Board Game Arena

I thought I would gather some thoughts from players on the playability of different scenarios between actual players... obviously Poland 1939 is purely a training scenario so cannot be played with another players, but how about the others? Personally I have not actually played a scenario to conclusion but I have now played most solo and am playing some against other players:

Scandinavia 1940, Balkans 1941, and Main Event 1939-40 also feel to me like they are only useful as training scenarios.

USSR 1941 looks to me to be one of the most obviously playable as a game...

Though I have some doubts about Main Event 1941 - 45, USSR 1941-45, and France 1940 for game balance reasons.

What are others thoughts and have you actually played out an a full scenario on BGA yet?

Though I have some doubts about Main Event 1941 - 45, USSR 1941-45, and France 1940 for game balance reasons.

It's why I have created DUEL mode, even unbalanced scenario cans be played by switching faction and trying to do better than oppenent.

Mediterranean scenario is good too, but very long.

Spoil:
- France 1944 will be saison 2 arena scenario.
- USSR 1941 will be saison 3 arena scenario.

I have only just reached the second leg of a scenario but it seemed from the interim screen like the game was just recording that one player had won (or lost) not a score (such as Russian national will for USSR 1941). If the scenario is unbalanced (say Poland 1939) then you will just end up with two legs in which the same side wins, a draw. Have I misunderstood how duel mode works?

In Duel mode there is a tiebreaker, at least for the current Arena matches.

I do think that the Main Event scenario is balanced and playable, as is the USSR 1941 scnenario

Duel mode is excellent, and gets rid of much of the imbalance problems.
You can still get messed up by weather that your opponent didn't get, but that's part of the game.

I am really enjoying the game and the scenarios I've played so far.
I have yet to see Axis win Balkans 41, but maybe we are all just bad at the game!

Okay... so I have now finished a duel match and can safely add France 1944 to the scenarios with balance problems.

Obviously this is a tough scenario for the Allies to win. Myself and my opponent both won with the Germans (very similar results, one British beachhead was driven back into the sea and early Dragoon was repulsed at Marseilles). The game comes to calculate the tie breaker and sums the national will of the forces involved - and gets 0 because national will doesn't feature in the scenario and its victory conditions are predicated on liberating European cities. So the game is a draw - as it will usually be.

The Duel idea is completely sound (and like other elements reflects well on the developer's implementation which is very good) but it will work to distinguish players only if a) the scenario is close enough that a more skilled player can win with both sides b) the tie breaker condition is chosen to accurately reflect how well players do.

RobertBr wrote: ↑14 February 2021, 14:40 The Duel idea is completely sound (and like other elements reflects well on the developer's implementation which is very good) but it will work to distinguish players only if a) the scenario is close enough that a more skilled player can win with both sides b) the tie breaker condition is chosen to accurately reflect how well players do.

When I have created DUEL mode, I used a quickly thought tie breaker.
I think that for each game, WE can use a more precise tie breaker but It's not in the rulebook, it's only on BGA.

So I call for volunteers and I suggest YOU create a forum thread by scenario to offer a tie breaker well thought out for each.

These tie breakers could be used for future arena mode.

I have some thoughts too.

France 40 is good to start adventure with this game. Especially playing as Germany.

Poland, Scandinavia and Balkans are only for self play, maybe one or two times.

I don't know, what thing about France 44 (I like it, but it's unbalanced)

And now, the best small scenarios in my opinion are USSR 41 and Mediterranean. USSR 41 is balanced and enjoyable. Mediterranean scenario can be long, but in my games (about 7) takes no more than year (Both the Allies and the Axis win, so I recommend it to everyone).

Full campaign (Main event 39-4?) is very good. Many options, minimum input of luck and more importantant a huge tactical and strategic challenge.

I didn't play the rest of the long campaigns. Are they worth playing?

Some other issues:
1. Duel mode - good job, maybe i will write about it later
2. Is it posible to have more ELO points for ending full campaign?

I don't feel confident to offer a definitive solution. At this stage I've only completed one duel game, and both myself and my opponent made errors. I didn't feel confident to write a strategy guide for Carc until I had a 400 ELO and I'd played that game before joining the site. Which is part of why I started this thread, I think people need to air ideas and thoughts on the scenarios before any of us try to solve problems.

I did think this was useful, which is the relative length of the scenarios. Based on the playbook (not sure why Germany 1945, French North Africa, are not implemented?) these are the scenarios in terms of length:

Poland 1939 1 phase
Scandinavia 1940 2 turns
Balkans 1941 2 turns
France 1944 4 turns
France 1940 5 turns
USSR 1941 8 turns
Europe 1944-45 14 turns
Europe 1943-45 25 turns
Mediterranean 1940-42 30 turns
Europe 1942-45 37 turns
USSR 1941-45 43 turns
Europe 1941-45 50 turns
Main Event 1939-? 60-84 turns

My suspicion is that everything below 4 turns is too short to make a playable game. I also suspect that in some of the longer scenarios you need a tie breaker that prevents the German player from pulling a turtle... for example in USSR 1941-45 a tie break like the lowest the Soviet National Will got to.