|
springer -> RE: Vietnam War AAR (5/17/2009 8:32:49 PM)
|
Grymme,
My impression is that part of the purpose of this AAR is to show off what the scenario can do. Based on what you have written, you've done a great job extending the AT engine to the Vietnam war. I'm impressed also with how well you've modeled the asymmetry of combat capacity.
Though it's a lot of work, I think it'd be a good idea to still do an AAR. Maybe you don't need to record every turn. However, if you are showing off the scenario's strengths, it's important to see how it works.
The potential weakness of this scenario, as I see it, is something that you noted in the AAR: It's apparent static nature. As mentioned by both of you, it didn't feel static when playing it. The combat was dynamic and complex. But my question would be: is the strategic situation defined by the scenario itself relatively static?
That is, will the major fights play out more or less the same each game (e.g., Khe Sanh, Rash Gia, Pleikku). The danger of the game, looking at the map is that the major combat zones will be fairly scripted.
In my opinion, this is what makes most of the Barbarossa games somewhat dull at the beginning. The opening moves are fairly set piece. The interesting action usually takes up to midgame when the players have pushed deep into Russia. In these midgames, there are a large number of possible force configurations due to the depth of the Russian European landscape.
The issue I see with this scenario is that the area of action doesn't have the depth that opens up deployment possibillities. (From what I could tell, the furthest city from the coast is about 13-14 hexes.) This means that the battle of the fronts risk taking on similar gestalts each time and that could limit the game's replay value. It'd be nice to get a sense of how the midgame could differ from what game to the next.
I'd be interested in second AAR to see if the actual campaigns (north, south, center) in the scenario play out with a different feel.
Again, I can appreciate the mega-hours that went into making praiseworthy scenario with the feel of a simulation. But I think another (perhaps less dense) AAR would give us a better sense of the scenario's actual flexibility.
(But then, I'm not the one doing the work [;)])
|
|
|
|
