Custom Scenarios: Large or Small? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Armored Brigade



Message


DoubleDeuce -> Custom Scenarios: Large or Small? (10/7/2019 4:23:07 AM)

I am in the initial stages of designing some stuff for AB and was curious, for those interested in playing custom scenarios, would you prefer commanding a larger (Battalion) or smaller (Company+) force?

My personal preference is smaller (Company+) size and will likely go with that for most of my projects BUT if there was enough interest I would also be willing wo work up some larger ones.

Thoughts?




forgottnsoldier -> RE: Custom Scenarios: Large or Small? (10/7/2019 4:54:45 AM)

Anything company-battalion size is where the sweet spot is for me personally.




22sec -> RE: Custom Scenarios: Large or Small? (10/7/2019 3:07:34 PM)

The bigger the better. Nothing like commanding a Soviet regiment on the move!




nikolas93TS -> RE: Custom Scenarios: Large or Small? (10/7/2019 5:34:03 PM)

I usually play at (small) battalion size. Usually 2 mechanized and 1 armour company, but it is not uncommon for me to have 5-6 companies under command.




exsonic01 -> RE: Custom Scenarios: Large or Small? (10/7/2019 6:12:16 PM)

I used to enjoy med-sized game, but these days I always play with maximum conditions: biggest possible and largest possible.

15km x 15km gives a chance for me (and AI too) to press by maneuvering or flanking. With 50k, I (and AI) can try some serious combined arms stuff with multiple companies of armor and mech infantry.

Unfortunate thing is, due to 100 unit limit, I cannot field 50k-wise units in the field if I play early cold war or secondary echelon forces. If I play Italy or Poland, maximum practical limit for my forces will be 36k ~ 40k point due to unit number limitation. I wish AB loose the unit number limit to field more units, and allow biggest size map to 20km^2 or wider.




blackcloud6 -> RE: Custom Scenarios: Large or Small? (10/7/2019 6:54:12 PM)

I usually play battalion or batallion+ on the attacking side.




kevinkins -> RE: Custom Scenarios: Large or Small? (10/7/2019 10:22:28 PM)

I would go with your personal preference (Company+) since that is what you enjoy. A well made scenario will get played either way. You will get slower feedback on larger battles. Good and timeless wargame question however. I know in the long standing Combat Mission community, smaller beats out larger due the time players have to invest given their busy schedules. This is true for all wargames I believe. Large scenarios are difficult to playtest too given the time involved. Not sure if the sweat spot has been determined for AB yet. But it's gonna be higher than Combat Mission. If it's battalion +, so be it. But again, design to your own preferences since there will be plenty of people wanting to play something smaller on a weekend night.

Kevin




Policefreak55 -> RE: Custom Scenarios: Large or Small? (10/8/2019 9:34:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: exsonic01

I used to enjoy med-sized game, but these days I always play with maximum conditions: biggest possible and largest possible.

15km x 15km gives a chance for me (and AI too) to press by maneuvering or flanking. With 50k, I (and AI) can try some serious combined arms stuff with multiple companies of armor and mech infantry.

Unfortunate thing is, due to 100 unit limit, I cannot field 50k-wise units in the field if I play early cold war or secondary echelon forces. If I play Italy or Poland, maximum practical limit for my forces will be 36k ~ 40k point due to unit number limitation. I wish AB loose the unit number limit to field more units, and allow biggest size map to 20km^2 or wider.

This ALL day, bigger is better. That being said, smaller scale engagements are very much still enjoyable. I love the scalability that can be attained with this engine, from small scale to large engagements with tons of maneuver. I wonder, theoretically, just how big of a map and engagement the engine could feasibly handle.




exsonic01 -> RE: Custom Scenarios: Large or Small? (10/9/2019 12:46:27 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Policefreak55
This ALL day, bigger is better. That being said, smaller scale engagements are very much still enjoyable. I love the scalability that can be attained with this engine, from small scale to large engagements with tons of maneuver. I wonder, theoretically, just how big of a map and engagement the engine could feasibly handle.


Indeed, company sized or battalion sized battles are still good, of course. I feel great about AB over Combat Mission or Close Combat is that I can set map size. Even with few company or one battalion size battle, I can give 10km^2 size map or more. I can give enough room for flanking for attacker so that I can try maneuvering defense. Or I can give small size and urban section so that I can try something like Grozny mod.




DoubleDeuce -> RE: Custom Scenarios: Large or Small? (10/11/2019 4:51:47 PM)

Going to go with a Company(+) size unit and work up scenario's following it through a WWIII situation.

More information will be forthcoming.




deltapooh41 -> RE: Custom Scenarios: Large or Small? (10/12/2019 6:25:54 PM)

I think company(+)-battion(-) is best.




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.0234375