I have notices a trend, that most games in the Panzer Grenadier Series that the smallest scenarios are played the most and the first couple of scenarios as compared to the last or middle scenarios are also played most.
It seems gamers always say they want large scenarios but few play them compared to the smaller scenarios. I just say that, because I know how much work goes into designing those larger scenarios.
Also, for some reason gamers play only the first couple of scenarios first. I usually look through the whole scenario book and play the ones that most interest me first and it doesn't matter if it is first, middle of last in the scenario book. I mean the idea is to play them all eventually. I have played some that I saved for last that were more fun than the ones I played first.
OCD makes me play scenarios in order although I've been working on that. The numbers for small vs. large can be misleading as you're counting raw number of scenarios played, not time spent playing scenarios.
I have found some of the best scenarios for some games in the middle or the end of the scenario book, so if I started with number one and worked my way back, I might have missed them or never have gotten to them.
That's why we rate scenarios.
Thanks for explaining that to me Shad.
I tend to always play the first scenario of a module for two reason.
1. I sometimes have long breaks between PG playings and the first scenario usually is a smallish one to help me get my brain back into it.
2. I have an intention to play the entire module in order, something I've never even come close to doing but nevertheless the intention remains.
That's interesting. I usually find myself doing the opposite in terms of size... almost all the games I've played have been 'big' 4-6 mapers. When I do play a smaller battle I tend to find them 'cute'.
I play scenario of every size but I prefer large scenario. I tallied the results a few years ago and found I rated scenarios with 125+ pieces more than 0.5 point higher than scenarios with less than 75 pieces.
(07-25-2018, 06:41 AM)Hugmenot Wrote: [ -> ]I play scenario of every size but I prefer large scenario. I tallied the results a few years ago and found I rated scenarios with 125+ pieces more than 0.5 point higher than scenarios with less than 75 pieces.
I have tended to simply randomize what I'm going to play within my interest at the moment. I'm into FiitS rights now. This is the first game I have not randomized. Matt has given us a campaign system to follow. But it appears that the first scenario of most games are fairly low in counters and learner scenarios.
One thing I've found over the years is that FtF games are low turn low counter ?affairs. People simply don't have the time to pull the counters for a big scenario, set it up, and play it, especially if it's, say, a 36 turn biggie. I always wanted to tackle the 12 map Fronte Russo scenario. I wouldn't even know where to set it up.
(07-25-2018, 07:49 AM)saracv3 Wrote: [ -> ]I always wanted to tackle the 12 map Fronte Russo scenario. I wouldn't even know where to set it up.
This sort of problem is why I got into Vassal.
Many years ago I started work on a Vassal module for War of Resistance. Here's my photo showing the map layout:
[
attachment=1198]
I never finished the module, though
