Hi all, quick question after our game last monday (already posted on BGG but wanted to get as much info as possible).

We played scenario 4 from the "revised" OP. Blue Thunder campaign book coming with the Terrain Tile Pack. The mission details state that the Attacker (which was me) starts with 250AP while the Defender starts with 100AP and can deploy 30AP (+ unused AP from former rounds) starting in round 4.

Is this an error? 250AP vs 100AP for 3 rounds...+30AP each round after the third?!??!

Read that the old scenario gave only 160AP to the Attacker for the mission...not 250AP...

If it's the way it's meant...how can the Defender win this mission?

Thanks all for the clarifications.

The original Operation Blue Thunder gave the defender three Armor 2 infantry and a hero, with 4 AP per turn starting on turn 4. That was one vehicle, two Armor 2 infantry squads, or one Armor 2 squad and a hero.

Operation Seelowe's update used the simple 10x multiplier for the attacker, but left the defender with the same option, and didn't actually address the reinforcement point values.

The updated version increases both the attackers points, and the maximum value for the defender. The biggest change is the option for the defender to use vehicles as well as infantry at the start. With the updated point system and the new units available

The defender has some advantages. They control all of the cover terrain placement. The attacker comes in across a three space frontage into a kill zone unless they blew an extra opening in scenario 3. If they did, they get more entry options, but it should still be a kill zone. The defenders can now start with both vehicles and Armor 3 infantry in cover (which is a pit to face with Damage Resiliance).

Because their choices come in staggered, the defender can vary their reinforcements to match what the attacker has left from what they brought on for round 1. The attacker has a single chance to choose their force for the battle. The defender gets to choose what they need based on what they see on the table.

It isn't an easy scenario for the defender, but it is doable if it is played well.

I just find it funny that the original version was very challenging for the attacker, while the revised version made it even more challenging for the defender.

Loophole Master said:

While being interesting either way. I don't mind scenarios that don't have perfect balance, so long as they are interesting to play.

Only tournament scenarios need to be fully balanced.

I'm gonna try this mission as the Defender next time just to see how things are from that side. But giving the Attacker 250AP at the start and the Defender 100AP for 3 rounds before being able to get his 30AP+leftovers from round 4 leave the A a lot of room to deploy, move to a startegic point and attack the D forces.

Like you said, if played well i'm sure it's possible to win as D, that's why I want to try it from that side.

Interesting scenario though.

Imagine being the attacker, and never knowing where the defender will be coming from with those reinforcements.

The defender can set up all of the cover at the board edge, so everything in the middle is a kill zone from multiple defender entry points.

If you set up to close to the edge, Zombies, Gorillas, or other close combat nastiness will say hello. Markus can only come on once, but with just a few points saved, he comes on with a full Gorilla unit to make him Charge Fast, and any unit near the edge can worry about Grenadier-X or the Totenmeister with Zombies for just a few more points. Armor 2 infantry near the edge could make the Totenmeister with Zombies worth giving up a turn of reinforcements.

Within five spaces of the edge, you have Lara, Heavy Recon Grenadiers, Heavy Flak Grenadiers, Heinrichs, or Lothars (with a few spare points) smiling at you. The entire board that counts for victory is within five spaces of an edge.

Every enemy unit has to be killed immediately, because they can rip you apart again the next turn with Sustained Attacks if they survive.

Destroying the available cover becomes an important consideration, but it takes firepower that could be attacking reinforcements and starting units to do it.

It isn't a death trap mission, but if the defender is smart, it will be a scary fight for the Allies.

Gimp said:

Oh, I don't mind either. I actually love how tough the original version was for the attacker. When I finally managed to win it with a well thought-out strategy it was very satisfying. I just think this new version might be leaning too far the other way, though I haven't played it like that to really know.

Well thanks all for your replies.

Maybe i'll try to balance this thing a bit knowing that the original scenario gave less points to the A.

I'll still try this mission as D next time though.

**** I love this game!

Played through this today and it was a very close win for the Allied attacker.

The initial Axis forces were dispatched quickly, but took their toll before going down. And with a Heavy Laser Grenadier or Heavy Flak Grenadier unit popping up every round from round 4 on, it made things very tough on the Allies. They only ended up winning thanks to some bad rolls in round 8 for the Axis.

This might be easier for the Axis to win in the attacking role, due to the Damage Resilienece of their Type 3 infantry. A couple of squads of zombies in cover with a hero could last a long time.