Suggestions for Starter Scenario?

[Gil R.]

The Starter Scenario for "Brother against Brother" consists of our smallest scenario with a bunch of yellow question marks strewn about the battlefield, providing information and tips about the game when one right-clicks on them. It would be helpful to know if there are issues that you feel should be addressed -- it is very easy to add more, so please do let us know. Thank you.

[FroBodine]

I can't wait to dig in when I get home from work this afternoon. Is the starter scenario with the question marks the only tutorial? Or is there an actual tutorial that explains how to play and steps you through some turns?

I always think the more information you can give about how to play, the better, for complex wargames.

[elmo3]

Erik's Twitch stream, now available on YouTube, is a very good tutorial for the game.

[zakblood]

i can do a turn by turn AAR if it's needed or wanted?

but twitch and manual are both great, with some great maps for planning to download if any one wants them to print out, local shop has good A3 printers that don't cost the earth for a full colour print out then they laminate it for you

[bdoubled]

I would like to have a non-historical beginner tutorial series of lessons that begins with the basic mechanics of movement and combat, and introduces more complex game mechanics like command, fatigue, morale and supply gradually over several scenarios.

[Gil R.]

bdoubled,
What you suggest wouldn't really work that well with this engine. Fatigue, for example, isn't something that can be taught by means of a tutorial: as units fight more there is a chance of fatigue, and if they become fatigued they need to rest. Morale is similar: it can't really be taught through a tutorial, but rather the player just needs to know a few basic facts, such as what constitutes good vs. bad morale, and then the factors that raise and lower it (which are listed in the manual). Supply is automated, so all one has to know is what to click on to learn which units need supply, and then that one should move one or more supply units in that direction.

If any of these areas are not clear please do ask in the forum and I'll do my best to explain it.

[bdoubled]

So, if I understand you correctly, Gil, there is no shallow end of the BaB pool - you have to jump in the deep end and sink or swim.

[rickier65]

ORIGINAL: bdoubled

So, if I understand you correctly, Gil, there is no shallow end of the BaB pool - you have to jump in the deep end and sink or swim.

Actually Blackburns ford is a good "starter" battle. not too many troops but it does have all the elements. I haven't checked to see if there are some AARs on it though.

Thanks
Rick

[zakblood]

here you go

tm.asp?m=3856133

and there's no deep end, you can walk all the way in our pools, so no drowning as yet[;)]

[Gil R.]

ORIGINAL: bdoubled

So, if I understand you correctly, Gil, there is no shallow end of the BaB pool - you have to jump in the deep end and sink or swim.

No, I'm not exactly saying that. But most of the elements of the game don't really lend themselves to a tutorial, as I noted for fatigue and supply. When the game came out there were a few players who, like yourself, were calling for an interactive tutorial, but we explained the various reasons why BAB does not have one. I don't recall all of the reasons, but the two that stand out in my mind are that such a tutorial, especially for this engine, would be an enormous amount of programming work (coming at the expense of improvements to the game), and only a minority of players might need it. There are different types of players and different playing styles, and not everyone prefers to learn in the way you suggest. We believe that the combination of the introductory scenario, complemented by being able to watch someone play online (either the Twitch game Erik Rutins played, or one of the YouTube reviews (links to which are in a thread up above) should be enough to get one able to play the game within an hour, even without reading through the whole manual.

The bottom line is that if we believed that BAB cannot be learned without an interactive, step-by-step tutorial we would have done one, despite the significant investment of time that would take, but this does not appear to be the case.

And again, I'd urge you to share any questions you might have about anything that's not clear.

[zakblood]

ask and it will be answered, and if by me then half of the time it may even be correct[:D][;)]

[Chromey]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Belmont

[bdoubled]

Ok, Gil, then how about giving us an options screen that would let a player turn off (uncheck a box?) various game factors like supply, morale, fatigue and FOW - to remove them temporarily from the game's calculations. That would offer a player the ability to start with a simplified system, then turn them back on to add complexity over time and playing experience.

[ericbabe]

bdoubled, we did this for FOF -- provide a bunch of options to make the game simpler -- but we didn't really seem to get the sort of positive feedback from players (and reviewers) that we had hoped. In fact the only time a reviewer mentioned our options was to say that having so many options made him "bored." It really is a lot of work to add these sorts of things since it creates many, many more "use cases" under which we then need to test the game and to write AI code. Maddeningly, offering all these options didn't seem to help with the players who complained about having to deal with too much complexity: such players would say "I want to play the game how it was meant to be played" (whatever that means), turn on all the options, then complain that the game was too hard to learn right away.

[bdoubled]

Thank you very much for your explanation, Eric. I'm an old f*rt and was just looking for a way to "lower the learning curve" (aka "cheat"). I've been playing wargames since 1965 (and did some playtesting for Avalon Hill when I lived in Baltimore), and my multitasking skills aren't quite a sharp as they used to be.

May I suggest a future add-on collection of several small battles (like Honey Springs, OK) where a new player can start small and work up to larger engagements? (I think that would be fun for the player, but probably hell for the person making the maps.)

[zakblood]

well all battles can be edited so in theory and in practice all can be altered to cheat in, and made easier very quickly and tbh very easily

[Gil R.]

ORIGINAL: bdoubled
May I suggest a future add-on collection of several small battles (like Honey Springs, OK) where a new player can start small and work up to larger engagements? (I think that would be fun for the player, but probably hell for the person making the maps.)

As the one who researches the maps and gets them ready for our artist to create I agree with your assessment.

It's been our hope that some modders with sufficient graphics skills will have an interest in creating maps of the battles that we are not planning (and I don't even remember hearing about Honey Springs, so that's certainly not one). If modders create maps that are up to snuff for BAB then I'll work with them to make them playable.

Regarding Honey Springs, I just skimmed through the Wikipedia summary. Do you know if it's an interesting place to see? I'll be visiting my uncle in Tulsa in a few weeks, and it's an hour away. I was thinking of hitting Praire Grove for the first time on this trip, or returning to Pea Ridge, but might squeeze in time for another place or two.

[bdoubled]

Gil - yes, the battle of Honey Springs is pretty interesting. There's usually a re-enactment staged annually at a nearby location. Although the Indian Territory is considered a minor theater during the ACW, both the Union and Confederacy considered it very important to gain the allegiance of the native American tribes in the area, who fought on both sides. A Cherokee, Stand Watie, was the last Confederate general to surrender (at Doaksville, OK, in June, 1865).