Kingtiger said:

Put your 3 Tigers anywhere you want to on the boards and unless you design the scenario to force the 12 Shermans into some extreme bottleneck, or contrive some ridiculous artificial objectives that just have to be taken, forcing the Americans to ignore having to engage with the Tigers, or lose based on time, then the Tigers will get destroyed with as little a loss as 6 Shermans. Holing up in one hex in the corner of the board with 2 tigers in one hex can work, but its rediculous, because there are no such limits like board edges, and the Americans having "cornered" such a target would simply call in air strikes which would obliterate it rather than send in only 4 Shermans.

The reasons are many: 1. The normal range of the Tiger should be 12 hexes and the movement value of a Sherman should be 4. 2. Combined fire with unlimited no. of units causes "fantasy" odds, as if suddenly, now units weapons effectiveness is twice a high as the best weapon on the board: the 88 flak gun. 3. Thats another thing- the 88 flak should have a normal range of 16 hexes,, if the hex scale= 100 meters( which it appears to be). Its too bad, the designers decided to not take into consideration the no. of times a weapon can fire in a certain amount of time, and calculate how many hexes a unit could move before it gets shot at. It is OBVIOUS that this was NOT considered, which is why an 88 flak only has a normal range of 9 while a Crusader can move 7 hexes. ITS A JOKE!

Fixes:

Gun Ranges:This can be corrected by either changing ranges, or changing the dice to hit roll for Tiger, Tiger II, and 88 flak, to 4,5,6 at normal range, and for the 88 flakgun, change long range to hit dice roll to 5,6. Make close range for 88 flak, Tiger, Tiger II , and Panther dice roll to hit = 3,4,5,6

Combined Fire: get rid of it. Or if you just have to have it , then require each unit that participates spend an action also. This will limit the no. of units in each combined fire to 2-4 units depending on no.of actions/phase allowed by scenario

Movement: All movement is too high. Reduce movement value of Tanks and halftracks by at least 1 pt for every unit., or state that the movement value is the max value, and if a vehicle or tank unit expends all its movement points, must roll a breakdown die roll at the end of its movement, like 1.2,3, and the vehicle or tank is then lightly damaged. For squads, change clear terrain cost to 2 pts..

VanCamper said:

Yes, so you keep saying. So far I haven't seen anything to prove me wrong though ...

It's simply not that hard with the current official ruleset to create scenario's in which other variables are used to balance a great difference in numbers. Initiative matters a great deal, strategy decks as well, operation cards can make or break an army and even without going into extremes, terrain is a big factor as well.

8)

(PS: Don't believe all those WWII-myths out there ... the Western Allies were actually very bad at anti-tank air operations.)

How do you get 100m pr hex? 200 meter houses? 100m wide streams? And where does it way what the timeframe for a turn is? Days? Hours? Seconds?

Your 'fixes' would all twist the ballance of all scenarios to the point of being unplayable. Advancing against MGs at 2 hex at the time? with weaponrange increased? talk about doomed assaults.

VanCamper said:

I would prefer changing the ranges of some guns to more realistic proportions.

For combined fire, I would go for requiring units to spend actions or to limit it to one main firer and two supporters, period. The same as for assaults.

I have no problem with vehicle movement. To me, it "feels" more or less right. Except maybe the strange ability of halftracks and trucks to move unhindered through rough terrain. If I were to change anything, I would divide movement into leg, wheel, halftrack and track and give them different movement penalties in different types of terrain.

I forgot to mention the absolutely ridiculous ability of trucks and halftracks to move through building ruins (Normandy). Heavy vehicles should be allowed to enter ruins very slowly and at risk.

ruins should still be impasable for vehicles (or roll dice to see if the vehicle become immobile) and still give 3 cover, Ruins were great hiding places and cover for infantry. Just look at stalingrad now that was a nightmare for the germans. They destroyed the city but made it so much harder to fight the russians.

As far as the gun ranges of 88 Flak guns, Tigers and Panthers, the easy way to adjust without actually having to reprint any reference sheets would be to just add a change to the normal and long range "to hit" dice roll values. So for 88 Flak, and Tiger II, Normal range is 4,5,6 and Long range is 5 or 6. For Panthers, Tiger I, change Normal range hits to 4,5,or 6, but keep Long range as it is. This will work, but you have to add more boards to get farther distances to use the 88 flak at long range.

The simple adjustment for Combined fire is just to require each participating unit to expend an action. That leaves the rule intact, but limits it to 3 or 4 units per action phase.

Unit movements could be reduced by 1 by adding breakdown rolls for vehicles and tanks, and casualtie roll for squads., if units use their max pts. At end of move, the tank or vehicle expending its max move pts, rolls 1 die and on roll of 1,2,3, is lightly damaged. Squads, if using 4 pts, roll 1 die, and 1,2 or 3,causes that same no. of casualties (men exhausted, demoralized,). The effect will be that units will move a more avg. tactical speed, but may move their max speed at a risk, as player deems necessary.

What you guys think about wreck markers that would look like what type of tank or vehicle got destroyed? After removing the model, the wreck marker is placed in the hex, counts as 1 vehicle for stacking purposes, and would have a number on it representing its cover value of 1,2 or 3 depending on size of tank.

+

VanCamper said:

or 2 or 1 - depending on scenario

Still think your modifications will ruin a lot of scenarios. Tigers simply becomes much too deadly.

KlausFritsch said:

Hey...somebody has been playing CoH ...

I havent seen any scenario with force ratio far beond 1:1 which is balanced.

Can it be done, sure, but not in a normal, fun, playable scenario. For example if you have two layers of minefields with no ways around and the enemy has no way of removing the minefields, two layers of combined tank-traps and barbed wire infront of the minefields (and no remove tank-traps op card) and you place one/two tigers on a hill exactly 9 hexes from the minefields. Yes sure, then you can have a balanced scenario with force ratio far from 1:1. But you have to take it to the extreme.

VanCamper said:

Far too powerful in my opinion.

Wreckage markers and rules would be nice. I do not know about stacking, as a wreck does not need quite as much elbow room as an active tank.

KlausFritsch said:

What I have a problem with mainly is the ratio of distance a unit travels vs how many times a unit can shoot at it.. I like to set up scenarios with Germans outnumbered 3:1 or more, but the shoot and move halves the attack value, and also the movement, so it does not help to try to fall back after shooting as you will still be in range of advancing enemy tanks, and only have maybe lightly damaged 1. Then they combine fire with all units and destroy from normal range, or even long range.

2 88 flak guns are set up 16 hexes away from attacking players edge of board on a 3 x 4 layout w/DOTF boards, and mostly open avenues of line of sight. The British player advances 3 Crusaders onto board, move 7 hexes towards 88 flaks. At long range, both 88s fire individually, rolling 13 dice with only 6s as hits, or avg =2 hits vs Crusader armor 3, avg roll 1 def, so 2 Crusaders get lightly damaged. Brit player then moves remaining 9 Crusaders on board 7 hexes.

Turn 2 begins with German player having initiative. 88 flak guns fire, get above avg rolls of 5 hits/gun and destroy 2 undamaged Crusaders. The Brit player now having moved 7 hexes the previous turn is now within 10 hexes of the 88 flak guns. He shoots all remaining 10 Crusaders at long range in combined fire, 5+ 9(3)= 32 dice with only 6s as hits. Avg dice roll =5 hits vs 88flak gun in woods hex=4 def dice, above avg dice roll of 2, and 88 flak gun is still destroyed.

Turn 3 German has initiative again, Shoots remaining 88 flak gun at long range,( because some designer thought only 9 hexes was normal range for an 88flak) and gets really lucky and rolls 5 hits out of 13 with only 6s as hits vs one other Crusader, and destroys it. Now the Brit player shoots all his remaining 9 Crusaders in combined fire at long range: 5+ 8(3) or 28 dice, rolls avg of 4 hits vs other 88 flak also in woods, or 4 def dice and rolls way above avg of 3 and 88 flak is lightly damaged

Turn 4. German AGAIN has initiative, 88 flak rolls 12 dice with AGAIN way above avg. dice roll of 5 hits, and destroys one other Crusader. Now Brit fire his remaining 8 Crusaders in combined fire, or 5+7(3) =26 dice with only 6s as hits, and unless he is the unluckest player in the world destroys the 88 flak gun.

Result: 2 88 flak guns destroyed, and only 4 Crusaders destroyed, and 2 lightly damaged. And this is giving the German player initiative, incredible above average hit results, and astronomically above average def dice rolls. If you calculate the above with avg. die rolls for both players the result is 2 88 flak guns destroyed and 4 Crusaders lightly damaged. ARE YOU KIDDING ME? This is why Combined fire MUST be limited to 3 or 4 units/action, 88 flak gun normal range should be adjusted to at LEAST 12 hexes, and why movements should be reduced by at least 1 mp for all units.

Additional note: it does not matter if you set up the 88 flaks at 18 hex range, because the Crusaders will just move on the first turn to one hex outside the double range of the 88 flaks. Then on the next turn will move full 7 hexes the next turn, and it is the same situation.

But Why should two AT guns be able to fight 10+ tanks? That is not even Close to your own goal of 3:1! And the 88' will still have cost the english 2 turns, 3 if they were set up at range 19. And boy are they going to look stupid if/when they the eventualy fail to destroy one gun with one round of shooting.

PS: 10 hexes would be Normal range for the 88' due to being on a hill and shooting down........ and range 11 for the crusaders.....

VanCamper said:

You are correct. The difference between long, very long and shorter guns in this game is not big enough by far.

Really long guns such as the 88s and other similar guns should have a range of 10 or 12, oe maybe even more.

Hefsgaard said:

The 88 flak gun kill ratio vs tanks was routinely 5:1 and often as high as 10:1. I do not even get close to those stats when playing TOi, and have actually had to resort to using Memoir 44 cards drawn one per turn to get the variablility of units moving and firing so that the odds come out about right. The action phase does not work when one side outnumbers the other as the player with greater numbers is able to fire ALL his extra units each turn with such overwhelming odds, that it is pointless to even try to set up any scenarios of 3:1 or more one side outnumbering the other.

So I dispensed with the TOI action phase, and now each player just draws one MM44 card, not knowing in advance what that card is, then may move/fire the no.and type of units on the card, if in the right/left or center as card instructs, or may elect to move/fire one unit of their choice in any part of the board. It works great, its simple, and using the other rules in TOI, I get a much better kill ratio for the different units.

That ratio is for the desert, and only when proberly supported by tanks.

It would be a shame if the game degenerated to a state where a 5:1 ratio was Nessesary for a succesful attack.

Hefsgaard said:

I am not saying that it should be 5:1 automatically in every scenario. Only in scenarios where there IS a wide open board, and where the 88 flak gun does have a long range advantage and no other variables as artillery or air strikes. The 88 flak had an effective range of 1600 meters, meaning normal range. The avg. tank speed cross country was no greater than 25 mph, or about 600 meters/minute. In one minute, an 88 flak crew could easily acquire and shot at 2 or more targets. So a tank would only be able to travel about 300 meter before getting shot at LEAST once by the 88 flak gun. Given that the effective gun range of the Sherman was only about 800 meters, and 500 meters for its machine guns, 3 to 4 Shermans could get hit before they even got within normal range to fire back at the 88 flak.

I think this can be replicated by having a rate of fire related to the 88 flak gun manned by a squad with an elite infantry vs one with all regular infantry. The "elite" crew would allow the 2 shots/action rather than one. A squad with at least one elite infantry figure would be considered an elite crew for purposes of manning the 88 flak gun. And changing the normal range to 12 hexes might help so that the 88 flak could OP fire twice from farther distances in scenarios where more terrain limits fields of fire.and where the tactic will be to move move to behind woods, and hills, trying to avoid a LOS.

There should be some range limitations for units firing at AT guns and infantry squads in non clear hexes, as it was much more difficult to spot them in cover and pinpoint their exact position, unlike acquiring a more distinct ,and larger target like a tank. A simple rule might be to require that units which attack AT guns and Squads in woods, rough terrain, must be within normal range to fire on them.

However since we still have no meassurements for Time, Distance or ROF, we have no way of calculating how gamemechanics relate to real world performance. The variables are multitude, but I will mention one. How many shots does a roll of the attack dice represent? It is easy to imagine that it would be one shot for one fistfull of dice for a gun, but then Squads and Arty comes and shows that it simply can't be that simple.

I would rather make AT-guns into infantry tragets (along with trucks) to help them survive a bit longer.

Hefsgaard said:

Infantry targets for vehicles and vehicle targets for infantry, otherwise, MGs would start destroying AT guns when they should be shooting at the gun crews.

In other words, it seems like at least a third target type is needed in ToI.

I think representing AT guns as vehicles for targeting purposes (range and firepower) is fine. However, something could be done to represent AT guns in fortified positions. Allowing AT guns to be set up in trenches, buildings, fortified buildings and even bunkers would help a lot and feel more correct. Also, the use of concealment would also help.

By the way, if AT guns should be able to set up INSIDE a building for example should be scenario spesific.

KlausFritsch said:

Not a bad idea. However, THE most realistic thing would be for units behind the AT gun to shoot at the crew and units in front at the equipment/shield (so vehicle target). But alas, there's no facing in TOI officially.

What might also help is to assign AT guns and their crews concealed markers at the start of the game. In addition the opposing player could make a die roll after the AT gun has fired to see whether or not it is located. The more often it fires, the higher the odds that this roll would be successful and the gun is discovered. The above could be a scenario specific rule.

I have no real problems with MG destroying AT-guns is a game as abstract as this. AT-guns should never have been Equipment in the first place, but units in their own right. Besides a MG will need a bit of luck to destroy a AT-gun within an acceptable amount of time. Unsupported AT-guns deserve to be abandoned by their crews anyway.

I have been thinking about combined fire again.

As long as ToI has no facing rules and no rules covering the effects of crossfire, combined fire as written is the best approximation of the effects of said issues.

In the timeframe given in a turn, a tank can present its front armor to one firer, but not to several at once.

Also, fire from different directions has a much higher effect on infantry than just from one direction.

I know, there are instances where this does not make quite as much sense (e.g. combined fire by units in the same hex), but unless vehicle/gun facing and crossfire are included in some future or advanbced incarnation of the rules, I will be playing with combined fire as written.

It is not as if the effects of the rule come as a complete surprise to the recipient of a combined fire attack, so he has to think where to place his units to stay out of sight of as many enemy units as possible.

The problematic part about combined fire is

1) when N shermans are fireing at a tiger/panther at long distances. The problem is that taking out a tiger wasnt easy, and they had to get close before they could destroy it. In ToI I feel it is not problematic at all.

2) firing at the bunkers in the normandy scenario.

In most other situations combined fire is not that big of a deal.

That is another thing to add to the modification of CF attack: limit it to close or normal range only.

So new revised revision rephrased rule for CF: A Combined Fire attack is limited by requiring that each unit participating with the lead unit, must expend one action/unit , and if vehicles add only +2 AF (attack factor)/unit to the lead units AF. Squads which participate, add 1/2 AF/unit. All units which are involved in a CF attack on a unit, must be within normal range.