Sudden Death Issues

[DoubleDeuce]

I posted this in the main part of the forum but wanted to actually post it here as a hope to getting some recommendations on how to address this. Should I change the VL points around so this main objective is smaller than the others or at least equal? Should I add more enemy units, to enter in the last few minutes as reinforcements to offset the force imbalance?

The story so far. I am playtesting a scenario and am constantly hitting the SD trigger end before I can secure the last main objective. Because the main objective is worth so much more than the others, it appears to be causing a continual Decisive Loss for the attacker (in this case it will be the user's force in a campaign). Even when I have forces in between the objective and the nearest enemy and the enemy force overall is pretty much eviscerated.

I understand that as long as enemy forces are withing 2k then the objective is not crediting towards the apparent victor but there should probably be some remaining force structure factors taken into account, like if they are below a certain % then they abandon the filed totally.

[Mad Russian]

What size forces do you have in the game?

Are there VL's assigned to either side at the start of the game?

Your forces are skewing the Victory Levels. You have contested at 91%. Are NATO's forces are worth considerably more than the Soviets?

Good Hunting.

MR

[DoubleDeuce]

Point are very out of balance because in the scenario the Soviets are a defense in depth speed bump to attrit US forces as they advance towards Fulda. It's not intended to be a standalone scenario but the jumping off point for the larger 10-11 scenario US Campaign.

The US Forces are a combined Armor/Infantry Battalion Task Force while the Soviet forces are a Heliborne Infantry Battalion (minus their vehicles) with the following point setup;

US Forces: 3,886
US Objectives: 0

Soviet Forces: 390
Soviet Objectives: 0

What I want to do is find a way to tweak it without having to add in filler units sitting in the corner of the game map just to balance it, at least not without another option if that makes sense.

[Mad Russian]

I see.

I never make scenarios that I don't think both sides can win. I might not be much help for you with one where you expect the Soviets to win easily.

We'll see.

Good Hunting.

MR

[DoubleDeuce]

The Soviets shouldn't really win this one easily. The US is stretched to reach the furthest objective but it doable with about 1 hour to spare if you grind along to reduce your casualties but keep a steady pace. The problem is, the sooner the Soviets "collapse" the sooner they win. That just doesn't seem right.

[Mad Russian]

I understand.

Good Hunting.

MR

[DoubleDeuce]

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian

I understand.

I was re-reading your AI Crumbs post and I'm thinking to alter the VL Points so that the farthest VL are most valuable. The object for NATO is to secure the central VL (to be used as a resupply point) AND take and hold Exit Routes out of the surrounding area for future offensive Ops.