Second Pipe Creek Scenario

[Marching Thru Georgia]

I played the 2nd Pipe Creek scenario last evening and was extremely impressed. Although I beat it at historic level without too much trouble, the scripted behavior of the AI was a joy to behold. The enemy approached my line and then stopped out of range to assemble everyone and dress their lines. Very historic. Once they advanced and were thrashed, the enemy retreated to their own high ground some distance away. That was a brilliant idea of the author's. Rather than the usual fight to the last man, the Rebels retreated with a somewhat intact force. Again, very historic. Then having to chase after them to complete the route, although not a usual Union tactic till late in the war, was a very nice finishing touch.

The only weakness of the scenario that I saw was use of the corps artillery groups. Since there is no artillery AI, the AI uses them as if they are an infantry division. Better to have split the batteries up and assign the to division commanders. Also, the intro is much too specific, telling the player that the enemy will retreat at a certain loss level and that the player will have to chase after the AI. Better to let the player learn this as the scenario progresses, IMHO.

Overall, I'd say this scenario sets the bar for all future scenarios. Seeing how well this works, the organized retreat after suffering significant losses should be part of any good scenario. Hats off to RebBugler for a fine experience.

[born2see]

That's a RebBugler scenario. They're nothing if not well scripted and historic. As testers we always expect a challenge, that's for sure.

B

[Little Powell]

Yep, if you see RebBugler in the intro you know it's going to be well designed and TOUGH.

Speaking of tough, I'm looking forward to your feedback on my PC04 when you get to it. If you're not wiping sweat off of your brow after that one, you have ice water in your veins..

[Marching Thru Georgia]

LittlePowell wrote:

Speaking of tough, I'm looking forward to your feedback on my PC04 when you get to it. If you're not wiping sweat off of your brow after that one, you have ice water in your veins..

If it is of the same quality as the 1st two, I'm sure it will be both a challenge and a joy to play. So far, I've loved the simplicity of the problem given in each scenario, yet the solution requires a very close management of both the pulse of the battle and ones reserves. But first, scenario 3...

[RebBugler]

Really appreciate the feedback, it's the real bonus, hearing a design worked above and beyond...

Yeah, this scenario was a challenge, primarily because of the imbalance, strength and ground favor the Yanks big time. Took me a while to find ways for the Rebs to win, threw in some feints in the form of variants, added the offensive...and after three weeks of building and tearing down...No Guts No Glory.

[Marching Thru Georgia]

RebBugler wrote:

, threw in some feints in the form of variants

Yes, those are tricky to deal with. The player can't collapse his line too soon. Otherwise, he may find he has concentrated his forces in the wrong place. :ohmy:

I am in the middle of scenario 3. It too is shaping up to be a real winner. Very believable enemy setup. And my overly aggressive division commanders ... it's like herding cats. Please send me a jug of your white lightening the next time you run a batch. :laugh: Maybe that will mellow out my generals and they'll be more obedient.