(01-29-2015, 04:40 AM)t1M0t8yk Wrote: I think an interesting topic for discussion is what distinguishes a well-designed scenario from one that is not well-designed.
What do you think are features of well-designed PG scenarios?
Intriguing question. But covering different topics.
What do players like ? Really I don't know but as far as ratings are concerned, they will better rate a BIG scenario than a small one, overall. The idea seems to be that if someone spends enough time to play a large scenario until the end, it has to be good enough. On the contrary, small scenarios get more erratic ratings because of the luck involved. Take
Saipan as an example, the first (amphibious assault) large scenario cannot collect bad results and commands the rest of the rather small or medium size scenarios.
Designing scenarios is an entirely different question. And there will probably be as many answers as they are designers. As far as I'm concerned, the historical bias is commanding everything. When a particular historical action interests me, I try to use the right terrain, the right order of battle, the right special rules, as much as possible, and still turn it into a PG playable scenario. It's not necessarily the best way to write down the scenario the player like the most. But it is my way.
