If you've got FotB and want to try out a really neat scenario, Bill sent me one that he's worked on and I volunteered to be a guinea pig. I posted the AAR over on the geek: http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/657320/custom-scenario-encounter-at-dubno . Compared to the scenario's in the book, this one is right up there with the best of 'em. Kudo to Bill on a job well done. This one was a blast and will be hitting the table several more times.

Nice write up, looks like a really good scenario,

In you description of the set up you have that there are 2 Panzer IV's but in the images looks like you have a couple of tigers.

This is great news More good scenarios are always welcome.

And I did enjoy the op-cards for the tanks.

The soviet AT spesilization also sounds interesting. Its actually quit potent. Versus Panzer III and Panzer IV I would say that 5 firepower and 5 in range is more usefull than 7 in firepower and range 3. It depends on the scenario ofcourse, and versus super tanks, the soviet AT spesilization has to low total firepower.

Aussie_Digger said:

You are correct sir. Snagged the Tigers instead of the Panzer IV's from the box and didn't notice until after the first turn. Instead of swapping out, and then having photos with different tanks, we decided to continue with the wrong tanks but the right stats (which is what really mattered anyways).

Besides, he liked the paint jobs on the Tigers better than what I did on the Panzer IV's anyways

Grand Stone the Soviet AT Rifle and other AT weapons where extremly potent in 1941 and 1942 it wasn't untill 1943 that they became trivial weapons and even so the made excellent sniper weapons. The Soviets often went after exposed tank commanders and killed many of them.

BJaffe01

Scammer said:

Ok cool, just checking

BJaffe01 said:

Then this specilization is spot on Cuz before the arriaval of the german supertanks the german tanks has 3 or 4 in armor, and thus it is quit potent, and on par with the german/us varriant. But once the panthers/tiger appear, their not that helpfull as their firepower is to low. Its also one of the things which is fun to add to a the game.

Maybe its a good ide to replace the AT specilization for russia with this one in general (ie whenever russia obtains a AT specilization for some reason, it gets the russian AT varriant). You could also add a small soviet symbol in the corner to illustrate that this is the soviet

eventually that is a goal. believe it or not the Soviets never really devloped a man portable at weapon. they relied on Tanks,Tank destroyers,Air Planes and at guns for the most part after mid 1943.

BJaffe01

BJaffe01 said:

Aren't you forgetting the dog-portable weapons?

KlausFritsch said:

Ah, the dog AT-mine!

From the evaluation of the Battle of Kursk:

"Dogs were a highly effective means for blowing up tanks. Operations by a platoon of these dogs in the defensive belt of the 67th Guards Rifle Division (Voronezh Front) serve as an example. In a single incident in which 16 dogs were expended (four of which were killed before they reached the tanks) the platoon used dogs to blow up 12 enemy tanks."

From: The Battle for Kursk 1943, The Soviet General Staff Study

Needless to say, I want a "Dog AT-mine" operations cards for the Soviets!

The "dog AT-mine" is simply to weird for me. Yes it is might be historical accurate, but I dont want to know about it

Latro said:

Careful, such a card would have to include a rule for mishaps when friendly tanks are nearby. There were instances when the dogs ran under Russian tanks becuase they were more familiar to them from the training.

KlausFritsch said:

I've read that too, but since it is never accompanied by any example/evidence/AAR or anything like that ... I'm inclined to see that as a WWII myth. I'm no dogtrainer myself, but I don't think it would be that hard to train a dog to run under a specific vehicle (pointed at by his handler for example).

Anyway, I ran into this list while browsing a WWII forum for some other info and thought it would make a mice addition to this thread:

Soviet infantry used against AFVs during the whole WWII:

a) anti-tank hand grenades RPG-40 and RPG-41 (weight 1.2 kg) mod. 1940-1941, anti-tank cumulative hand grenades RPG-6 and RPG-43 (both since 1943, they could penetrate 75mm-120mm armor).

b) Molotov cocktails (huge amount of types - with different sticky self-priming high-temperature flammable liquids, which were developed by Soviet chemists during WWII)

c) Quite seldom (mainly during the Battle of Moscow, 1941) the rifle anti-tank grenades (VKG-40, VPGS-41) were used.

d) anti-tank 14.5 mm rifles PTRD-41 (mod. 1941, single-shot) and PTRS-41 (mod. 1941, semiautomatic, five-shot magazine).
preWWII 14.5 mm anti-tank rifles of Rukavishnikov type were used in small amount in 1941.
Also powerful 20 mm anti-tank rifles RES (could penetrate 70mm armor at the distance 300 m) were produced in small amounts in 1942-1943

Soviets developed and produced in small amounts different types of recoilless anti-tank rifles and light guns (in principle, they were "bazookas") of Petropavlovsky and Kurchevsky type in 1930s. But a very-very few amount of experimental recoilless guns were in the regular army in 1941.
Several experimental "bazookas" were developed in 1943-1944 (LPG-44, DRG-40)

(Soviet automatic grenade launcher, a very small amounts were tested during the Winter War, 1940)
(37mm recoilless AT-rifle of Kurchevsky type, 1930s, 325 were produced)
(65mm experimental "bazooka" of Petropavlovsky type, 1931!)

e) 12.7 mm heavy SMG DShK with armor-piercing bullets

f) different models of hand and stationary flamethrowers and special very light mortars ("ampulomets") for tossing the 6-8 thick glass spheres with 1 L of flammable liquids per minute

g) also AT-dogs, carrying two AT mines, were used quite often.

Several radio-operated AT-tankettes ET-1-627 were used in 1941 during the Battle of Moscow and in 1942 During the Battle of Kerch and Sevastopol, also near Leningrad.

Last edited by BIGpanzer on 29 Nov 2005, 01:09, edited 1 time in total

Latro said:

Hmm i think you will find that the Finnish army came up with this one while fighting the russians in the winter war (1939 - 1940, went for 105 days). Well the name they came up with, the simple form of it was used in the spanish civil war by the spanish republic, it was the rag in a bottle of gas. The finns used versions that used chemical reations to ignite the weapon.

I have read everything I can get my hands on about the winter war as I find this conflict very interesting (plus the contuination into WW2).

The Finnish used and improved this weapons as they had very little to counter russian tanks. It was called the Molotov cocktail to spite the russian foriegn minister who was named...... you guessed it Molotov. As to the Finnish people he was seen to have back stabbed and started the war for the Finns.

They made many differnt variations of it over this short time.

(edit; just had to add that the weapon was used in the spanish civil war and " apprantly invented" by the spanish republic, (i should really read what I write before i post... ) (5 mins after original post)

Molotov cocktails should simply give an improved firepower at pointblank range. In many cases, it can be argued that hand thrown weapons are indeed part of the regular firepower of infanteri versus vehicles, and if you want infanteri which are slightly better equiped and or trained for such task you can use the expert specilization which is gives a nice boost in firepower.

Regarding the finnish-russian war: I would also like to see a scenario for this war. But then fast moving ski-troops for the finns would be a must. And or combined with a penelty in movement for the russian.

Yea i would love to see this too, there are so many scenarios to be had. This war suits the ToI scale with so many small actions taking place.

I have looked at doing some but the boards dont really give much choice for terrain that i am after. really like to see some more winter boards before i start making scenarios for them.

On the molotov cocktails would be interesting to have the weapon deal some damage on the inital attack then can deal ongoing damage (as the fire has time to cause more damage) dont know how this would be done off the top of my head but ill be sure to think about this now.

Aussie_Digger said:

I don't think the original poster of the list was claiming that the Soviets invented Molotov Cocktails, but that they developed several sticky self-priming high-temperature flammable liquids during the war to put in them. They also developed special "light mortars" to shoot glass "molotov-balls" with ... see point f) of the list.