Scenario Design: Tips, Tricks and Q&A

[DoubleDeuce]

I figured I would go ahead and start this thread since questions have come up. Please post and tips or tricks you may have for helping guide the AI to do kind of what you want or ways to make scenario's more challenging to the player. While TotH is NOT ASL or SASL, its pretty close but there are some things its not really currently designed to do. For example, in SASL you can encounter special events such as Human Wave attacks and Convoys among other things. With a little creativity you can kind of duplicate these at least enough to add challenges and variety to your scenarios.

Over time I will be posting some things that seem to work for me and would encourage others to do the same for the benefit of other designers. I would also encourage others, who may not have plans to design anything at the moment, to ask questions about things that they think would make scenarios more interesting and/or challenging. I am not talking about changes to the feature, design and coding of TotH BUT things that might be capable of being done in the Editor itself.

[Gerry4321]

Good idea.

[genesismwt]

I agree, good idea. I have only been converting scenarios, and some are a challenge due to some of the scenarios features not being present in Toth.

Here's a couple thoughts that I have regarding compensation for lack of transport and lack of hidden initial placement.

In scenarios where transport are used and are fairly unhindered, have the transported troops appear on the turn and at the place where the transport would have gotten them. It won't work for all scenarios. It won't replace infantry storming around in halftracks, but it can help in scenarios like Agony of Doom. I have modded the downloaded version to have the 4 assault engineers, a leader and an LMG either show up the transported spot, or with the rest of the troops. I made 2 of the hexes in zone 1, zone 2. I deleted the previously mentioned units and re-added, turn 1, zone 2. To compensate for the lack of trucks, I also made the first two hexes of the forest road hexes(0/16, 0/17) zone 2 also. Those troops entering from there will be in the roughly same place at the end of turn one that a truck would have put them. If you want to hold them until turn 2, that might be more accurate. I have them on turn 1, a little ahead of schedule. Turn two is a little behind schedule, but hopefully, you get the idea.

For HIP, I am thinking about scenarios like ASL 110 North Bank and ASL 108 Guards Attack(*edited from Dreil Team, it was late last night when I posted. For some reason I thought ASL 109 Dreil Team had an AT gun), where a six pounder facing King Tigers frontally just doesn't cut it. They really need the AT guns getting the first shot from the sides or rear to have a chance. For this, I am thinking of making set up zones(very limited number of hexes) where the guns appear at a later turn, within the defenders "area". This would give the defender a better chance for the element of surprise. Of course, there's the argument that if a unit passed through the hex, then the unit should have been found. To that, I can only say that SL/ASL's rules are written to avoid complication and ambiguity. Why does it have to be absolute that a non-vehicle unit in a hex was found because a unit passed through it? Again, Toth is a separate game, only inspired by SL/ASL. Without ASL's HIP mechanics, I am just thinking my idea as a way to compensate.

That's my two cents.

Thanks,

[Gerry4321]

That's an interesting way to handle the hidden idea. One of the problems with not even having concealment right now is AT Guns do not get a fair shake. In RL it would take a few shots from a hidden gun before the tankers would "see" it. Wonder if Peter with give some concealment advantages to Guns in an exapnsion?

[DoubleDeuce]

I haven't noticed this in any of the scenarios I have played, maybe because they were all SL/ASL conversions but, when adding equipment, especially vehicles and ordinance, check the equipment's historical availability dates.

I am not seeing this in the existing rulebook so maybe the creation of a cheatsheet is in order for that for designers to reference?
EDIT: I am going to go through my stuff and see if I can put something together for this.

[chuxdecator]

Working on a scenario... I am trying to allow for victory points for exiting units which I know is doable. However, I want to allow exit points for one side only after a specific game turn. Is there a way to do this in the editor??

[Peter Fisla]

ORIGINAL: Chux

Working on a scenario... I am trying to allow for victory points for exiting units which I know is doable. However, I want to allow exit points for one side only after a specific game turn. Is there a way to do this in the editor??

No, exit hexes or VPO hexes are active for the duration of the whole scenario/CG

[jcrohio]

I have a question. I was looking at the ASL Scenario B The Tractor Works. The role of the Attacker/Defender is
a little muddy in this scenario. The Russian have a Hold AI Attitude. But half of their forces have really an
attacker role. The Germans have an Advance AI Attitude but part of their forces are really on the defense. Now
if I am understanding the AI Special Commands correctly you can modify the Russian units with Hold commands to
attack. (I am not really sure whether Defend a Hex or just plain Attack is the better option though.) What I
have no idea how to accomplish is to take the Germans and make part of their units assume a defensive role as
only units with the Hold AI attitude can use the AI Special Commands. Is the best way to give them both Hold
Attitudes an then modify some with AI Special Commands.

Any thoughts would be appreciated.

Thanks
Jack

[genesismwt]

I think giving the Germans the Hold order would make the Assault Engineers passive. However, I will give it a try.

[genesismwt]

I have been playing with my HIP method and I am thinking that it may be sufficient to just reserve any unit until a later turn to achieve an element of surprise(if it's set for placement). As I noted in North Bank, write down the location that you want the unit to appear in at the start of play to be fair.

[genesismwt]

I played Tractor Factory twice tonight as the Russians(first game blew up half way through [&:], needless to say, I saved every turn the second game), with the Germans set on Hold. They were way too passive. Their leaders and MG's sat in back the whole game. the Germans never advanced on the factory once in either playing.

My two cents.

[jcrohio]

Thanks genesismwt

I have actually changed the scenario to both the Germans and Russians on Hold and appropriate units to an AI
Special Command of Attack. I just need to find the time to test it.


Jack

[genesismwt]

Let us know how that goes! I'll give the idea a try myself.

In general, I find that the AI's idea of advance is a little different than ours. I probably have not been fair to the AI as it tends to shoot if there's viable targets, and not move unless it couldn't shoot. By keeping just a picket line of one squad per hex facing the German Assault force, the AI stays frozen in place, firing the Germans. It won't move if there's a target to shoot at first.

[utexgrad]

I'm interested to see how others handle issues with some special scenario rules. For example, I'm converting an ASL scenario that allows for squads to use Assault Fire even though the counter being used doesn't support that. So the scenario calls for a 4-5-7 1st line unit to have the capability, but ToTH doesn't allow for Assault Fire with that counter.

Is it just a matter of living without it or is there some other type of balancing y'all like to use in a situation like that?

Thanks!!

[genesismwt]

The units can't be altered. You would only be able to alter your forces, like substituting squads for lmg's. Or, live without assault fire.

[utexgrad]

Thanks, sir! I know you've done yeoman's work converting ASL scenarios, so is there a rule of thumb you use in a situation like this? For example, adding a half squad or or a more powerful MMC to make up for not having assault fire available to add balance.

[genesismwt]

You're welcome.

I think it's a question of how important the extra FP is in the AFPh. If not, then don't bother.

If it is, then I would start by trying to be true to the original scenario, or historical reference, and keep the FP factors the same(subbing 2 lmg for one squad). Not too much, since there is so much more to a squad than just the FP.

I don't think that going with 638's is viable as it is probably overkill. I am guessing that you are trying to do an Allied Minor, like the Belgians. If that's correct, 638's don't fit.

In the end, you want it to be balanced. I define balanced for myself by being able to win with either side on hard.

[utexgrad]

I appreciate the knowledge. I decided to upgrade a MMG to a HMG and go without the assault fire. The Poles are defending anyway, so not having assault fire shouldn't be that big of a deal.

I DO wish that there was the ability to place trenches like squads, as the scenario allows for that, but someone can always go into the editor before a game and put the trenches wherever they'd like.