[Aslml] Complete Beginner

[Owens, Michael S CPT D/2-58, USAITB]

Hi all,
 
JMO on Beginner scenarios.
 
Stephen P. Berry wrote:
 
[snip]

>Just kidding.  I've noticed that lots of folks have suggested Gavin
>Take (T1), presumably because it's small and reasonably well-balanced.
>My thought is that this is probably not a great starter scenario because
>it -is- so small.  
 
Actually, I recommend Gavin Take because it teaches what ASL is supposed to be: a game of fire and maneuver, not just of fire.  In Guards Counterattack, the incorrect lesson is too often reinforced as units sit back and prep/Dfire.
 
>Small enough that a couple of DR can completely
>alter the outcome of the scenario.
 
Yep, but so what?  Aren't you playing to teach (or better yet, playing to get a newbie hooked) vs. playing to win a tournament / win Ladder points / maintain a personal won/lost ratio?
 
IMO, It's the wacky stuff caused by the dice that makes ASL so much fun. You roll a snakes to wax one of his units moving in the open toward the victory exit hex, which triggers a sniper that whacks your 9-2, and one of your squads Battle Hardens and generates a Hero on the ensuing LLMC.  If ASL was merely a contest of calculating FP ratios, it would be a lot more boring  Just line up local fire superiority and blast away.  Heat of Battle is one of the "hooks" that gets newbies to stay.
 
>While there's nothing inherently
>wrong with that, I think that it does tend to emphasise a particular
>style of playing. 
 
True, see above.
 
>And I'm not sure that such an emphasis makes a good
>introduction to ASL.

>I've actually been recently teaching ASL to someone who had no prior
>wargaming experience, and she seems to prefer DASL scenarios---she
>says it's easier to keep track of where everything is if there's little
>or no stacking.  
 
Did you say she?  "She" and "ASL" don't usually exist in the same sentence unless the words "thinks I play too much" are in between.
 
BTW, does anybody else remember the Michelle Johnson scandal on the list a few years back? ;^)
 
>I'd also recommend that you try playing through scenarios twice, once
>from either side.  You'll notice things that you didn't the
>first time through, and it'll help you figure out why your opponent
>did things the way they did (which is an enormously important skill to
>develop).

Even more importantly, I'd recommend discussing the scenario after playing.  Talk about what your plan was, why you did what you did, and what actually happened (what the Army calls an After Action Review).
 
Mike