Analysis and Modifications

Analysis of Evaluations and AARs

We believe a balanced scenario has no more than 60/40 split in victories with good to excellent play by both sides.¹ Balancing a scenario requires judgement when considering player styles, experience and the vagaries of the dice. This is especially true when analyzing data with relatively few plays. We considered both game-play results and player opinion in making our judgement and we believe these provide a reasonable basis for the scenario modifications.

Sixteen Play-Testers participate in 9 games resulting in 5 German wins, 1 American win and 3 incomplete games. One team played two complete games with the second the only American win. Six of the eight teams prepared seven AARs sharing the events of play. They discuss setup considerations, turn-by-turn play and narratives of significant events. Screen-shots visualized the game play.

Additionally, Fourteen of the sixteen Play-Testers completed the optional multi-choice Evaluation and twelve commented on their game experience and scenario balance. Most players believed they were fairly matched with an average rating of 3.1 measured against a sliding scale of 1 to 5, 3 being fairly matched. They also felt the Victory Conditions, setup instructions and SSRs were clear with all but 1 mark average or better and the majority voting for better. This information suggests that Play-Test results were not distorted by experience or unclear wording but determined by the capabilities of fairly matched Play-Testers.

The Play-Testers provided important insights into the balance. Here are a few of their comments...

• "It was simply 'A Building Too Far'"

• "The Germans are definitely favored here. The Germans need only delay the Americans a couple turns until..."

• "The game is currently winnable as the Americans but they have to rely on better dice..."

• "small chances for the Americans to take the Alamo" (L6)

Perhaps the strongest indication of balance is not one Play-Tester felt the Americans had the advantage. 12 of 14 Play-Testers believed balance was 4 or 5 against a sliding scale of 1 American, 3 balanced and 5 German. In an evenly balanced game, one would expect a mix of opinions on favored side. On this point the Play-Testers have spoken quit clearly - its a German favored scenario.

The Play-Test results do corroborate their opinions. Only 1 of the 6 completed games went the distance to turn 6 and this was the only American victory. The Americans submitted on turn 5 of the remaining 5 games, unable to muster the force for a last turn rush. That the American forces were depleted by turn 5 is a strong indication of a German advantage.

Reviewing the AARs further corroborated the Play-Test results...

• In Team 4’s AAR, the Germans suffered an initial KIA of its best leader and 2 squads and by turn 5 had only one building left. Yet they fought like defending the Alamo and repelled the final American assault.

• Team 3’s detailed AAR (with over 75+ views & many screen shots) has the German commander facing hard decisions after American hot dice on turn 1 although this is countered by hot German dice on turn 3. The Americans find themselves in control of all three buildings at the end of GT4 and awaiting German reinforcements. Although the game was incomplete, it sets a high, but uncertain, water mark for Americans.

• Team 6’s Second Game AAR the only where the Germans met their match. The Americans resourcefully use wheat-fields to fire on German units _out_of_LOS_ using Q&A 44.31 and employed good tactics. The delay of the German reinforcements until turn 4 provided the time needed for the Americans but even then it was very close.

Proposed Modifications

We propose two significant modifications to improve play balance of the scenario. Most significantly, the German reinforcements are delayed until Turn 4. This provides the Americans an extra turn to secure the buildings and position themselves to interdict the German reinforcements. The Germans may still reach building L6 albeit not until turn 5. They may also attempt to break the occupants of any one building to deny the occupancy Victory Condition.

The second significant change is making hex W6 woods by SSR. This resolves an issue were broken American units routed themselves out of the game.

We believe these modifications will significantly reduce the German advantage in the scenario. The scenario will remain in Beta as we gather more data based on the revised scenario. This play-test has moved RIF (A) far along in its development and future play will test these modifications.

Modifications for RIF (A)

1. Replace the VC with: “The American player wins if he controls and occupies with an unbroken infantry unit all three buildings L6, O4 and T9. No unbroken German infantry unit can be in any non-destroyed (See SSR 109.1) building at game end. The Germans win by preventing the American Victory Conditions.”

2. Replace Rules Limitations with “Rules in Effect: 1 to 25 Scenarios 1 & 2, 44.2 Wheatfields, 37.4 Bazookas, 50 Americans, 54 Entrenchments, compiled Q&A and Squad Leader Academy rule conventions”

3. Turn Record Chart: move german cross from 3 to 4.

4. German Setup: Change hex “V” to “U”. Change Reinforcement arrival from “Turn 3” to “Turn 4”

5. SSR 109.1 add after first sentence: “The Americans may place a DC in buildings L6 or T9 to satisfy the control and occupation conditions of that building. These conditions are satisfied if operably placed (23.4 & 23.8) and the DC is removed from play in the immediately following ADFPh. Building Terrain Effects (3.1) are unaffected”

6. WG 109.2 Replace entirely with “The German 468 squads are elite forces. Other than possessing a higher morale, they have the same capabilities of 467 squads. Players may use the counters found in the COI game-set or substitute Russian 447 counters using 468 capabilities.

7. WG109.3: delete “Note:”. Change ”Point blank fire” to “Point Blank Fire”. Change ‘die rolls’ to “dice rolls”.

8. WG109.4 Delete “Board 16; Default orientation (Board ID on lower left);” Add “Hex W6 is considered woods.” after “Wheatfields are in season.”

9. WG109.5: Delete “(base creation number is ‘3’)”

Modified Scenario Card

You may view the modified RIF (A) scenario card here.

You may download it in the File Cabinet

¹ Jon Mishcon, "Have Your Own Scenario Published?," The Avalon Hill GENERAL, 20:6 (Dec, 1984): 40-43.