Scenario Size and which sizes gets played more?

[Matt W]

Jay,

Please don't stop making large scenarios. I personally really enjoy the big battles.

Of course, this needs to fit into the history (or presumed history, as Larry notes of Red & White) of the battle/campaign. It wouldn't be Kursk without several big, tank-heavy battles, thus someone buying a Kursk product would be aghast if there weren't some huge donnybrooks. If there weren't big invasion or large Japanese attack scenarios in Saipan it wouldn't be Saipan, it would be some nameless island conflict. On the other hand a product covering, say, Norway in 1940 couldn't have anything that large by the nature of the conflict and would have to be composed of smaller fare. The large scenarios help define the product and anchor it in history (or, again, in alternate history...). The effort involved in the large scenarios is certainly not wasted even if they are not played as often as the smaller scenarios.

This brings to the fore the need for the designer and developer of those larger scenarios to come up with a scenario that has some level of interest. They have to have actually played the scenario enough to know that, at the end of the scenario there is at least a reason to have played (for both players). While this is true of all scenarios in new products, it is vastly more difficult in the large/long scenario given that large forces and board layout typically give the players an exponentially increased number of options that must at least be considered in the development of the product. Smaller scenarios can generally be understood quickly once the boards and pieces are laid out, but a large scenario may require weeks of study to ensure that the players have the "right" options, the "right" forces, the "right" objectives and sufficient time - but not too much time - to complete the job. This is a huge job and small mistakes or miscalculations can have a huge impact on the result.

Don't get me wrong. I love a nice, clean, short scenario as much as the next player. On the other hand I love some of the more involved scenarios. Daniel and I recently played all three of the Christmas battles from Fronte Russo, which were huge individually and combined took us a LONG time to complete. The ease of the Italian victories in those belies the enjoyment (well my enjoyment at any rate - as the Italian commander) we had playing the games. A stunningly great small scenario will get a strong 4 ranking but will be eclipsed by its larger brethren that carry the same quality

As to which gets played "more", that question answers itself. Smaller scenarios will get played a lot, bigger ones not so much due to the logistics of the player. I think something that needs to be factored into the equation is that playing one of the monsters may take several weeks to complete, during which time one could play 10-12 smaller scenarios. I find that the larger scenarios continue to have a very strong attraction, despite their logistical difficulties in terms of playing time (and continuity!) and playing space. I would always prefer a game that included a mix of scenarios including some larger ones (150+ counters, 4-8 maps) to be a well rounded product. I'm not looking for a huge number of them (more than 4 in a 40 scenario package would be overkill), but I am looking for some if they are representative of the overall conflict.

Something that Mike said in Daily Content years ago sticks with me. That these scenario books can best be considered literature. If you have played some small scenarios, you can read a medium scenario and imagine how it will play. You can continue stepwise towards larger battles until you reach the edge of your physical playing space (or effective playing time). If, as will almost certainly be the case, you reach the edge of your playing logistics before you hit the largest scenarios that doesn't mean that you haven't read them and imagined what they will be like. Heck, we all probably own several monster games with "full" battle/campaign scenarios that have never hit the table. That doesn't mean that we don't read them, dream about them, drool over the prospects of playing them and respect the time and effort that went into their design and development. They also were probably part of the decision to buy the game in the first place.