Colonial Campaigns Club (CCC)

I noticed from http://www.wargame.ch/1776/1776scenariodata.html that no American had won, now I know why!

Okay, 7 turns into my game with Karl, I feel cheated. Yes, I am probably going to win, but that is not the problem with this scenario.

The real problem is the objectives hexes, which the Americans have no chance of protecting are worth 100 points each! This is the main reason as to why the Americans will lose before 10 turns are even played.

I am going to throw them out, because this is a joke.

Now, if there were a couple of more objectives behind the American breastworks, this would be a real challenge to the British.

As it now stands, no one who plays the Americans will ever win.

No idiot would try and protect 300 points in the middle of nowwhere while they get surrounded. So, the 3 objectives for 300 points is the key. If these are removed and put behind the Breastworks and make the Brits need some real points to win, this would be a good scenario. 100 points for objectives that can never be defended is just not right, especially the way things are scored in FIW, 1776, 1812.

Any other suggestions from from ones who have played welcome.

Do not get me wrong, the scenario is historical, but should not be lopsided in points so it cannot be played with a chance of winning.

Also, one note, I play to have fun. And when the other player cannot have fun, then I cannot have fun either.

Cheers,

I suggest you copy the scenario and alter the objectives to the way you see fit, submit it to Rich and have it posted on the SDC.

"No idiot would try and protect 300 points in the middle of nowwhere while they get surrounded. So, the 3 objectives for 300 points is the key. If these are removed and put behind the Breastworks and make the Brits need some real points to win, this would be a good scenario"

To an extent, I disagree. If all objectives are put behind the breastworks and into Brooklyn, it eliminates the strategy that the British had at Long Island.

Since it is clear all Americans are losing within 10 turns, perhaps the scenario should be alter to make it more fair to those who play it. This is why Bill Peters and Mike Cox made a (what-if) Long Island_b.

Paul,

You are right about the scen, I've never played in a more uneven battle than this one and not really enjoying the scen. But you are a great opponent so I'm holding on.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Sean Coffey</i>
<br />Since it is clear all Americans are losing within 10 turns, perhaps the scenario should be alter to make it more fair to those who play it. This is why Bill Peters and Mike Cox made a (what-if) Long Island_b.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Actually, that was one of many projects that are currently on hold. Bill is in semi-retirement, and I am swamped with summer responsibilities.

Maybe this fall.

Excellent, can some one point me to Long Island (b) scenario, I have looked but could not find.

Sean - don't take it the wrong way, the scenario is excellent as far as historical, I am trying to find a way to make the scenario better only as far as CCC club play. Otherwise, no one will ever want to play Americans.

Cheers,

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by PAW1776</i>
<br />Excellent, can some one point me to Long Island (b) scenario, I have looked but could not find.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Never finished, on hold, indefinately. (Especially given my current poor file turn around rate.)

Cox
NJM

I think that if you study the situation the Americans were beat from the git go. This is one of those that is better to play with a "What if the Americans had better morale" type things. I dont mind the objectives as much as the "Runnin' Rebels." For a moment there I thought I was attending UNLV!

Sean - I dont think the objectives reflect the situation. The main point of focus for the British was to cutoff and capture Americans. Here is a game where loss points for victory would have made more sense. Again I feel it is a situation played out more for history's sake than a game. Which is why Mike and I decided to make a new version. Not that it will change much and alot of credit goes to Sean for doing the groundwork on this one.

I have longed to make a scenario where every hex on the board is an objective to sort of get the message across that even if you take Moscow it doesnt mean you won much!

My own $0.02 on the objectives, would be that there should be some in Brooklyn itself, and that a major victory would entail taking them with a reasonable (?) casualty exchange with the Americans. Had the British done that, it may well have ended the war in August of 1776. (As the Americans would not have had an army left to retreat and hole up in New York with.)

I was thinking of victory levels along these lines:

Brooklyn cleared, low British losses: Major Brit Vic
Brooklyn cleared, excessive losses: Minor Brit Victory
Brooklyn held by Americans: Minor Brit Victory (Historical IMO)
Brooklyn held by Americans, excessive Brit losses: Draw
1 of the outposts held by Americans, Minor Brit Defeat
More than 1: Major Brit Defeat

BTW, the new FIW emplaced guns, actually should be added to the oob for some of the outlaying forts.

Col. Cox
NJM

Excellent ideas!

If I wasn't flat out (Aussie for totally occupied) doing ACWCO scenarios, I wouldn't mind start dabbing into CCC scenarios.

I also want to point out, I am not in the business of just finding fault, what I want is better scenarios for everyone, so I do a lot of error checking because I enjoy it.

But believe me when I say, I appreciate more than you know the hard work on designs and maps. My hats are off to all designers and their works. I am just the fine tuner, which I find I enjoy since I am into statistics and such.

Cheers,