Scenario Contest #7- Two Nations, One War

[Jen]

Today is Thursday and that means...

The seventh scenario is up on the website!

We're taking feedback until August 24. Editorial and playtest feedback is welcome!

If you know who the author is, keep it to yourself, so everyone feels free to give honest feedback.

Thanks, y'all!

(Also, quick reminder... We'll be out of the office next week so no new scenario will be posted.)

-Jen

[sgbeal]

At the risk of sounding trite... i'd highly recommend changing "White Nation" and "Black Nation" to something less likely to incite a combat scenario.

e.g. "Faction A" and "Faction B".

Alternately, use the 6E color names: Red and Blue (and forgot the "red" connotation). (OTOH, someone out there will likely point out that U.S. military uniforms, in the time frame where the U.S. was screwing over the "Red Faction", were mainly blue (if TV and movies are to be believed, anyway).)

[sgbeal]

a) "The Command posts in this scenario are like kings in chess. If they are destroyed the game is instantly over for that player."

Does the game not also end for the other player at that point?


b) There is no explicit prohibition on calling in immobile units, but it would seem that calling in, e.g., a HWZ is not really intended by the scenario's designer.


c) "Substituting a Doppelsoldner for the Fencer and an Ogre Mark VI for the III-B is an obvious and sound choice, since these two cybertanks are balanced against each other."

Nevermind that they are not balanced vs all other forces on the field. The first player to get one of these likely wipes the floor with the other in short order. i don't see that option as being viable unless (1) players get more reinforcements (e.g. 1 per 3 cities) and (2) the cost of the Dopp/MkVI are increased (doubled?).

[selenite]

I'm having a flashback to my old Avalon Hill Tactics II set. Looks like fun.

[selenite]

Originally Posted by sgbeal

b) There is no explicit prohibition on calling in immobile units, but it would seem that calling in, e.g., a HWZ is not really intended by the scenario's designer.


c) "Substituting a Doppelsoldner for the Fencer and an Ogre Mark VI for the III-B is an obvious and sound choice, since these two cybertanks are balanced against each other."

Nevermind that they are not balanced vs all other forces on the field. The first player to get one of these likely wipes the floor with the other in short order. i don't see that option as being viable unless (1) players get more reinforcements (e.g. 1 per 3 cities) and (2) the cost of the Dopp/MkVI are increased (doubled?).

b) Reinforcements can be deployed in any controlled town, so you can put them as far forward as your current troops hold. So I think a HWTZR as reinforcement is a viable strategy.

c) That substitution is for the set-up forces. Buying them as reinforcements should cost more than 12, yes.

[bactram1]

"Reinforcements can be redeemed before the start of the movement phase, or saved until later in the game. It's permissible to save up 10 armor units, for example, and then redeem and place them all at the beginning of a turn."

The second sentence implies that you may save a maximum of 10 armor units. Later you mention trading in for an Ogre at 12 armor units. Please add a statement along the lines of "there is no upper limit to the number of armor units you have saved for reinforcements."

[johndallman]

s/it's/its/.

Getting infantry reinforcements, so that you can be holding more town hexes, would seem sensible.

[johndallman]

s/it's/its/, for the first instance.

Getting infantry reinforcements, so that you can be holding more town hexes, would seem sensible.

[piningforthefjords]

Maybe it should be changed to Red Nation and Blue Nation, as those are the colors of the counters in the 6th Edition. Also more politically correct!

[Tim Kauffman]

Originally Posted by sgbeal

At the risk of sounding trite... i'd highly recommend changing "White Nation" and "Black Nation" to something less likely to incite a combat scenario.

e.g. "Faction A" and "Faction B".

Originally Posted by sgbeal

a) "The Command posts in this scenario are like kings in chess.

Originally Posted by piningforthefjords

Maybe it should be changed to Red Nation and Blue Nation, as those are the colors of the counters in the 6th Edition. Also more politically correct!

I'm assuming the following paragraph from the scenario was written the way it is because this exercise is intended to be a "theoretical war-game" much like...
wait for it...a game of Chess...which uses BLACK and WHITE pieces to represent the two opposing sides.

"A theoretical war-game, used by Combine Commanders to sharpen the wits of officer candidates, the scenario was completed with the help
of sophisticated combat simulators, and the results were dissected and studied. The victorious commander had to be a master of both tactics and strategy
- planning the shape and layout of the battle was as important as the conduct of combat."

Please let us not sink any further as a society into the debilitating mire of Political Correctness. That way lies madness...