- v1.1 https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-mutU30hSmHcVBVQ1BhTlpqOEE/view, although this was before some corrections, such as specifiying scoring units as those that can normally score Focal Points.
- v1.3 (used at Tournament, scroll to p.2) https://dzcrollinghot.files.wordpress.com/2015/09/a6d09-dzc_09-05-2015_tournament_2.pdf.
- v2.0 the latest version https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-mutU30hSmHRlczM0ZpR2FFblk/view.
Both with and without me, it was tested leading up to the event and has received positive reviews. No one has specifically talked about it post tournament, but there is much discussion over rural terrain which I will discuss at length in a separate post. Though it was on a pure rural board at the tournament it received testing in cities as well leading up to it. One hole in testing has been a lack of Scourge players. As none turned up at the tournament, I have yet to hear about this scenario being played by Scourge. I cannot see them having any problem related directly to the scenario, but still, it needs to be played.
Some results of this scenario from the Tournament are as follows:
- Resistance vs Resistance 20-0
- PHR vs Resistance 5-15
- Shaltari vs UCM 16-4
- UCM vs UCM 8-12
- PHR vs UCM 5-15
The major goal of this scenario was to prevent the Shaltari from grabbing all the focal points at the last second and/or grabbing objectives faster than anyone else. This goal has been accomplished. By breaking scoring up into the second half of the game players have to commit earlier or their opponent will gain a significant lead. This did not result in Shaltari unable to compete as with the 8” bands stretching across the table there was still plenty of room to gate about. It also means big heavy units have to be confronted. A typical strategy of playing against a Hades is to ignore and avoid, but when it can sit at the center of the table and contribute a lot to winning the central band, a player must devise a strategy of either outweighing its points or removing it.
There are some things I want to change, notably the scoring being stretched over 3 turns. It may seem counter intuitive to change that which I just previously praised, but for this to really settle in with the game it has to happen. Hawk is continuing to re-balance their game with key tenets in mind, one of which is the 6 turn game. The score can get pretty high when things are scored for 3 turns rather than 1. I got around this by having players halve the margin of victory, rounding down, and using this number to consult the Hawk Tournament scoring, but this is clunky and doesn’t fit with the rest of the scenarios. I also feel that counting kill points for 3 turns rather than just the last one may act as a deterrent for others to give the scenario a shot. In practice, determining who controls each 8” band is not difficult, but one less reason to try it will help it gain acceptance outside of my own locality.
So out with the old, but in with some new. As mentioned previously, the original write up did not specify units to count as scoring, and this came up when it was being tested and I was not present. Luckily, some there were familiar with the scenario having played me and cleared it up, and I was notified and made corrections to the sheet. It had been a consideration of letting all units score like they do in Ground Control, and now I plan to begin testing that. With the turn 6 scoring, and possibly aircraft scoring, I see this scenario as a descendant of Ground Control and Encroachment, which again should help it fit right in with the other scenarios given to us by Hawk.
I encourage all to give this a try. It has been played by all factions, except Scourge, with even results and positive feedback. It has been brought more in line with what already exists in the game by doing away with the 3 turn scoring and the clunky margin of victory calculation. There is more testing to be done to see if allowing aircraft to score is an improvement or if it is good as is. If you are looking for a new slobber-knocker of a scenario to test your might look no further than Frontline Control!