BJaffe01 said:

No, we don't use it all the time in every case. It's just that in "Piercing the Siegfried line", "Omaha beach" and "Orel" it's THE way to take out the few dangerous opposing units after which you'll have a completely free hand to do whatever you like. There should always be something the defender can do about it (other than not setting up in fortifications, but all the time hiding BEHIND them, that is...)

Kingtiger said:

All the beach scenarios should have the Massive Confusion op card because that is what happened.

Ofcourse combined fire basicly allows you to fire as many of your unit as you want before the enemy can react, while regular fire requiers more activations. Which is another aspect of it. Still, its mostly a problem for heavily fortified infanteri and tigers/panthers tanks. So instead of making a solution for some scenarios, it would be better to make a solution which works in general.

And by the way, what do you feel about combined fire in op-fire mode?

And one more thing: When setting up an AT gun IN an trench, what armor+cover value does/should it get? Regarding AT-guns: I think that moving into an trench dureing the game should be difficult, but setting up in one at start should be doable.

KlausFritsch said:

Exactly, but th heart of the matter is that it doesn't (officially, that is). I'm also ok with it only applying to non-armor units. Now what you get is the utterly obvious and utterly unrealistic tactic of the US troops lining up at the shoreline (that is, set up and NOT move!???!???) and combining fire and shoort at the bunkers. Yes, I agree the massive confusion card would help a lot here. Problem is, this particular scenario is NOT unbalanced. So if you do introduce that op-card here, you would also have to do something to bolster the US forces (perhaps the newly introduced expert tokens, elite formations or a few campaign specialisations representing veterans??? Just brainstorming here...).

Grand Stone said:

Personally I don't feel a need for a revised combined fire rule that applies to all scenarios. Op-cards and special rules should do just fine. At the same time you are of course entitled to your own opinion.

As for Tigers and panthers and fortified infantry: The problem usually is that the Allies start with that many Shermans that they indeed will form a real threat to German heavy armour even at long ranges (as long as you combine enough of them, which is certainly an option in many scenarios), which wasn't the case historically. Again, a scenario special rule or op-card should work just fine here as well. Very often the number of Allied tanks should simply be lower or a scenario special rule could be: "Shermans may online combine fire against armor targets at close range" (or at the very least NORMAL range).

No problem with combined fire in op-fire, that is, the rule is fine. Each individual scenario should be judged on its own and it should be determined whether such a defensive strategy will break the scenario. If it does, implement some kind of limitation, if it doesn't leave the rule as it is. A real diadvantages of putting your units in op-fire is that they can't do anything else than react to enemy movement. If the enemy forgoes moving certain units, all those "activations" are essentially lost. Often that is enough of a built-in restriction/disadvantage to not put too many units in op-fire. In addition, if you have the initiative, it's often better to put units in op-fire during your first turn as it will "save activations". As we all know, it's bad when you have no activations left and your opponent still has a handful...

At gun in trench: armor 2, cover 4, so total red dice of 6.

Yes, moving into one should generally be disallowed, setting up should be ok (same goedsfor buildings, I'd say).

Kingtiger said:

I agree. Setting guns up in fortified positions should be allowed (gun pits and the like), but they should not be allowed to move then.

KlausFritsch said:

And it should be possible to place the gun and a squad in the same fortification at the start of a scenario, otherwise this would not work with trenches.

I've been saying this all along that AT guns should be able to start the game in pillboxes, bunkers or buildings (buildings should have different strengths too - a barn is not the same as a flak tower) - and now trenches. Obviously they can't move in or out during the game . Having this rule would make a big difference and if this was the intention in this scenario it will help...although I think the German player is undergunned.

I think what is missing is the above, in addition to having the attacker move onto the board, or add two more boards behind the starting position and have the attackers move up that board taking long range shots against them. Prepared positions had all foliage removed in front of them for this reason.

Normally I don't complain about the scenarios but the typos and omissions are problematic - especially in that FFG refuses to provide a scenario editor in order to sell their own scenario series of books. It just seems that tunnel vision was in full effect for some of these scenarios and were only played with one strategy. As soon as someone tries a different strategy the scenario breaks down it seems.

Patate said:

Indeed, there shouldn't be cover on the apporaches to prepared positions or at least very little. I completely agree with what you're saying about the scenarios being played in a different style and they right away appear to be broken. That's exactly what (professional) playtesting is about: Try ing a wide variety of possible strategies.Some can simply turn out to be a disastrous choice, others can be so-so, but there should also be a few possible ways to win for both sides! While that may be difficult, it's certainly doable!

Sadly Tunnel vision happens easily when your not geting feedback that tells you to do something differently. now that i have that info i can change somethings.

BJaffe01

BJaffe01 said:

So maybe one or two future scenarios could be posted here and on BGG, for example, and then have players ask for feedback that can then be applied to other new scenarios as well?

Finished Counterattack at Orel yesterday, AAR follows soon.

Soviets won, no surprise there.

I have to move before buying FoB, so I still dont have it. But, is this the setup

http://boardgamegeek.com/image/964648/tide-of-iron-fury-of-the-bear

And I emidetly see some problems with the scenario. The russians can IGNORE most units the trenches. Drive straight past them. The one AT gun will be set out of play first round (regardless where it is placed) Even the half-tracks dont need to worry to much about the enemy infanteri. The germans cannot move forward, have no weapons with long enough range (except for the two MG guns) so the russians halftracks can safely be moved forward and put on op-fire mode to fire at any infanteri trying to move to the traffic-problem at the one minefree path all units are forced to move through, But basicly, the defensive line of the german can be totaly ignored. It would have been much better to setup all units in the balka. That would have been a far better, as there you could wait until the russians comes driving past. That would actually be a far better defence, since it is also noted that the russians are forced through that one path anyway.

The scenario would have been greatly improved if placing a single mine-field extra. Then it would be transformed from 'a walk in the park' to hell on earth for the russian. The reason I say this is that a minefield is a SIGNIFICANT thing which no sane person would every try to move through. Just to go through the probabilities when driving through a minefield

no damage: 1/16

lightly damage: 10/16

heavyily damage: 4/16

Destroyed :1/16

So the minefield allone would imobilise 1/4 of your tanks& halftracks, and lightly damage the rest. You will KILL half of the infanteri trying to move through. Nobody drives through a minefiled if there is an option not to. In addition, any tank that enters the field are fatituded. This means that if there is a german infanteri in the neighboring hex, they get to shoot! And at full strength, the shot is fairly potent also. Ofcourse, the russians could still just kill the infanteri, and then move throught, but it will regardless take out a large portion of their force AND it will cost them more time.

What reinforments do the german get and when?

And actually, I would geuss that the later case is much closer to the way the scenario was playtested. And if so, this is an example of how important tiny changes can be and how important it is that everything is 100% correct.

(ps! this analyses is taken soly on the picture on boardgamesgeek)

This is also an good example of why I mean minefields needs some work. In general I think minefields can to easily be ignored by simply moving around them. In this scenario it would have been far more fun to place twice the amount of minefields (two layers) but having half of them being dummy. Sending enigneers in to search would be a painfully slow (and deadly) experience.

Here is my AAR for this scenario. Notes are at the bottom. Even if the fight seemed a bit unfair, play was still fun.

Round 1
Initiative - Russians

Russians
Almost no tank movement
Tanks suppress all but one squad in the trench line and destroy one MG squad, one squad and the AT gun on the hill
Halftracks and combat engineers advance towards the trench line

Germans
The AT gun from the second line fires at extreme range and lightly damages one halftrack.
Squads from the second line advance up the balka towards the first line. This may be a mistake, see notes at the end.

Round 2
Initiative - Germans

Germans
Fail to contact artillery
Kill a few combat engineers
Pin two combat engineer squads
Destroy one halftrack

Russians
Disrupt one squad
Pin two squads
Combat engineers clear two hexes of razor wire
Tanks move and fire
Destroy one MG squad

Round 3
Initiative - Russians

Russians
Heavy mortar support only pins one squad
Fail to contact artillery
Pin all but one of the squads in the trenches
Combat engineers clear three hexes of razor wire and kill one soldier
Tanks kill two soldiers

Germans
Nebelwerfer damages three tanks, kills one soldier and destroys one razor wire
Kill some combat engineers
Fail to contact artillery
AT gun in the second line heavily damages a T-34 with a lucky long-range shot

Round 4
Initiative - Russians

Russians
SU-122 destroys one squad in a trench
Sustained blanket fails to pin anyone
Combat engineers remove two minefields
Offensive artillery kills one soldier in the second line
KV kills two soldiers in a trench
T-34 destroys a squad in a trench
Russian reinforcement beam onto the battlefield

Germans
Nebelwerfer fails to do any damage, four CPs down the drain
Mortar pins one engineer squad
Infantry destroys two combat engineer squads

Round 5
Initiative - Russians

Russians
Artillery lightly damages AT gun in second line and kills one soldier
Combat engineers remove one minefield
Tanks move and fire, killing one soldier in a trench, one soldier in the open and destroy one expert squad
Reinforcement squads occupy two trenches

Germans
Artillery pins combat engineers
Expert charge T-34 from the balka, no effect

Round 6
Initiative - Russians

Russians
Two SU-122s destroy an expert squad
Artillery destroys the AT gun in the second line and one squad
Artillery destroys one squad and kills two soldiers
Artillery destroys double mortar squad in the second line
Artillery disrupts MG in the second line
(at this point the game was decided, in my opinion)
Three T-34s reach hill 3A
Infantry attacks squads in balka and kill three soldiers
Tanks and trucks loaded with infantry advance

Germans
Nebelwerfer drifts one and destroys one T34 and Truck, kills two soldiers, heavily damages on KV and one halftrack
Surviving infantry falls back towards the second line

Round 7
Initiative - Russians

Russians
Heavy mortar support disrupts MG in the second line again
Two t-34s reach the objective on the bridge

Germans
Nebelwerfer only lightly damages one T-34 on hill 3A
Fail to contact artillery
No squad would be able to reach the bridge in round 8, so the Germans retreat from the field.

Survivors after Round 7
Russians
Heavily damaged:
SU-122
KV
Halftrack
Lightly damaged:
T-34
Undamaged:
3 SU-122s
KV
2 T-34s
2 halftracks
3 trucks
Infantry:
10 squads (not all complete)
Germans
4 squads (not all complete)

From the Russian point of view, the question was not "if" but "when". This attack was quite slow and methodical, first clearing most of the first line before initiating the breakthrough movement with the faster T-34s and SU-122s. Maybe the bridge could have been reached earlier, but given the superiority in numbers and firepower and the generous time allowed in the scenario, it did not seem necessary to take that risk.

The Russians never used their reinforcement deck, they did not need the additional troops and had better use for their CPs elsewhere.

The Germans might have made the mistake of rushing all squads not in entrenchments in the second line to the balka in the hope of threatening a Russian breakthrough with ambush from the balka. As it turned out, that ambush was too feeble to accomplish anything. The threat might even have convinced the Russians to be more thorough in their mop-up of the first line than they would normally have been. In the end, these German squads were sorely missed on the second line during the final two rounds, as there was no-one there to contest Russian control of the bridge objective. When I play the scenario again, I will leave them out of sight by the houses to cover the bridge, but I do not think that this will save the Germans.

In general, it is not really clear why AT guns cannot set up in trenches with their operating squad. The equipment rules system hinders the game here by stating that equipment is the stacking equivalent of a vehicle. Trenches can only take one squad, ergo no guns with crew in trenches. Sheer nonsense.

Even in a trench, the German AT gun might not have survived the first round, but it would have drawn a lot more fire with a defense of 6 rather than 3, thus at least slowing the Russians down a bit.

As a whole, the scenario is only for German players who do not mind playing speed-bump, and as such it would be better suited to being a part in a campaign, where after the Russian breakthrough, other battles follow.

In my opinion, the scenario could use:
Two more German AT guns, one for each line of defense, allowed to set up immobile IN trenches and entrenchments with their crews.
Russians moving onto the board at the start of the game and as reinforcements.
Maybe a round or even two less to give the Russians an incentive to take more risks.
Two more tank obstacles adjacent to the existing one to block the way behind the first line (did the Germany run out of construction material?). The one obstacle hex does nothing.

Nice writeup. I guess this is closer to playtest. But with a free route through the minefield, why not simply ignore the german infanteri in the trenches, and drive straight towards the goal? Add one more minefield, and you are forced to play the way KlausFritcsh did, and if not balanced it seems like it played a lot better that way.

But still, the germans dont get any more reinforcements? No tanks? no more AT guns? No bazokka spesilizations? AND the russians has good time... it seems very much like the scencerio as written is not the same scenario as was playtested, cuz most tanks can totaly ignore most infanteri. Cuz there is no way a handfull of infanteri can take care of 10 tanks, and it has nothing to do with combine-fire tactics. The pure numbers in round 7 says alot.

I agree. Combined fire is irrelevant here. I didn't use it at all and likewise won by round 6. The germans are destined for misery on this one. I opted not to destroy the first AT gun but instead shot at the crew with my SU. they routed leaving the gun in tact creating the laughable situation of acting as bait to draw other squads out of trenches in a fruitless attempt to man the gun. When a halftrack full of engineers drove past the AT gun I couldn't bring myself to capture it and turn it on the germans; ludicrously unfair.

KlausFritsh

thanks for the write up. the more i see this played the more i wonder if something got written up wrong by me and i sent FFG bad info. once my copy arrives next week i will look into this and let you all know.

BJaffe01

I agree that in this scenario possibly combined fire isn't even necessary. It does however aggrevate the imbalance, IMHO.

Kingtiger said:

I did not use combined fire often because the SU-122s already fire a whopping ten-dice attack against infantry. That was more than enough to pin or even kill squads in trenches.

KlausFritsch said:

Yes, that is correct. However, firing at vehicles (The AT gun is a vehicle) they'd fire a few dice less. Besides, in my "mental" play session of the scenario, I simply bypassed the trenches altogether. At least with the vehicles. The Germans would then have to leave the trenches to be able to make a short range attack, which is the only remote possibility to hurt a Soviet vehicle (although undoubtedly at a very high cost).

If I recall correctly, there are two SU 122's in the Soviet line-up? You may have to combine infantry squads to take out German infantry in trenches then, right? (Again, as I said, I guess you could simply choose to ignore them as well). It'd really help to fill up the "whole" in the German defenses with an additional minefield.

Kingtiger said:

There are 4 SU-122, if I remember correctly. To pin squads, one is enough.

Those holes in the minefield and in the tank obstacle line are strange indeed.

hmm now that i have my copy of the game. i thought the at gun and squad where going to set up in the entrenchment to represent a dug in gun pit. my obvious mistake was giving the soviets starting Initiative. and not having them enter the board on round 1.

BJaffe01

So should we play this as being able to set up on the hill with the entrenchment and have the russians enter the board on round 1?

Is this how you playtested it?

Aussie_Digger said:

Seems to me like that is what he's trying to say. That's how I'll be playing it, anyway. I guess i will also add an extra minefield to complete the German defensive line. If I'm not mistaken, the Soviets have some engineer squads with the possibility to clear mines ("Clear mines" operations card basegame), so it will be highly important for the Soviets to keep them alive. Otherwise they are definitely going to suffer casualties in the minefield. I'm not sure about this as I don't have the scenario booklet with me ATM, but it's how I'll play it probably. Even with these changes, it still looks challenging enough for the Germans, to say the least with all the Russian reinforcements!

Kingtiger said:

How about this and toss in another AT gun or an '88 (in a trench) and call it even.