King William's War and Pontiac's War

[Durk]

I have recently been playing these two scenarios and have found them utterly delightful. WIA is a small game with a lushly large list of scenarios. These two scenarios are, if I understand correctly, due to Hobbes efforts to examine additional wars in America.
One of the delights of these scenarios is an alternative take on Victory Conditions. An additional bonus is finding the conflict between unconventional warfare and conventional warfare.
My recommendation to players, dive into one of these games with your favorite PBEM opponent and enjoy uncovering these gems together.

[Hobbes]

Hi Durk, thanks very much for taking the time to comment on the scenarios. It's much appreciated!
I'm just finishing off testing what will probably be my last WiA scenario - King Philip's War.
Screenshot here after several English settlements have been destroyed and the English have built a stockade at the site of Metacom's village.



Quite fun testing it at the moment although It's always difficult to get a woman (Athena) to do exactly what you want her to do.
Maybe Zenobia will be easier to control.

Thanks,
Chris

[Durk]

Hobbes,
I am so looking forward to King Phillip's War. Thank you for the sceenshot.
You have tapped into areas of history which are obscure to most people, but full of delight to wargamers. One of my private delights was seeing the kind treatment of one of my relatives in your leader evaluation.

I did not mention one of the items which make me love your scenario designs, small unit density but truly complex strategic demands upon the players. These are not the kind of scenarios some players may assume from playing some of the short WIA scenarios, which while exceedingly fun, come down to 'best' play. Your scenarios are rich and complex games extending through multiple years of play.

I cannot imagine the complexities of trying to make Athena behave. I have a hard enough time understanding my one moves in a game.

[Scaramouche]

I haven't played the King William's War and Pontiac's War scenarios yet but I'm very glad thinking it's possible now! Thanks for that Hobbes! I only had a glance at King William's War scenario and noticed the change in the French soldiers' uniforms color (grey instead of white or blue) and the presence, for the first time in Wars in America, of the "coureurs des bois" instead of the "courriers" which demonstrate how serious is the work for the conception of these scenarios. I'm glad also thinking that King Philip's War scenario is going to enhance the value of the game very soon!

[OneArmedMexican]

I have to join the praise. These two scenarios are beautifully done. Great options and flavour events. I had the pleasure of trying both out in PBEMs with Durk (actually we are in our second Pontiac's War PBEM right now). This scenario has become an instant favourite of mine. I love the cut-throat victory conditions. Either the Indian player achieves total victory within the first 4-6 turns or he is pretty much toast.

[Hobbes]

Thanks chaps. I missed these posts - very nice to see the scenarios are getting some play. I'm a little worried that you have found that the Indians have to win in the first few turns though. I certainly had some very close PBEM games where the scenario went to the wire. Always happy to tweak a bit though if you find balance problems (as long as Lodi is happy to put into any future patch).

Cheers,
Chris

[lodilefty]

Improvements will always go into future patches!

[Durk]

The Indians, in my experience, do indeed need to win quickly or never. But one of the joys of the AGEOD system, which you have incorporated expertly into your games, is that if the Indians do not win they are not fated to lose.
They can still set ambushes and delay the British advance long enough to win a technical victory or a draw.
I certainly like the game and victory conditions as they are. Perhaps others will have a different take.

[OneArmedMexican]

Hobbes,

Durk and I only played this campaign twice, therefore the sample size is small. My impression is this:

1st campaign season: Indian victory by sudden death is perfectly achievable. It all depends on the Indian player concentrating his forces well. If he does, the British player can't do much to prevent him from winning within the first 4-7 turns.

following campaign seasons: British are reinforced and the three big forts become impenetrable to the Indians (unless the British player risks too much and leaves them too weakly defended). Victory by sudden death is now out of Indian hands but can be achieved by the British if they attack carefully. But it isn't an easy task and time is limited. It's just as likely that the Indians manage to hold on to one or two of their objectives until the end of the game and victory points will decide the match.

To me this sounds like a good balance. I wouldn't change a thing. Our two games ended in one Indian victory (very early, 6 or 7 turns) and one British victory (very late, with two turns remaining).
It's a beautiful scenario. We both enjoyed it immensly. Especially the options are amazing (small pox infested blankets, burning rafts, bribing/threatening the Iroquois, ...). They add a lot of flair. Thank you for your work!

[Hobbes]

Thanks for the feedback. I see now that you meant that the Indians only have a chance of sudden death (major victory) in the first few turns which is as planned as they needed the surprise to achieve this. But as you say they can still win a minor victory in later turns.

Cheers,
Chris

[Hobbes]

P.S. I have never actually seen an Indian sudden death victory (well once or twice in early testing). Was this the result of a siege or assault against the major forts?

Cheers,
Chris

[OneArmedMexican]

The Indians only need to take two out of the big three forts. I managed to take Pittsburg and Detroit in assaults (I think both fell during turn 3). But in my naivité I didn't look at the objectives ledger until Durk remarked that the list of objectives got shorter as he started burning down my villages. This made me take a close look at the objectives ledger myself (in turn 7) and I discovered that I only needed to burn down the one British settlement in the south of Lake Michigan) to achieve victory for myself which I promptly did. I could have achieved victory in four turns but I almost blundered it away in my ignorance.
Durk was the host, if you are interested in the savegame, I am happy to drop him a note.

I don't know whether I was lucky in the assaults on Ft. Detroit and Pittsburgh. But my impression was that the Indians have not to much trouble taking them if they properly concentrate their forces. The small pox event poses no real obstacle since it doesn't strike as long as one keeps the units in smaller stack until the turn of the assault.

If you want to improve balance, my only suggestion would be to make the Pittsburgh garrison slightly stronger (1 additional militia unit (4 elements) would probably suffice). Early on the Indians have complete victory in their hands. The British can only hope that the Indians don't concentrate their troops properly and assault ill prepared.

[Durk]

Oh dear, do not drop me a note. I recently cleaned out all my old game files.

I do agree this scenario is balanced. It may have the long term effect of a 'best play' solution. Variability is always desirable from my perspective to eliminate the potential of a stale game.
OneArmedMexican has a good solution.

My thought, and maybe it is not well thought out, use the mechanism in place of disappearing objectives, once taken, to create variable objectives. This is a time period when the specific objectives were indeed variable. Have a computer routine which shuffles the cities/villages as objectives a bit each time one is taken.
Or leave as is. This is such a fun scenario.

[Hobbes]

Some very interesting points and ideas! Just before I release King Philip's War I will make some further tests with the Pontiac scenario for the early Indian assaults against Detroit and Pitt and make some small changes if I think they are needed. I have a feeling that you may have got lucky as I have certainly been beaten back at Detroit a few times when attempting an early assault with a large Indian force (the Indians should probably never assault the larger forts for historical reasons but this muted change never made it into the game). But I want to make sure the balance is good and there is some danger that the Indians will suffer fairly heavy casualties sometimes if their assault fails. It hopefully is just down to the roll of the die and not a strategy that will always result in victory. Also was there time to send Dalyell to reinforce Detroit?

I love the idea about variable objectives to make a scenario more replayable! Obviously the main objectives would stay the same but some of the smaller ones could change a little. One problem is player understanding of this sort of thing. As with objectives disappearing, it can cause confusion. I think the Pontiac scenario could use an in-game event at the start of the game to highlight unusual things like this (also added to my list).

The small pox event poses no real obstacle since it doesn't strike as long as one keeps the units in smaller stack until the turn of the assault.

As Pocus once said to me - PBEM players - cunning sods (or something like that )

Thanks again for the feedback. It makes me very happy to know there are people out there enjoying the scenarios!

Cheers,
Chris