The game format - feedback

[thumper]

Please give me a little feedback on the game format - This game was designed and written to be as straight forward as I could make it while providing some tactical challenges for the teams.

In my next production, Im thinking using this same open book format - but adding a few general lead missions that are closed book.

[Steers]

I really liked how everyone knew what to do (as long as they kept their map) and was able to make decisions for themselves on what mission they wanted to do. Your squads can move alot more independently and are able to get back together if seperated alot more quicker. Everyone knows where to go and as a result you have heated battles at every mission -cause everybody is there.

Good Job thumper!

[Dracula53]

I have to dissagree about the spliting up thing. This game is one of the few a team will have the chance to realy work together. Tommie, Michael, and myself knew where to go every time we where shot out, and we stuck by each outher the whole step of the way. Realy fun scenario.

[GOD]

To me, it was too easy and I need a challenge.

[scrappy]

I had no clue what was going on for missions except for the 5:00 mission for preds

[crooked butt doctor]

i thought it was really straight forward and it pretty well placed both teams in plenty of good shootouts... i was able to keep up with everything pretty well... which was important since i have never been a general before. awesome job thumper.

nix

[Aerion]

I thought it was a cross between rec ball and a scenario. For the most part, the pattern went as follows.

15 minutes prior to mission time, the teams started showing up at the objective. Some small firefights ensued. 5 to 10 minutes to mission time, begins the major firefights. Mission is scored on time. For about 5 minutes after the mission some small firefights as each team realized the mission was over and withdrew. Teams went back to base or compound to rearm and regroup. Rince and repeat.

The format worked well for a one day event with a relatively small number of players for a scenario. Because everyone knew the missions (or SHOULD have known them) participation in the missions was nearly 100%. This made for some pretty intense firefights. If you had not known better you would have thought there were twice as many players as there actually were based on the intensity of the firefights.

The game was simple, but simple isn't always a bad thing.

[drewcif]

From the missions that were given I understood them. There were a couple that i didnt understand at Bakara- these were very clear from the ones i saw. I like Demo, and engineers, as well as medics in a game, but thats my personal preference.

Drew

[ACE]

I have to agree with Nix- The other General. The mission were stright forward. I liked it alot for the first time as a General. Looking back on the Scenario, If I have the experience I have now, I would have liked some side missions. Over all Very GOOD....

[Dracula53]

Yeah our team planed ahead of time to be the team to go ahead to the missions. We didn't get to bogged down in the main fight of the mission, but we held the area untill our side got there, and then helped them untill we needed to head on to the next mission. Ben wasa roling with our side, and I wished that we where abel to better keep intouch on the radios, I was on channel 11.5, but I didn't hear any one else (except one person) on our sides channel. I loved the event. The refs did a great job, it would be cool however if at the end of the mission every one (players included) mission over or somthing. Some people where still ifhgting at no mans when the f8 mission was a go lol. Allso a base attack would be cool every now and then, allthough the last f8 mision the pink/red team attacked our base a good bit. Next time I hope that we can show up to the event earlyer, maby we could have helped out more if we hadn't missedd 1/2 of the event.