(07-19-2022, 11:47 AM)goosebrown Wrote: (07-18-2022, 03:18 AM)plloyd1010 Wrote: If the battle game record thingy ever gets off the ground, I suggest we also add mini-campaigns as battles. The Vorontsovo campaign, from PG: The East for example, or the distinct sections from Campaigns & Commanders, like the desert campaigns. Maybe the grouped scenarios like the Twin Villages battles (ElsR 5-8), but that would require creativity on out part.
I agree. The scenarios are scenarios and should be pointed as such. The campaigns, tied scenarios, and battles deserve to be acknowledged, but not in the same way as the scenarios. I do not think they should count as advancement points, that is just for the scenarios themselves. I like the idea of some addition to the campaign ribbon.
No, I don't think battle games should count for advancement. 2 reasons for that. First, campaign ribbons don't count for advancement (nor articles, bounty points or anything else), so battle games shouldn't either. Second, I expect some (many?) players will play all the scenarios in a battle game, whether published or otherwise grouped, but not actually playing them as a "battle".
While adding battle stars to/under a campaign ribbon would be cool, obviously they would need to reside somewhere before the ribbon is earned. Moving them to the campaign ribbon later would take some recursive code. Then there become the question of what happens if a player decides to go back and play through a battle game after getting the ribbon? Now that we can get up to 3 advancement points per scenario, that's a real possibility.
I think we just need to get the stars working. We can try to get cute things done with them later. (Graphics for AAR's would be nice too.)
