Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
10 Posts

Conflict of Heroes: Storms of Steel! – Kursk 1943» Forums » Variants

Subject: Quick Firefight creation rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
David Beaver
United Kingdom
Newcatle/Gateshead
flag msg tools
mb
Has anybody tried this?

I've nearly played all the FFs now and some of them several times, but I'm looking to do more. I don't have the historical knowledge, nor the time for extensive research to recreate battles from Kursk, so I won't be looking for great historical accuracy.

Seeing there are cards that haven't been used yet and addressing some criticisms that SoS scenarios can be too frustrating (I think someone described them as too often one side racing across open ground only to be mown down - which seems quite realistic to me!) I was hoping to create my own, but how? I'm not yet ready to play test lots of times for submission, but I am looking for reasonable balance.

My idea was to use dice (perhaps 3, adding highest and lowest, or other variants to even it out) to decide on CAP allocation and number of units per side, or FP points totals for each side. Maybe have all units start off the board with a control point(s) already chosen. But how to decide on overlays, mines, fortifications, green cards, weapons and veteran cards? The more I think of it the more complicated it becomes and I realise the gratitude I feel to the developers. Is there a tried and tested way to do this? Am I wasting my time? Should I just wait for more FFs to come out?

Any suggestions guys?

Thanks

David
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joseph Noll
United States
Grafton
West Virginia
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I think of SoS as a miniatures game, and as such a 'bring and battle' system seems natural to me. The game is already fairly light as war-games go so the added complexity of an 'optional' scenerio generator wouldn't hurt the game. That said, I don't think a points system is appropriate. My idea is a menu system where you pick formations based on actual formations fielded, size of battle, year of war, and type of battle you want to play. Throw a little randomness in with respect to boards, overlays, and fortifications (if approprate to battle type). I'd also add battlefield intel rules sprinkled in for flavor.

I'd like to see more map boards and overlays before Academy puts something like this out. It could work, but would probably take a while to design.

Not that I'm a game designer, but I'll give it more thought.

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Beaver
United Kingdom
Newcatle/Gateshead
flag msg tools
mb
JANoll wrote:
I think of SoS as a miniatures game, and as such a 'bring and battle' system seems natural to me. The game is already fairly light as war-games go so the added complexity of an 'optional' scenerio generator wouldn't hurt the game. That said, I don't think a points system is appropriate.

I'd also add battlefield intel rules sprinkled in for flavor.


Good to see such a quick reply.

As someone fairly new to this, could you explain "battlefield intel rules", or point me in the right direction.

I can see how it could be good for miniatures and my miniature playing buddies certainly agree. Out of the question for me though as I don't have the time and can't justify the costs of creating the figures, etc.

David
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joseph Noll
United States
Grafton
West Virginia
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
David B wrote:

Good to see such a quick reply.

As someone fairly new to this, could you explain "battlefield intel rules", or point me in the right direction.

I can see how it could be good for miniatures and my miniature playing buddies certainly agree. Out of the question for me though as I don't have the time and can't justify the costs of creating the figures, etc.

David


Well it struck me after watching HBO's Band of Brothers, for the xth time that before going into battle that even the platoon commander got some measure of intel before setting off on an operation, but he never knew the whole story.

With pregenerated scenerios we get this somewhat by reading the scenerio before playing. In a 'bring and battle' (B&B) game you won't have this knowledge. In a B&B game you will have the benefit of being able to keep some information secret from the other player. This dynamic between opponents where each can influence the game, and gather information prior to the game, at different levels, would be very interesting. This information about the other player or intel is what the intel game mechanics would be based on.

BTW even though CoH with miniatures looks cool. I think one of the great strengths of this series is it's 'look' as is. I don't play CoH with minis, even though I could, I personally don't think it needs the added chrome.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike M
United States
Pisgah Forest
North Carolina
flag msg tools
www.gameholecon.com
badge
129/420
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
It has been posted in the forums before that there is a card-based deployment/scenario system for CoH under consideration.

I'd think a point-buy system combined with generic scenarios would work as well.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joseph Noll
United States
Grafton
West Virginia
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Sheep wrote:
It has been posted in the forums before that there is a card-based deployment/scenario system for CoH under consideration.

I'd think a point-buy system combined with generic scenarios would work as well.


I didn't realize that. I'll go looking for it. Thanks for the tip.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike M
United States
Pisgah Forest
North Carolina
flag msg tools
www.gameholecon.com
badge
129/420
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
You can find that thread here.

Not much info but it is something.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin Reynolds
United States
Colorado
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Although you can probably just take all the included scenarios and genericize the "goals" of each one into a table, and then randomize the location of the goal locales on the randomly selected boards, I think you might find that the game will more often be so unbalanced that it is not very fun, even if you give specific points to the units associated with the scenario.

Add in hidden objectives, and this will likely get better...but again, someones hidden objective might be close and defensible while the others is not either. Kinda too dicey right?

I think this can be somewhat corrected by:

1) Making the primary goal the same for both sides, and ensure that the locale of this goal is forced into the middle 1/3 of the board(s). It can be "hold" or whatever, as long as both players know up front.
2) Making the hidden goal/objective for both sides to either be on the players 1/3 of the board(s), or on the opponents 1/3 of the board(s). This way the travel time can be more consistent, as this has significant effect.
3) Give general guidelines for players to select hidden goal locale and bonuses or penalties for selecting a worse or better locale. For example, the scenario states that the hidden goal must be a hex with a specific terrain type (wood, building, whatever), and for a location with better defensibility (of the local hex) they lose victory points, or for less defensible gain points.
4) Give each player a pool of points to select units themselves from the box, with each unit counting for so many pool points. If they want a non-unit advantage, it is also payed for from the unit pool.

You then could randomize the boards and goals, with each side selecting their own units, and have a better (but not guaranteed) chance of equality.

Make sense? Maybe I'm off my rocker.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Beaver
United Kingdom
Newcatle/Gateshead
flag msg tools
mb
Yes, it does make sense.

It's similar to what I had in mind. Hopefully, I'll have a chance to give this a bit more thought soon.

The main problem I can see is balance, but on the other hand - providing you and your opponent aren't ultra competitive and just enjoy the ride it can still be fun with a one-sided scenario. I like the idea of having a round that involves initial movements and build up - rather than immediate firefights.

David
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ron Draker
United States
McLean
Virginia
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I was working on a cost system where I assigned each unit a cost and then depending on the desired scenario size, I would scale the purchase pool from 50 to 100 points. I don't have the table with me, but I think I made German Infantry cost 10 and Soviet Rifle 5. Special units cost more and Tanks a lot more. Players would make purchases simultaneously. Then players agree on the maps to play on and do a meeting engagement with 2 or 3 objectives in the middle.

The game system is clean and easy and I've had fun just randomly setting up a four map game with 4 players and giving each player a couple tanks, special weapons squad and regular infantry and just going at it.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.