Tours 732 AD IDL

[Micha63]

First at all :
I really lofe this game and i"m glad about every new scenario i find here.
But if i could , i would give to this scenario

The Award for the most unballanced scenario ever made for FOG !

For years i"m creating campaigns for the game People general. And i know , its not the playtesters job to help the scenariocreator to find the ballance at all.
The playtesters task is to help for finetuning and find hidden bugs.
I do not know anything about the historical backround of this battle, maybe the franks were really much stronger and the scenariodesigner wanted to make
the scenario historical correctly like a few other fog scenarios.
So let me say my oppinion about such "historical correctly "scenarios:

Creating a scenario were the player has not the trace of a chance to win is nonsense. The sense of every game is to win If the player plays good.
If you play a napoleonicgame ;which you can found many in the web; you have always the chance to win waterloo on the napoleonic site.
If you can not win, why should you play ?

My tip for players : Give yourselve a advance and the AI a handicap, maybe you have a chance to win this scenario..

Sorry, this scenario is bad work.


By michasimages at 2012-03-09

By michasimages at 2012-03-09

By michasimages at 2012-03-09

By michasimages at 2012-03-09

By michasimages at 2012-03-09

By michasimages at 2012-03-09

By michasimages at 2012-03-09

By michasimages at 2012-03-09

By michasimages at 2012-03-09

By michasimages at 2012-03-09

By michasimages at 2012-03-09

By michasimages at 2012-03-09

[ZeaBed]

Finally, a scenario from which even I can emerge victorious!

[stockwellpete]

My understanding is that Ian is doing further work on this scenario so there will be a version 2 for us to try in due course. It is not always easy to balance a scenario at first.

[Micha63]

It is not always easy to balance a scenario at first.

Yes, belive me i know this. Sometimes i had to playtest a scenario for "people general " 5 or more times.

But i think ian relaesed the scenario without playtesting and and correction, this scenario was more frust than fun for me.

The first playtester has to be the scenariocreator, thats was the only whish i had .

[Hoplite1963]

Hi
Thanks for all of this. I am working on revising the scenario and beefing up the effectiveness of the Arab side. Its worth noting that I had a similar problem rebalancing my Las Navas De Tolosa scenario which Like this one drew heavily on the OOB from a scenario published in the French Vae Victis wargames magazine. It’s a useful source but reworking its scenarios into “Field Of Glory Digital” ones is clearly not as straightforward as it first appears.

Also with this scenario I was trying out my off map flank march ideas for the first time and paid rather more attention than perhaps I should to this aspect of the draft as oppose4d to play balance before moving on to open playtesting.

Regards
Ian

[Micha63]

Hi,
yes, you are always the first and most important playtester, good luck.

[JocaRamiro]

My thanks to all who create new scenarios. Balance is good, but creativity is better. After all, you can always play both sides and see who got clobbered worse.

My most unbalanced? Angincourt.

[Micha63]

Hi Joca Ramiro,

Its i think a matter of the personally oppinion. When you play multiplayer you can play a paired game and both players have the same chance.

But in singleplayer the player should have a fair chance to win, this is a matter of fact since the first videogame was created.
Hopefully we have in fog the possibillity to give the ai advance or handycap. So every game designer should test his scenario in singleplayer mod
to give the players a tip which site is overpowered.
Sorry, but a game the singleplayer has not a trace of a chance to win is in my personally view nosense, but maybe i"m wrong.