Note for people converting ASL scenarios (lots of broken LOS)

[Thradar]

I recently loaded up a bunch of ASL scenarios from the Workshop, and noticed that most people are using "Trees" to represent "Woods" in SF. Second Front Trees are 2 level obstacles, so most of the elevation LOS (from hills, etc) in these scenarios are broken compared to the ASL scenario.

If you're converting an ASL scenario, use "Birch" to represent Woods hexes. Birch terrain is a level 1 obstacle.

[Daffy&Gwidion]

This is just one of many reasons why a direct copy of an SL/ASL scenario is not a good idea. There are many more if you want a situation that is challenging.

[kevinkin]

One technique is to start with woods, then border them with trees, and then border those with brush. To provide farmland and villages, woods tend to be cleared leaving them on higher ground with sparser ground as you move down hill into towns and villages. I think the ASL maps provide a great starting point. But some adjustment will need to be made on some of them.

[Daffy&Gwidion]

I still don't see, other than for nostalga, why anyone would want to use those geomorphic boards when actual terrain could be used. It really isn't that hard get real data and historical accuracy. If you are not interested in that, just make crap up.

[kevinkin]

I agree with both. Nostalgia is a powerful driver with SF AND there is a lot for terrain maps that can be used instead of translating ASL maps. But to call hypothetical maps, OOBs and scenarios crap is inconsistent with decades of war gaming. Historical scenarios can be difficult to balance and when you do the process throws history to the wind. No map in any war game reflects history 100%. It may look like the map from some page in a book. But it's not what the soldier encountered in battle at eye level. If you have a good terrain map and OOB from the war, then by means create a scenario out of them. But don't think it will be any more "accurate" at depicting combat than a quality hypothetical scenario that is based the designer's understanding of military history, weapons and tactics. This is true of all war game and even those where the maps are more granular than SF.

[Thradar]

Originally posted by Daffy&Gwidion:

I still don't see, other than for nostalga, why anyone would want to use those geomorphic boards when actual terrain could be used. It really isn't that hard get real data and historical accuracy. If you are not interested in that, just make crap up.

Some of the scenarios that are being translated have been around for decades and played many thousands of times. There's an implied balance with many of them (at least when using the ASL ruleset), and I think the presumption is that that balance will carry forward. There's actual balance data for every ASL scenario created, at least those who choose to report a result: https://www.jrvdev.com/ROAR/VER1/RecordByName.asp

But this presumed balance probably isn't really true as the SF ruleset is a little different, and dependent on the AI for things to happen.

BUT translating the geography incorrectly just adds the potential of additional imbalance ... significant imbalance in some cases. For example, the scenario "Hill 621" is very depending on Russians approaching through as much blocked LOS as possible. If you use SF 2 level trees all over the map, it probably breaks the scenario even more.

[Daffy&Gwidion]

Apologies for the term crap. I've played historical war games for 50 years now. All three words are important. Anyone who claims something is 100% anything does not understand statistics let alone history. However, that is not an excuse to not strive for accuracy and being honest with history. Nor does one need to experience war to study war and attempt to understand it. If one wants to experience war, and not go to Ukraine, dig a hole in your backyard, fill it with water, jump in, stay there for a couple of weeks, and get your neighbors to take pot shots at you night and day. Which brings up the last word - game. It is the responsibility of the designer of the game and scenarios to provide an environment that is interesting and use their skills to make a game of war and history.

[kevinkin]

Originally posted by Daffy&Gwidion:

However, that is not an excuse to not strive for accuracy and being honest with history. Nor does one need to experience war to study war and attempt to understand it.

See the thread on the scenario where the point unit is a M7 Priest. We are are on top of this type of stuff. On experience: You are correct. But here is an interesting quote for perspective,

"Certainly, there was little in the American military experience to condition Americans to conceive of operations as large as those occurring in the East, and what is not experienced cannot be fully appreciated. " (Glantz, 1987)

[Lazybones]

Here's a suggestion: if you don't want to play a scenario converted from ASL, don't download it. Same for non-historical scenarios, or scenarios that use weapons or vehicles in non-historical ways.

Some people want to play Second Front for historical authenticity, others for solving tactical puzzles, while still others just want to move soldiers and vehicles around a map and blow stuff up. I am getting tired of people who see it as their duty to tell the community how this game should be enjoyed.

Thradar, thanks for the head-up on the birch/woods issue. I may keep using woods when it doesn't matter for LOS purposes because I like the look of it better, but I'll keep this issue in mind when doing future conversions.

[Axeking]

There are a lot of differences between SF and ASL. So many that really, the ASL map can only be used as inspiration - you almost certainly can't duplicate the ASL map in SF. But you can get close, and you really need to test it to see if the changes you must make affect the play and balance.

"Gavin Take ASL 181" (in workshop) does a good job of making this translation and adjustment. It could do more (could have widened the map to fit the 12 hex minimum instead of sticking to ASL 10 hexes) - but it isn't essential, since gehrig38 made other adjustments to get the right feel out of the scenario.

For a start, differences in maps between SF and ASL include:
- Buildings are inherent - they fill the entire hex. Similarly for any other in-hex terrain.
- You can't have walls in building hexes
- as mentioned above, there are multiple tree heights.
- you can't use the roof nor sewers
- vehicles can't move through woods without a road
- shell holes are different (they provide more protection in ASL)

There are others. This means that a direct copy usually can't be made, and that you will have to adjust the map to make the scenario work. This can also be somewhat accomplished by adjusting forces and/or setup locations.

[Lazybones]

Those are good points, Axeking, and why I describe all of my ASL conversions as "adaptations." I have been trying to follow the designers' instructions for things like not placing multiple buildings close together, and allowing for more flexibility in set up (e.g., by moving the AI side back a bit to give the player more time to adjust the precise location of their forces). Victory conditions are another area where some adjustment is usually necessary. There are some conversions that haven't really worked (the AI seems to have trouble with armor-vs-armor breakthrough scenarios that have a lot of open terrain and route options, and I've had to scrap a few of those that I've started), but for the most part Second Front provides a pretty good ASL-against-a-computer experience.

One thing I have tried to do for these conversions is always include a change list that indicates how I modified the scenario from the original.

[Skye88]

Originally posted by Axeking:

"Gavin Take ASL 181" (in workshop) does a good job of making this translation and adjustment. It could do more (could have widened the map to fit the 12 hex minimum instead of sticking to ASL 10 hexes) - but it isn't essential, since gehrig38 made other adjustments to get the right feel out of the scenario.

Think "ASL T1 Gavin Take" in the workshop is the better one <grin>, anyway trees=orchard and woods = eeeuh , woods :-)