Turn limits. How do YOU do it?

[none]

Wondering. (Idle summer chat...)

When designing a scenario, I initially set very generous turn limits and play it through myself once or twice just to check if everything goes as planned. Then, when I'm happy with it, I set the "BV" turn limit to my own victory time +1 (or 2, depending) turns, and the other ones accordingly (like, +5 and +10 turns).
I think this is generous, because of course I know what's coming, but that is mostly just a psychological advantage, you still have to get through all those enemy units... And since I don't create any (voluntary) traps, with a little bit of prudence and logic the player should be able to face everything the scenario will be throwing at him: Strategic points and VHs are obviously (better) defended, depending on the situation there will be counter-attacks coming, and the enemy will get more or less reinforcements, there should be no surprise there.
Meaning I expect the player to take about the same time as me, maybe even less since I'm very prudent by nature.

How do you guys do it? Does anybody care to share?


(Currently working on my own version of a long "Blitzkrieg" campaign, where you start as Condor Legion and (potentially) end up in Washington. Or, most likely, defending Berlin in a heroic last stand. Lots of time to think about OG strategies and means to keep it interesting despite the long series of seemingly identical "capture all VHs" type scenarios...)

[randowe]

I usually set the turn limits right away when building the scenario. So i set the BV as to how i think it should be and usually add +4 +4 for the other victory types. In guess in most cases it turns out fine and i don't have to change anything later, in some cases i add or reduce few turns. But it even can happen sometimes that i miss BV in my own scenario test plays but if the scenario is fine and fun i leave it at that.

Since i have the habit to play as much as i can (destroy all enemies i can find and capture all regular flags) i think the BV limit is also relatively easy if one would concentrate on the VHs only.

[none]

I usually set the turn limits right away when building the scenario.

Surprising.
I usually have no idea how much time a scenario might take, or at least, only a very general idea. Since my scenarios are pretty busy (as you know), there are usually several ways you can win, some of which I discover while testing.

Since i have the habit to play as much as i can (destroy all enemies i can find and capture all regular flags)

Me too (old PG habit I guess), and thus usually this is included in my BV timing. Then again, some times I set the turn limit so short the player better realize quickly that hex farming won't be possible in this scenario, if he wants to make a BV...

And why try making a BV instead of a simple victory? That's another issue. There has to be some incentive to not just go for the TV, and I try to avoid big prestige reward differences, because they mean the campaign will progressively become too easy or too difficult depending on if you win or lose, which eventually will take all the fun out of it.
(In my current campaign it's easy: the carrot is getting to America... Anything less than BVs and you end up defending Berlin with ragtag troops.)

[randowe]

Often weaker players get punished twice for not getting a BV. They have no chance for a proto and get less victory prestige. Then they can not maintain a core army that is good enough to win (a BV) in the following scenarios and their chances deteriorate with every scenario, and eventually they will stop playing the campaign.
I do not punish players for not getting a BV. (I am speaking about the Weltkrieg campaign since all my other campaigns were just training )
BV means just that you can complete the job in a shorter time and i guess experienced players will try to get BVs.

I am keen to see your campaign paths once you released them and see which maps you used

[none]

Often weaker players get punished twice for not getting a BV. They have no chance for a proto and get less victory prestige.

Yes indeed, that was what I was referring to. That's why I usually only make symbolic differences in prestige awards (50 points), and I don't allow protos, I rather hand out free core units myself.
Protos are a nice idea, everybody likes gifts, but way too random from a scenario maker's perspective. You never know what the player will/won't be able to do after getting a proto. It might be nearly useless, or on the contrary make the player way too strong, as a scenario maker you just can't rely on them. I rather hand out expensive free core units (like long-range heavy artillery) myself, things the player wouldn't be able to afford himself. This way I know they will be welcome and useful, but I also know what the player will be able to do henceforth.

I do not punish players for not getting a BV.

Sure, but then again it's nice to get some award for being more decisive/successfully reckless. The problem is to find the sweet spot between awarding boldness without punishing prudence. (Except when the campaign calls for it of course. Some scenarios are indeed meant to be races, but the player is warned in the briefing.)

I am keen to see your campaign paths once you released them and see which maps you used

Healthy life, lots of exercise, and you'll maybe live long enough to see them...

As you remember I've completely changed ranges and damage of artillery, AT, and obviously ships, so I'm making (slowly) a new set of campaigns to go with it. I have one campaign finished and 3 in various stages of completion, and I plan to eventually also adapt the old ones.
Following player feedback I've also changed some procedures. My main test player (cousin) is a staunch history buff and wargamer, who is perfectly comfortable both with the game mechanics and with the strategies, so I guess my campaigns might be a little overwhelming for non-veterans. So I now added hints for each campaign, to get/keep people on the right track (for one campaign I've even added (non-spoiler) hints for each scenario). - Speaking of which, I have one feature request to make.

[hoza]

I do not punish players for not getting a BV.

Sure, but then again it's nice to get some award for being more decisive/successfully reckless. The problem is to find the sweet spot between awarding boldness without punishing prudence. (Except when the campaign calls for it of course. Some scenarios are indeed meant to be races, but the player is warned in the briefing.)

That is my topic with randowe and his Atomic Blitzkrieg. I am one of the real Blitzkrieger who strives for the fastest possible victory and I was disappointed a bit on not getting awards for that with a BV. But so far I managed the campaign without collecting all possible pp and with only BVs.

[none]

I was disappointed a bit on not getting awards for that with a BV.

Yes, this is a difficult problem, finding the exact right balance between awarding speed and not penalizing slower players.

BTW, I think (and set my campaigns accordingly) that an experienced player should be able to play through all my campaigns with only BVs. After all, as I said above, I set the BV limit arbitrarily to the time I needed to win (without specially trying to be fast). After all, there are (occasionally) inexperienced players, who else would be hopelessly overwhelmed. I can make scenarios you only can win if you do exactly the right thing, but where is the fun in that? It becomes a "guess the way the scenario maker's mind works", and if there is something I generally hate, it's taking advantage of the game mechanism. I don't mind if people cheat (that's their choice), but I try to make it difficult for them to game the game (i.e. taking advantage of the way the AI works and all that)...