Scenarios

[Mjpee]

So I'm liking these rules more and more as i process to fully understand them and kinda messed about with it. A few things questionable for me, but easily fixed and by and large it's what i"m looking for in a rules set.

However, one thing I've noticed particularly on this website (and even the rules) is that the scenarios tend to be very small actions. This is a grand tactical rule set, yet of all of the scenarios listed here in the scenarios section, only Aspern Essling is a properly large battle. While smaller scenarios are very useful, I'm wondering why there aren't more like the Aspern Essling scenario or even mid-sized such as Shevardino. It seems these rules play well in a tournament setting - is that where they really shine and don't do as well at larger actions? Just wondering.

And I know that making my own scenarios for larger battles is easily done - but the Aspern Essling scenario done by the Author is very useful because it provides and example of how things like command works in a large multi-corps battle and provides a concrete example of scaling the game to a large action. I have my own OOB for Aspern Essling that i will use with this game and it's considerably different than the author's scenario. So for me, it's interesting to get another take on it and I wish there was more these done for this rule set.

Matt

[Adrian Steer]

Hi Matt,
Yes the rate determining step I think is how large a table you've got to play on. I'm currently running the Fuentes de Onoro scenario as a display game round the UK at shows I can get in at ( Fiasco next) and find this is fine for playing on a 6*4' table with a 30 mm UD. So how big a set-up have you got?
Adrian