Scenario Design, Armored Feint, finis

So, after another play through I added a 2nd line MG42 team to the German setup pool, mostly because it was a very likely historical deployment. I’ve played through this three times now and I don’t see anything else obvious to take care of. Slowly, I’m learning not to overwork scenario designs, as different playstyles are essential for new perspectives.

I’ve tried full, medium, and minimal initial draws for the Germans. Each present different challenges for the US force. There is some advantage in feeding the fight as it develops and choosing the lane for your reinforcements. But, heck, it’s possible I’m overlooking something.

Beginning, Turn 5, third test. Weak initial draw. GER runs a tank down US right, but too late. On GER right, reduced paratroop squad menaces a PzF shot. Germans ahead by 3VP.
Beginning, Turn 5, third test. Weak initial draw. GER runs a tank down US right, but too late. On GER right, reduced paratroop squad menaces a PzF shot. Germans ahead by 3VP.

I like how the tank-infantry coordination rule cleaned up. Its easier to remember and makes for some interesting maneuver problems. Was gratified to find the Turreted Vehicles rule I wrote didn’t require refining. I’d forgotten whether I’d reduced firepower for tanks which do not change their facing to target. A vehicle counter with a turret ring may engage targets to its sides and flanks without changing orientation but suffers -2 to its firepower. While I respect the logic of the basic game, new terrain in FTGU cries out for some nuance here. I think mine is an acceptable compromise. All the counters in the module are marked accordingly.

Now I leave it up to you. Comment here or email me should you be interested in testing this or other parts of the module. Unfortunately, I can’t offer a physical playtest kit, but one can be printed (complete with counters) at reasonable cost. However, I’ll be updating the VASSAL module in the next few days and, of course, it will be available for free.

Here’s the finished (for now) product.

2 thoughts on “Scenario Design, Armored Feint, finis”

  1. Hmmmmm, not sure if I’ve ever mentioned this before. Think about separate scenario cards for each side. That way neither side knows what the other has, or what their setup is, or what their possible reinforcements and objectives are. The War Stories games do this, and it adds a whole new level of paranoia and FUD to the players. I realize that none of the Worthington BoB games do this, but since this is a module, I figure you can break with tradition a bit.

  2. Scenario format is something I’ll work out with farther down the line. For the moment I need things to be malleable and in one place. The map dimensions are the only hard and fast production detail I have. Everything else is subject to change. For example, the counter mix will likely change as I figure out ways to economize. For what it’s worth, the campaign scenario for each AO will be in a separate format; the situational scenarios are designed for evening or afternoon pick-up play. They’re easiest to playtest and, honestly, will likely see the most play. Accordingly, they’ll also be the most balanced.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *