Lorin Maletsky
Lawrence
Kansas
-
I've just started playing this series and love it for a number of reasons, not the least of which is the history behind the scenarios. Generally I don't mind losing and it's great fun to play both sides of a battle. For the scenarios I've played so far I've noticed that the higher winning percentage found on the DoW site has consistently corresponded with who actually won the battle. I generally mean significant when there is a difference of say more than 10%.
Are there scenarios where there is a significant difference between the percentages and the more frequent victor does not correspond with what happened historically? As I started thinking about this, I had some questions about the scenario designs and am curious about how they are created.
Many scenarios are clearly imbalanced (I'm fine with that), but is that imbalance historical based on the pre-battle conditions? Most of the scenarios I've played do not seem to be hugely imbalanced at the outset (at least with forces). Do designers shift the balance, say with number of cards, to skew the results so that they more frequently match up with history?
If a scenario is faithfully created based on the pre-battle conditions and there is a significant difference in winning percentage but it does not correspond with who actually won, does this suggest that the actual historical outcome was an outlier - or chance event. Put in other words, had the real battle been repeated numerous times under identical conditions, there would be a distribution of outcomes, some occurring more frequently than others. If the actual battle outcome was on the tail of this distribution, and the Memoir scenario is an "accurate" simulation (I know this is highly questionable), then a significant difference between percentages where the more frequent victor does not correspond to what happened in history would indicate that the historical victor "got lucky".
Seeing as this seems to happen in many of my Memoir games (both for and against me), perhaps this is not so surprising that it happened in the war as well.
-
Trent Howell
United States
Utah
-
That's what makes it so fun.
I love playing the underdog - the side that's got the odds stacked against him. For when you break through and win, the victory is so sweet.
It may only be once in a while, but it keeps me coming back.
We see a similar thing in sports - the beginning conditions are stacked in favor of one side, but that doesn't mean the other team can't pull out a great victory.
-
Chris
United States
New Jersey
-
maletsky wrote: If a scenario is faithfully created based on the pre-battle conditions and there is a significant difference in winning percentage but it does not correspond with who actually won, does this suggest that the actual historical outcome was an outlier - or chance event.
I think that, since Memoir 44 is hardly a simulation as you pointed out, that could just mean the scenario was poorly balanced. It is fine if the victor in real life has an advantage, but if the victor has a disadvantage I would imagine that either there was an oversight somewhere in scenario design, or there was a really good reason for it.
For example, the Omaha beach scenarios seem to favor the Germans. Is this because the scenario was poorly thought out, or because Omaha was an Allied victory because so many men went above and beyond what could have been expected on paper? In this case, Omaha beach seems to have been a disaster until the successful and courageous assault on the bluffs. As wikipedia describes it, "The original plan was in tatters, with so many units mis-landed, disorganized and scattered. Most commanders had fallen or were absent, and there were few ways to communicate, other than shouted commands. In places, small groups of men, sometimes scratched together from different companies, in some cases from different divisions, were "...inspired, encouraged or bullied..."[46] out of the relative safety of the shingle, starting the grueling task of reducing the defenses atop the bluffs."
-
bruinrefugee
United States
Laguna Niguel
California
-
My strong sense with Memoir '44 is that the scenario design is structured around creating a feel much more than simulating a given battle. Good luck trying to tie the scenarios to any real order of battle, for instance or even to identify a scale.
There's usually enough force on each side to make a win possible for either, but uneven decks really put the weight on one side or the other, ESP. If the same side has more cards AND more/stronger units.
-
|
|
