Hmmmm still waiting on Fury of the bear,

Has anyone heard or know what units will be featured in this set, and maybe any new rules? be nice to have that preview that was promised to us by FFG

So if any members of FF read this could you please let us know what we can expect to see

No preview for you!

Come back one year!

Over at boardgamesgeek Bill Jaffe has confirmed the three russian vehicles

I looked and looked for this and didn't see it. Can you give the link or tell what the 3 vehicles were? Thanks.

Its in the Tide of Iron base game forum under news. http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/516263/fury-of-the-bear-news-at-ffg/page/2

the last post Bill Jeffe left was "nope. i'm not going to spoil FFG's previews that will come later.I will say there are a some really cool things though"

skinsfan

so i left a post asking if he might now give us a preview since FF havent yet, as his post was the start of may.

T-34, KV-1, SU-122 and 76.2mm AT gun.

My geuss:

T34

Armor 5, move 7

Attack versus infanteri: range 6, firepower 6

Attack versus vehicles: range 8, firepower 10

concusive firepower, overun,

KV-1

Armor 5, move 5

Attack versus infanteri: range 6, firepower 6

Attack versus vehicles: range 8, firepower 10

concusive firepower, overun, thick armor

That looks about right. There will be a difference between the two T34 variants. I think the T34/76 will have less range and FP. Also, I agree with KlausFritsch that the T34/85 will be one hex slower due to the heavier main armament.

I think you're right on WRT the KV-1.

I think the SU-122 might look something like this:

Armor 5, Move 4 (road speed 25 mph)

FP v. Infantry 5/6

FP v. Vehicle 8/10 Slow ROF!!!!! (might reduce FP) Definitely cannot move and fire.

Concussion/Overrun.

Bazookajoe said:

After further consideration, I'm gonna have to go with armor 6 plus the Extra Thick Armor bonus (flip 2 def dice to 6). This sucker could take a hit, especially on the front face (8").

My speed estimate stands...very low hp/wt ratio.

I'm a bit surprised that this unit would be included over and above the SU-85 and/or SU-100. Only 300 SU-122 were produced.

I dearly hope that they're Russian khaki colored, rather than red.

Bazookajoe, 600+ SU-122's produced according to records i have also remember they first appeared in big numbers at Kursk

BJaffe01

Bill,

Can you give us an info regarding when to expect a preview? Thanks.

Regarding SU-122 vs SU-85 or SU-100, as far as I remember, the former was designed as a mobile artillery unit and the latter as a mobile AT. Different purposes vehicules. Will this difference show up in FoB? We'll see!

MB

BJaffe01 said:

Sir, thanks for he response.

Ahh...I think we can assume at least one scenario will be a massive armour battle.

I pulled my number from some old Jim Dunnigan materials. You are referring to the JSU-122 with the 122/43 gun, correct?

BJaffe01 said:

BJaffe01, You got me going down the researching path for the JSU/SU-122. I've found several production figures since and was wondering if you're quoting numbers for the JSU-122S? Wikipedia states that model's production being 625 by the end of the war (the JSU-122 model was much higher).

Finally, I'm curious regarding how you factor the specs from your operational research into armour, FP and movement values. Do you factor for things like optical sighting technology and rate of fire or are the numbers based primarily on front armour thickness, penetration and max speed (The Panther and Tiger models' rules seemed to reflect the fact that the frontal armour was thicker by using the "flip to 6" technique.).

no my research for russian production is 2 sources really. books done in polish with some english translations and a really cool website called RKKA in world war ii.. he is Russian using the records from their archives the SU-122 was used at kursk as an at gun against the tiger since it actually had a chance to penetrate the front armour at more than 500 meters btw there where 6 test JSU-152's at Kursk

BJaffe01

Bazookajoe said:

I will agree that the T34 and KV1 should have the over-run ability, but the SU122 should not as it has not machineguns! Yep, you heard me right, the SU122 has no MG (hull or otherwise). So it should not be allowed to overrun. Because if the SU122 can, so could the Elephant and that would just not make any sense. Most of the Elephants were knocked out by infantry because they were easy pray for infantry attacks because the first models did not have any MG. Had one heck of a tank killing gun (88mm/71). As a result to being so vulnerable to infantry, later models had hull MGs as well as some other stuff for the crew to repulse infantry.

So I strongly suggest to the FFG team to make sure the SU122 does not have the over-run ability. In fact, German infantry had an easy time taking out SU122 (as well as SU85's and SU100's) because they were easy pickings because they had no defensive MGs. They had to rely on supporting infantry to protect them from enemy anti-tank squads.

Ubercat said:

I wouldn't be surprised that they will be the same red-brown (or something close) that the Axis & Allies Russian playing pieces are. That doesn't bother me. And for those who paint their figures, who cares what color they are, right?

But from a game design perspective, a distinctive color would be a good choice. Shades of green might be to close to US game pieces. Shades of tan might be to close to British, but the one color that is distinct and will stand out from the other playing pieces will be the red-brown color.

Meta Baston said:

You are correct. I hope this difference will show up. But considering how they dropped the ball on the M10, I don't have high hopes, but we'll see.

These were totally different vehicles. The JSU-122 was based on the JS-2 frame and was designed as an AT SPG. The SU-122 was designed on a T-35 bed and was artillery.

RayGuns said:

Ray,

Several places list the following heavy MG for the JSU-122:

MG 12.7 mm MG, 12.7 mm DShK-38 MG AA, 12.7 mm DSchK 38/43 AA

# Russian Tanks and Armored Vehicles 1917-1945, by Wolfgang Fleischer, 1999
# The Encyclopedia of Weapons of World War II, Chris Bishop, 1998
# Tank Data 2, Aberdeen Proving Grounds Series, E. J. Hoffschmidt and W. H. Tantum IV, 1969

This was mounted on the commander's cuppola. I agree that there weren't hull mounted MGs.

Bazookajoe said:

That 12.7mm MG you speak of was an AA-HMG. If it was mounted on these tanks, it must have been very rare indeed because I don't recall seeing any contemporary WW2 photographs or WW2 combat footage showing these tanks with such MGs mounted on top. I have several good books specifically on Russian tanks in WW2 (including the "Armor at War Series" by Concord Publishing) and I'll see if I can find more information.

You have a very good point. I just looked thru numerous WW2 photos of ALL the Soviet SP guns and TDs and couldn't find any photos with the cuppola mounted MGs. The MGs were represented in drawings and display photos.

The question I have WRT overrun...is an MG mandatory for overrun or is the characteristic based more on the psychological effect of a 45T behemoth trying to occupy one's personal space in a bull rush?

I would think the real fear would be from the MG. Unless of coarse you are the target of the big gun because maybe you are manning an AT gun or in an MG nest. Otherwise the rest of the field would have little fear of the tank as nothing would be targeting them ie. the MG.

I agree that an MG is essential for the overrun ability. Troops were trained to identify enemy units in order to counter them more effectively (especially well trained german troops). The only time i could imagine it working without an MG would be if the troops morale was very low and they were near the breaking point. But if they could keep their cool it would be relatively simple to take cover as a tank with poor visibility and no MG rolled by and then pounce on it with anti tank grenades or mines (most units were equipped with at least a few).