Scenario: Beyond the Belice (Spoiler)

[Ted]

I've started the scenario Beyond the Belice and as the Allies reviewing the tactical map it says I should have 1x60mm mortar as support in the beginning but I can't find it anywhere either on or off the map.

I haven't received my reinforcements yet and although the mortar support shows at the start and not at T plus 15 with the rest of the reinforcements, I suppose it's possible it will come with them.

Really, I was just wondering if it's my machine, a typo or a bug.

[beatmasta]

You'll get the mortar when the reinforcements arrive

[Ted]

Thanks. I sure could use it

[Childress]

The problem with this scenario is that victory conditions seem murky.

[Bimmer]

The problem with this scenario is that victory conditions seem murky.

Yeah, I just finished it PBEM with a buddy and the VCs are really odd. No credit for casualties unless you hit the threshold, and the terrain objectives are set to occupy, which is at odds with the mission description of conducting a patrol, and are pretty arbitrary. I ended up controlling 75% of the map and inflicting double the casualties I took and getting a straight draw. Seems like it would be a lot better with a few adjustments to the way the scoring is handled.

[nik mond]

Some Spoilers about this murky situation:

The Rangers get a late mortar reinforcement because they start with bazookas, which provides an advantage against the Italians especially if holed up in buildings. To me the rangers have the advantage in weapons, the Italians have Brixia right off so its debatable. HT versus tankette, BAR's....

These units are operating independantly, and competing for control of a sector. Think of it as a fighting patrol or a combat patrol at its destination leg, not a reconnaissance. Its listed as a meeting engagement. The enemy is doing the same thing you are.

The objective IS the sector, not a spot on the map. Well, the sector is divided in half actually. The one who solely occupies and clears the sector gets the points. Own half the map. Get half the points. Also the one who inflicts more than 65% casualties also gets the points.

Its easy to get a draw because occupation points can be nullified by camped out enemy fragments, so it forces the player to be thorough. Should you truly inflict heavy casualties on your opponent while staying under 65% yourself, then this should break the draw.

[DavidFields]

I have played this scenario a couple of times, and probably will play it a couple of more times. I think it is a good way to get the feel for both sides, but particularly the Italians. I find units spot and get spotted from a longer distance than I expected--I am told that simulates the lighter brush in this theatre of the war.

I like that scenarios can be sorted by size--helps newbies get into the right scenarios.

I also like the objectives, though, yes, my initial draw as Italians suprised me--but that was my fault, because I neglected to replace, with even a small force, my destroyed right flank, lost sector points, which nullified the heavy casualties I had inflicted! Understanding the sector points issue, which I think is clever, is important (then, as Nid mond said, it will then come down to casualty infliction.)

[Bimmer]

These units are operating independantly, and competing for control of a sector. Think of it as a fighting patrol or a combat patrol at its destination leg, not a reconnaissance. Its listed as a meeting engagement. The enemy is doing the same thing you are.

The objective IS the sector, not a spot on the map. Well, the sector is divided in half actually. The one who solely occupies and clears the sector gets the points. Own half the map. Get half the points. Also the one who inflicts more than 65% casualties also gets the points.

Its easy to get a draw because occupation points can be nullified by camped out enemy fragments, so it forces the player to be thorough. Should you truly inflict heavy casualties on your opponent while staying under 65% yourself, then this should break the draw.

I do understand the rationale behind the design decisions, though IMHO there are some limitations created that make draws too likely.

Specifically, the terrain objectives are very large, and as such (and as you note) a few stragglers can unduly influence the results. Personally, I prefer to avoid using such large occupy objectives for just this reason. Perhaps dividing the map into quarters or sixths would offer greater flexibility.

Further, the 65% threshold is workable to an extent, but without any points available for casualties inflicted below that threshold in addition, and considering the terrain issue above, it is basically a foregone conclusion that many games are going to end not only in a draw, but indeed with exactly equal scores. This seems unnecessary; offering at least some points for casualties, even a small number, would at least allow for some differentiation in results.

Just my thoughts from a design perspective. I am well aware and respectful of the fact that other designers prefer other approaches.