Entebbe is Ready. - Get it now!

[Siddhi]

This is a magnificant little scenario, quickly playable and managable - plus with a great storyline and a couple of snazy design inovations.

One issue is raised by it however: I noticed that even the Israeli commandos are not granted an 'elite' experience rating, indeed 'elite' as a qualification has not been used for any of the standard OOBs, including SAS type commandos. The first question would be: who is exactly 'elite' then?

Secondly, historically the Israelli's suffered (IRC) a single casulty, Bibi netenyahu;s brother (the CO), although there were a couple of hostages killed. It is impossible to replicate this result, even under the following conditions:
- all israeli troops have had experience increased to 105-110.
- all terrorists have average exp. 60, moral 70
- all ugandans have average exp. 50, moral 60.

still the israeli's suffer casulties, which makes me wonder more about the game system. E.g. the ugandan gaurds react a little 'too well' (firing every single time someone enters a spotted hex) and the Israeli's tax casulties too easily (every single time 1 man goes down). If we actually look at the specifics - one full-allowance commando team moves 1 hex in a building and is fired upon by a unit 100m away AND causes casulties - it makes me think the building cover rating is insufficent, as well as the true differential between experience ratings too small. what is the actual difference between exp. 100 and exp. 60, besides ROF?

[WBWilder]

Thank you Alex!

I'm not able to answer some of your queries but let me address the scenario itself.

To replicate the battle precisely as it occured would make it too easy, not much of a challenge to the player. Then there is the fact of the limitations of the game itself. Finally, there is the "unknown" factor. By that I mean things might have gone differently. That is what makes a scenario like this so interesting and such a challenge.

Not being able to exercise much control over the AI, I cannot make the terrorists stand still and not see what is going on when the Israelis move adjacent to them. Historically, the Israelis fired first.

Another issue is that of the hexes. Each hex represents 50 meters or about 50 yards. But, one must remember that one unit could be "on the line" of the hex when the unit in the adjacent hex moves into it. So in a sense they could conceivably be next to one another, or even closer than separate hexes might indicate.

Another factor is that if both units are in the same building, the building modifier realistically might not apply. They could be facing each other in adjoining rooms.

I'm not disputing your thoughts neccesarily, Alex. I think your questions are good ones and worthy of some technical answers.

My own experience in design indicates that a higher morale makes a unit more resiliant, it rallys and keeps coming, even if the experience is so low it can't hit anything.

On the other hand experience gives a unit the edge in the lethality of their firepower. I use those two numbers to make units behave in a certain way. Its one of the few tools afforded me as a scenario designer.

In fact, often unnoticed I'm sure, I modify most units in many ways, move factors, experience, morale, cost (value), name, weapons, number of men, etc. This helps me to do a scenario like this one.

It did take a lot of work and a lot of testing to get the timing right and make the units do what they should do.

And, of course, we are looking back to an event that has already taken place. Thus we have a great edge that the actual participants did not have. We know how it should go. They didn't. They had a plan, but no way of knowing if all contingencies had been covered.

A classic example of this is the attempted rescue of the hostages in Iran in early 1980.

Your note here is a very good one and should be food for thought for designers, programmers and gamers alike.

Thanks for your positive comments about the scenario. Wish us luck to produce more of the same.

Wild Bill

[Siddhi]

WBW, the scenario is excellent and i wish more of the same - you mentioned a potential 1980 Teheran there- may we hope? )

The technical issues do bother me however and I am finding it difficult to use a common 'fix' (such as using preferences - infantry toughness).

The 'fixes' I attempted with your scenario were purly an attempt to generate losses, and general behavior, more in-line to what you (or I) would expect when one of the world's most elitle formations goes against a 3rd world / terrorist type outfit. when i massively changes the experience levels i was very surprised to find that it made hardly - if any - difference at all to the orignal scenario. i certainly will keep trying , but i find that result nonetheless instructive.


You raise some valuable points, however IMO there should be very few cases where for instance the terrorists 'out shoot' (out react) the israelis, and especially the ugandans. movement in non-adjacent building hexes/

[WBWilder]

The 1980 one is a real possibility but we'll carry it through..WB