Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Deep Battle v3 Playtest

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III >> Scenario Design >> Deep Battle v3 Playtest Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Deep Battle v3 Playtest - 4/10/2012 10:38:13 PM   
Chuck2


Posts: 830
Joined: 10/12/2005
Status: offline
Looking for someone to playtest a new version of Deep Battle 1930. Scenario is attached below if you want to have a look.

Attachment (1)
Post #: 1
RE: Deep Battle v3 Playtest - 4/14/2012 5:28:30 AM   
rhinobones

 

Posts: 733
Joined: 2/17/2002
Status: offline
I played the original scenario some years ago and found that despite the name, this is actually a stand up fight along national borders. There is little, if any, opportunity to conduct "Deep Battle" operations as envisioned by the Russian strategists. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the scenario, but I think it needs a much larger map and some force "variability" to make the scenario live up to it's name.

Regards, RhinoBones


_____________________________

Colin Wright:
Comprehensive Wishlist Forum #467 . . . The Norm (blessed be His name, genuflect three times and accept all values in the program as revealed truth)

Pre Combat Air Strikes # 64 . . . I need have no concern about keeping it civil

(in reply to Chuck2)
Post #: 2
RE: Deep Battle v3 Playtest - 4/16/2012 7:09:26 PM   
Chuck2


Posts: 830
Joined: 10/12/2005
Status: offline
I think you're right, a bigger map space area would be better. I'll remake it from the ground up. That will be an engaging anyway. My main concern has always been not to have too much micromanagement in this particular scenario.

By force variability, do you mean variable arrival times or more variety in the composition of the forces? I added some new units in the latest version, though variable arrival times does sound like it could make the scenario more interesting.

Thanks for the feedback.

_____________________________


(in reply to rhinobones)
Post #: 3
RE: Deep Battle v3 Playtest - 4/16/2012 8:13:52 PM   
shunwick


Posts: 2178
Joined: 10/15/2006
Status: offline
Chuck,

I have just started playing v3 with my mate but am I right in thinking it is ok for 3.4? The briefing is a little out of date.

I like the sound of variable arrival times for the next version. It adds spice.

Best wishes,
Steve



_____________________________

I love the smell of TOAW in the morning...

(in reply to Chuck2)
Post #: 4
RE: Deep Battle v3 Playtest - 4/16/2012 10:19:36 PM   
Chuck2


Posts: 830
Joined: 10/12/2005
Status: offline
The scenario I attached was saved with 3.4. I haven't done much with the new options, except to set beachhead supply points to 50%. Thanks.

_____________________________


(in reply to shunwick)
Post #: 5
RE: Deep Battle v3 Playtest - 4/22/2012 1:45:58 AM   
rhinobones

 

Posts: 733
Joined: 2/17/2002
Status: offline
quote:

By force variability, do you mean variable arrival times or more variety in the composition of the forces? I added some new units in the latest version, though variable arrival times does sound like it could make the scenario more interesting.


In a hypothetical scenario, such as this, some doubt about arrival times always seems to add "replay" value. My thought is that instead of having the same-o-same-o forces and positions every time, which leads to a same-o-same-o battle every time, a little uncertainty is in order. To me this is the beauty of hypothetical scenarios.

In my post I was thinking more along the lines of adding variability to the placement and composition of the forces. The main line units could remain the same, but some variability in the composition and placement of follow on forces could be varied to add that "interesting" bit of uncertainty to the scenario. Make five or six corps or divisions variable where ever they deploy and/or the area. Make this 1 to 5 turns into the scenario and you'll really create a true life military headache for the players.

Another feature that I like is making the starting Force variable. To do this I use events to do:

1. Side 1 Turn 1 opens the scenario. The event immediately cycles to Side 2 Turn 1 so that Side 1 has no opportunity to move.

2. Side 2 Turn 1 has a 50% event to start the game and make the first move.

3. Side 1 Turn 2 plays the turn as either the first to move or the second to move.

I've played the scenario Blitzkrieg a number of times ( this is the excellent remake of the board game) but I've found that the game experiences the "same-o" effect in that forces always end up face to face in the usual places. As a result Blitzkrieg has none of the variability that makes the scenario a "must" to play multiple times.

I've always felt that the true value of TOAW is the ability to model hypothetical situations in all historical eras and require players to solve military problems. With the current crew of designers, even thought the preponderance of scenarios use WW II as the baseline, there is still plenty of room for scenarios other than WW II. There is room for the hypothetical and I recommend that it be used.

I appreciate the work of the WW II scenario writers, but I think it's time to move on. Find something other than "Panzer" and "massive scenario" to turn you on.

As a final thought, if you want to transport this scenario to a large map that provides unlimited boundaries, feel free to use my Revisionist War map. My thought is that Deep Battle should really be played on a map that has no artificial boundaries.

My thoughts, my opinions . . . take it as you will.

Regards, RhinoBones


_____________________________

Colin Wright:
Comprehensive Wishlist Forum #467 . . . The Norm (blessed be His name, genuflect three times and accept all values in the program as revealed truth)

Pre Combat Air Strikes # 64 . . . I need have no concern about keeping it civil

(in reply to Chuck2)
Post #: 6
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III >> Scenario Design >> Deep Battle v3 Playtest Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.100