Counting Every Play-Through

[treadasaurusrex]

It would sure be great, especially for newly-trained PG players, if each and every scenario that they play is counted toward their total scenarios played. As it is now, an individual scenario -- once played -- is counted just once. No additional play-throughs of the same scenario are counted toward a player's total of games played.

IMHO, this seems like a discouraging practice if the object is to encourage as many people to play PG as possible. I think that this is especially important for those who choose to participate in VASSAL shared, online play. Perhaps there might be a standing requirement that an AAR also be filed for each play to be counted?

A game play is a game play, after all, so why not count every scenario play-through, either solo, or shared that a PG-HQ member plays and records?

Perhaps there should a be a poll of the membership on this question?

[Blackcloud6]

I agree.  Count all plays.  All Plays Matter! (Sorry, I couldn't resist)

Now that VASSAL play is getting PGers together, the common wargamer way of "OK, let's now switch sides and try it again" wants to rear its head.

[plloyd1010]

Now that VASSAL play is getting PGers together, the common wargamer way of "OK, let's now switch sides and try it again" wants to rear its head.

That would be a caveat for me it comes to multiple counts on a scenario. Perhaps also with one solo play counting. Where would multiple plays of a given scenario stop counting for advancement? After all, a 150 rounds of Town Fight shouldn't give you a commission. (I have played through the mentoring scenarios 6 or 8 times.)

Generally the ranking system is a little hokey. It is based on the percentage of scenarios played of the then and mostly out of print offering of the Panzer Grenadier system. It is also a little tiresome that there are 7 levels of sergeant. Also, home grown and experimental scenarios don't count. While there is a lot to be unhappy with, I can't think of good working alternative.

[Schoenwulf]

I concur with Peter on this one. The max # of plays credited should be 3: solo, red, blue (or whatever terms one likes for axis and allies). My concern with even suggesting this however is that I have no idea how much more work this would be in coding for the page. This site is the best site devoted to a particular game series anywhere on the web now, and if this lays a lot more on the site's managers, then nyet.

[treadasaurusrex]

Now that VASSAL play is getting PGers together, the common wargamer way of "OK, let's now switch sides and try it again" wants to rear its head.

That would be a caveat for me it comes to multiple counts on a scenario. Perhaps also with one solo play counting. Where would multiple plays of a given scenario stop counting for advancement? After all, a 150 rounds of Town Fight shouldn't give you a commission. (I have played through the mentoring scenarios 6 or 8 times.)

Generally the ranking system is a little hokey. It is based on the percentage of scenarios played of the then and mostly out of print offering of the Panzer Grenadier system. It is also a little tiresome that there are 7 levels of sergeant. Also, home grown and experimental scenarios don't count. While there is a lot to be unhappy with, I can't think of good working alternative.

Yes, the current system is surely silly, but the key question is: who cares if someone wants to play a particular scenario 50 times in solo or shared play mode on VASSAL? It is a only a game, que no? Who cares about wins & losses on a virtual battlefield? Do adults really need the affirmation that achieving one of 7 levels of "Sergeant" conveys, after playing a certain number of scenarios?

If individuals enjoy playing PG online, or in-person and sharing it with their friends, we should be as welcoming & encouraging as possible. IMHO, that is the only grownup solution to the question of counting "game plays."

I'm pretty sure that Mike at Avalanche Press, and the various PG-game/scenario developers would agree. More engaged and happy players = more interest generated in WW2 history, more enthusiasm for boardgame-based wargaming, and in terms of mere commerce: more games and extensions sold.

[goosebrown]

Now that VASSAL play is getting PGers together, the common wargamer way of "OK, let's now switch sides and try it again" wants to rear its head.

I think three plays would be fair. I would very much like to do some scenarios once on each side. Not very useful, but, "I'm with you fellas."