(04-26-2017, 10:04 AM)Greyfox Wrote: On the profile page, one has the opportunity to select which game or supplements they own. This is supposed to tell us which scenario's we can or cannot play with other players (dependent on which games they own). The problem is that a player doesn't get constructive credit for the scenario's he can play in earlier editions of the same title, when he purchased a later edition. Unless I am missing something:...I would think that a player would get credit for being able to play some of the scenarios in earlier or later editions of the same supplement.
No, you didn't miss anything. That is pretty much how the accrediting works.
Now play credits have to do rank. So are you suggesting that bonus play credits be awarded based on APL's re-released games? That would be the effect, would it not?
Medals have to do with games completed. So if there is accreditation through the released version of the scenarios, does that not mean earning one medal contributes toward another one? It seems to violate the spirit medals.
All together it seems too complicated to sort out. Rank and medals are for bragging rights of those who earned them. Such things don't mean much to me. Others who have value in them already subscribed to rules, and earned there rank and medal based upon them.
BTW: The Kokoda Campaign Vassal module works fine for Kokoda Trail, except when it comes to scenarios 10 & 17. A little creativity should overcome the difficulties of the versions.
