We have been playtesting some amendments to the rules over the last two months and last week we played a scenario using the amendments.
the report can be found here.
A small scenario
(6 posts) (3 voices)-
Posted 11 months ago #
-
Hi Andrew,
Just had a look through your blog as well as your terrain company website, both very impressive. I will look forward to following your blog, with it's beautiful terrain.
Great scenario by the way.
Nice work,
John
Posted 11 months ago # -
Thank you John for the kind comments.
I will be following your new diversion closely and watching the project developregards
AndrewPosted 11 months ago # -
Hi Andrew,
We are looking forward to trying your scenario next weekend with Conquest French attacking Prussians and their Saxon allies. Just a quick point of clarification - am I correct in assuming that the defender, as well as the attacker, gets the Core bonus units and additional subcommander?Cheers,
Peter.Posted 11 months ago # -
Peter,
That is correct both sides get the bonus units.
the defender has 1 support choice the attacker gets 2.Lets us know how you get one with the scenario please. I will shortly be posting the terrain alternatives once i work out how to add them to the blog.
Posted 11 months ago # -
Andrew,
thanks for producing what we found to be a balanced and enjoyable scenario. While we only got through 11 turns after a late start, the action provided highlights and challenges for both sides. There was plenty of fighting still to be done, however the result was looking to be very similar to the one you descibed in your blog's battle report - the defender was going to be hard put to hold the critical objectives.While the terrain provided some minor advantages to the defender, the initial equality between the attacker and defender encouraged both sides to be aggressive, (well as aggressive as you can be with a linear 1806 Prussian army and three lethargic and tactically inept subcommanders!). The timing and location of the attacker's reserve brigade arrival was very important to the chances of success for both sides and provides a nicely balanced degree of uncertainty in both players' decisions.
Thanks again for sharing your ideas and we look forward to following your ammendments
Cheers,
Peter.Posted 10 months ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.