Scenario play and preferences

[DRG]

This poll concerns scenario play and preferences. We haven't had a lot of luck with polls in the past...many view them but few actually vote but maybe we'll have better luck this time

you can choose multiple answers

[Wdll]

I don't play them but I like the idea of them being there.
I voted Only occasionally to reflect that.

[Aeraaa]

I play them all. Like them all, but have a special spot for large, well-designed scenarios. Medium sized is the next best thing.

[Imp]

Play them about every 5 or 6 battles.
Size is not a main factor though medium to large preferred.
Not a fan of renamed units to military names, company commander is fine.
Large if badly laid out or renamed put off as takes to much time to see what I have.
Defend is least favourite type, fun with scenarios is you don’t know where the deployment line is and hopefully there are a few surprises set up for you.

[Suhiir]

As you can probably tell by the scenarios I create I generally prefer large scenarios. I generally have three games going at once I swap back and forth between depending on time/mood.
1 - Some large scenario that I may play one turn at a time this take weeks to finish.
2 - A small scenario for when I just wanna shoot stuff.
3 - A playtest of whatever scenario I'm working on at the moment OR when I want to test some wild idea I have and see if it actually works.

[jivemi]

IMHO user-designed scenarios are better since they are less predictable, thus more challenging than stock generated battles as they aren't bound by force ratios along with AI purchasing, setup positions, and waypoints. With human design there's greater possibility of approaching historical reality and greater chance of losing with careless play (sometimes even with one's best efforts).

Bottom line though is Steel Panthers is fun regardless of scenario provenance. Play on, play on.

[whdonnelly]

I play them quite often, then generally use them as a basis to tweak the OB and test different weapons.

[kulik242]

I prefer scenarios that resemble real tactical situation on a battlefield. Preferably where I have several ways on how to approach the situation, doing OCOKA, maneuver and taking time to minimize losses. I don't like "puzzle scenarios" (#3 The Road to El-Arish comes to my mind) that are designed around very well balanced victory conditions but feel somehow artificial in the end.

[Dion]

It says I already voted, but I don't remember voting. Perhaps the poll is old. Anyway, if I was to vote today, I would vote that I play mostly random battles, and the size of the map really doesn't matter to me (though I do like large maps the most). I appreciate pre-made scenarios and happy that I have a choice to play random battles or scenarios. Infact the game just wouldn't have the same appeal if didn't have a choice.

[Paderborn]

I've not been on any video games, including SPMBT, in quite a while. But am now retired and have the time to catch up. Seeing the latest rendition of the game, v.14 was a pleasant surprise as the last version update I had was v.6. As to the poll, I like the large offering of scenarios in the game and play them quite a lot. I also like putting together my own battle scenarios on medium and large maps. More than ever I appreciate the flexibility of the game in providing players with the ability to create and modify vehicles, tanks and so on. Thanks to everyone who make this game possible and hello to all my fellow Steel Panthers gamers!:)

[EJ]

I like the medium to short scenarios.

[Karagin]

I like all of them, they give me a challenge and then prompt me to try them again with different ideas and tactics.

[wulfir]

I like the larger ones, on bigger size maps - makes mobility more of a factor than say a small size map.

I often prefer to deploy myself so I tend to edit scenarios into a short improvised two-scen campaign which will allow for a player deployment phase. Sometimes I exchange player 1 to some other nation than intended in the original scenario. I don't worry too much about 'balance'. :)