1940 Scenarios

[dogancan]

both subscription and individual release of 'expansion packs' is ok for me. As long as I will get at least 2 packages of new scenarios, I can happily subscribe for 20$/y.

[Arjuna]

ORIGINAL: Llyranor

If you're going to make content, you might as well charge for it individually as mini-xpacs, or have a few content packs grouped together for bundles. Having a subscription means that people will be EXPECTING content coming out at a regular pace. If this doesn't happen, people will start complaining about it. And if Panther DOES get regular content released, it'd probably still be better to sell things individually, since the person who'd subscribe to such a service is basically voicing that they'd pay for all the content that Panther will release; in which case they'd just buy everything individually anyway.

Yes I agree. If it's just going to be for data content, then we may as well release these individually. I was assuming we were talking about a subscription service to cover engine upgrades as well as data content, in which case the subscription rate would have to be sufficiently high enough to cover both code and content development.

[JeffroK]

Franklin N,

Yes, East Africa

Indians, Brits, Sth/East/West Africans

Messervy, Slim, Wingate, Haile Sellassie

Matilda's, Cavalry Charges, Italian mobile coffins.

Arjuna,

I can's see how you could offer a subscription service, the time and effort spent by you guys in putting out a game is immense, to have to do it within a set period would see short cuts (Just like S&T, reams or errata because they rushed things and having a blind man compiling the charts, maps & counters!)
But, I would love to see a table showing the TO&E & weapons data so that if we wished we could knock together our own scenarios, a la the Run 5 magazine had. we might even get the talented amongst us to "knock up" a map.

[FredSanford3]

I was thinking of a subscription thing mainly to hold Panther's feet to the fire in order to provide more content for the same engine on a regular basis. If they do individual releases, the focus would drift to the next engine release and the added content wouldn't appear, I'd guess. Having a subscribers base would provide the revenue steam to keep generating content, and means to sustain interest in BftB's engine. This content could also be released for individual sale, but the subscriber would get it earlier and cheaper since he's essentially committing in advance to buying whatever Panther puts out.

Patches would focus only on fixing gameplay issues/bugs and any interim enhancements in the code.

I'm pretty much advocating progress as much as possible to universal estab/oob coverage. If that exists, then the player community can come up with maps and scenarios more easily as well.

[Deathtreader]

Hi all,

Well......... it could maybe go along these lines.

You could commit to a service that provides 4 medium sized (or 5 smaller, or 3 larger, or some combination thereof etc.) scenarios for the latest version of the engine every 6-8 months. Poll the subscribers with scenario suggestions and let them vote on the ones to actually be produced. This would be a scenario only subscription using existing current estabs and engine. If you wanted to go a little further you could expand the idea to include limited system improvements/graphics/estabs as below:

1/ A variation that includes 2 - 4 minor/modest engine upgrades per period. Nothing that would require an extensive build and test cycle. Task Trackers 3657 Reinf Tab (minor)and UI 3674 Attachments from OB (modest) are an example of what I mean. There could also be further variations where every second or third subscription delivery could include 1 or 2 major enhancements in the system in addition to the minor/modest ones.

2/ A further variation that includes updates to existing estabs to further support scenario creation or even the occasional new estab per period. The new estabs would not have to cover every conceivable piece of equipment for the armies represented – only those necessary to support the new subscription scenario(s). These additional estabs would then qualify for updating over the next several periods.

3/ Ditto for new graphics i.e. map terrain types or weather graphics or infrastructure types.



You wouldn’t have to have a service that offered scenarios plus all 3 options above. You could go with just scenarios only or just # 1, or just # 2, or just # 3 or any combination of the above. New scenarios plus options two and three if you wanted to keep the engine out of it. Including all 4 though would provide for a steady evolution of the system as opposed to a more big bang approach with a new title every 30 months or so. It would significantly increase the number and coverage range of scenarios which is always a good selling point. As the system evolved and extant estabs or graphics were no longer compatible (as you’ve found with BFTB and the original HTTR estabs etc.) you could either update them over several periods of the subscription or via the expansion pack concept or a combination of both. Polling your subscribers on things of this nature would give you the way to go.


I admit I have no idea what constitutes minor/modest system improvements – just guessing when I picked the Task Trackers to try and illustrate the concept.

As to cost, if a complete new game is going for around $70 to $80 then a scenario 4 pack subscription could be around $50 annually (if every 6 months approx.). If it included periodic system enhancements maybe $75 annually. If it included new/updated estabs or graphics plus scenarios plus minor/modest enhancements then maybe $100 per year. If the delivery period were every 8 months or so then costs would be prorated accordingly. Just bandying some numbers based on what I’d pay…. Don’t know how much others would be willing to pay for a steady supply of new scenarios, regular (if modestly incremental) systemic feature improvements, and occasionally a few new (updateable over time) estabs, plus occasional graphics additions. I realize my pricing is based on zero knowledge of the level of effort requirements for these types of things in the Airborne Assault environment but I’m sure that it could stand some upwards revising.

Now don’t flame me too harshly folks……..the foregoing is put forward with the best intentions in the world. This is my favourite game system and gets first call on all my gaming dollars. [:)]

Rob.

[Prince of Eckmühl]

A gentleman named David Lehmann did a nice write-up of the Ardenne Operation, May 10-12, 1940 and posted it here:

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=84561

Very interesting stuff, IMO.