Scenario Contest #1- Mark-O-Polo

[dwalend]

Originally Posted by rjg173

When I first saw the name of the scenario, I thought it might have something to do with Chinese Ogres.

I was thinking of Paranoia name specs.

[PK]

Originally Posted by acroyear

can for future scenarios, somebody just put the maps together (with overlays) and take a picture so we have some idea that we're putting it together correctly?

It would be nice to have someone do this. The instructions were fairly clear, but they'd be a lot easier to follow with a visual aid.

Originally Posted by dwalend

I was thinking of Paranoia name specs.

I'm glad I wasn't the only one! My very first thought was, "Shouldn't that be Mark-O-PLO?" :)

[GranitePenguin]

Originally Posted by PK

It would be nice to have someone do this. The instructions were fairly clear, but they'd be a lot easier to follow with a visual aid.

How's this?

[KevinR]

Originally Posted by GranitePenguin

How's this?

For the production version, probably would be good to highlight the overlays in some way. Giant red border, maybe. Overlay in color and map in greyscale?

[GranitePenguin]

Originally Posted by KevinR

For the production version, probably would be good to highlight the overlays in some way. Giant red border, maybe. Overlay in color and map in greyscale?

Yeah, I just threw it together but I know exactly what you mean. That's a lot of map to try and decipher in one shot.

Maybe don't show the whole map, but rather just blow up the areas where there are overlays. Or maybe it doesn't matter (people can be pretty smart sometimes).

[AstralWanderer]

Any chance of providing the scenarios in PDF format for off-line use? Doesn't need to be done urgently - waiting until all are posted and then offering one PDF booklet download would be fine.

[PK]

Originally Posted by AstralWanderer

Any chance of providing the scenarios in PDF format for off-line use? Doesn't need to be done urgently - waiting until all are posted and then offering one PDF booklet download would be fine.

Not my department, but I believe the last update said that the plan was to release them all as HTML, then to compile the whole shebang into a pretty PDF for W23.

[Tim Kauffman]

Originally Posted by offsides

Typo (well, sentenceo :))
A pair of Admin 20 SP counters stacked should be used to designate the Admin 40 counter stacked with a Laser 20 SP counter should be used to designate the Laser 40 SP once those buildings are identified.
(

Page 10 OGRE DE Rules say:

"Admin. A generic buiding which may represent an office, laboratory, hardened site, ect. Admin buildings have SP values of 10 to 30."
"Strongpoint. A very heavily armored bunker, command center, or other fortification, with SP 60 or more."

Question. What is between a Admin building and a Strongpoint? 40 SP and 50 SP buildings. But what are they classified as?

"3.6 Buildings...Laser. A heavy laser for use against Cruise Missiles and Ogre missiles, with 20 to 40 SP. See section 12."

"Laser Tower. A heavy laser mounted in a tower, giving it increased range; it has 20 SP. See section 12."

Another shout out for getting Laser 30 SP and Laser 40 SP Tokens that go with the original Laser 20 SP Token we got from the first release.
Sure, just use the generic SP Tokens, but why give us Laser 20 Tokens and leave it at that?
To quote a mosquito hunter from Monty Python...Where's the sport in that?) Can we have a complete set of these please. :)
These new Scenarios being inspired by the OGRE DE release really could use them.

Typo at 6 O'Clock:

"Armor units all start with a number token delineating the specific unit. Once that unit either A) fires, B) it is fired upon, or C) comes within a 2-hex range of the Ogre, the token is replaced with the unit in question. Use tokens #1-20 initially, then D1 & D2, plus SP10, SP20…SP60 as needed to indicate the individual units."

[ghostofjfd]

Looks like an interesting scenario, with lots of variability.

Under "Gameplay", "may be unmasked if acts in a manner" should be "may be unmasked if it acts in a manner".

Under "Reinforcements . . . Reinforcement Variant", "may decide the composition of each offensive group" should probably be "may decide the composition of each reinforcement group".

[Jen]

Originally Posted by JLV

The only real negative comment I have to offer is that the scenario name is terrible!

<gentle snip>

Overall, I like this scenario, and it's concept. I'd say this one is a good one. But do, please, look for something better for the name of it! ;-)

Thank you for the quick note on the playability of the scenario.