Jump to content

Grand Stone

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About Grand Stone

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • AIM
  • MSN
  • Website URL
  • ICQ
  • Yahoo
  • Skype

Profile Information

  • Location
    Trondheim, Sør-Trønderlag, Norway
  1. Cipheron said: heyho, according to a picture from 1agames` website (link: http://1agamesworld.com/1a-games-at-gama-2013-report-from-day-1/), the new Stalingrad expansion for TOI will be a new campaign expansion. now this are really great news! i believe this will something like the 6th german army campaign or something like that. i alway hoped for a new campaign focusing on german forces. we will see…greetz from germany! Can be good indeed yes And from http://1agamesworld.com/tide-of-iron/ we get the Panzer III, STUG III, T70 and T34/76 The panzer III versus the T34/76, doesn't sound fair ->fun. I can guess the stats for the stug III. But what about the T70?
  2. You can add facing rules without making it much more complicated. I do enjoy the simplicity of the game. But the simplicity can still be kept and still introduce simple facing rules.
  3. You have some very good point Kingtiger. I have thought about this for some while, and games where you are allowed to choose forces, then you are allways fighting a well balanced force. Allways having the optimal degree of armor versus infanteri. Allways fighting more or less the same units. Its far more interesting when you have a bounch of men with bazookas trying to sneak into town and kill of as many shermans as possible. You will never see a large but illequiped army. You can set up the forces so that you can play far more aggressively in such a system. Cuz sometimes, you have an edge. If you allways can choose your forces, your enemy will almost never have major weaknesses. Scenario based systems gives you so much. I also agree that the 3 action back and forth is a nice mechanism. You never know what the enemy might do. I do remember I once used my flamethrower in a fire and move ment action last action of turn 1, then first action of turn 2 I did the same. Fist action almost killed of one entire infantery squad. The second doing the same. And then the squad ran into safty. Beauty and fun. However, there is one thing that ToI can improve, which I do disagree. And that is balance. Nothing is more booring than 'whatever you do, the US will win' Nothing is more booring than that. The scenarios could very well be imbalanced, but both teams should be given an equal opportunity to win. But the game DO have scenarios that are far more fun than the ones in the original box. I for my part find that if the scenario isn't a clear cut 'attacker' versus 'defender' scenario is far more fun. My best example is 'night hunt' from designers series. Where the germans are attacking shermans in a city with bazookas. Its night so the shermans cannot see the infanteri. But the US have an infanteri division close by. If they had been setup correctly, well, I guess the US would have no problem winning. But they are not. They are on the side and need to enter the city themselfs. The germans on the other hand also get reinforcements, which tries to defend against the US. Thus a caotic fun and wonderfull scenario.
  4. I guess that the imbalance of scenarios is an obvius one that they allready do know how we feel about.
  5. I haven't played it jet, but its definitively on my to do list. Play test this one with an aggressive US the three first turns. Ofcourse, you count the normal effect of fog in addition. But you gain it for both sides right? 13 dices at LONG range versus 5 in armor. In average 2.16 hits versus 1.67 saves. But you might be lucky and no damage. Unlucky and get a lightly damage. But heavily damage is very unlikely at long range.
  6. I'll reread this one again and figure I'll definitively try this one out with an agreesive US. Taking the bridge turn one, with one green troop. And setup to MGs in two entrenchments, and having one or two troops in reach of the bridge hex in reserve. Leaving the two halftracks unmoved, gambling that the german AT gun dont do much damage at longe range AND with fog. Forcing some though decision upon the germans. Do they use their mortar on the MG, or on the bridge?
  7. Yes, the germans have better troops and with the extra cover granted by fog the quality of the troops is amplified. And maybe you are correct that an aggressive US player would cost to much. But, if they could sacrifice one half-track to remove that AT gun, that might be worth it. However if you sacrifice two or more, its probably not. But it would atleast be a far more fun scenario if the US could play aggressive the two first rounds…
  8. Yes this is somewhat typical. The defender can have a nice time planing the defence, seting up. But after he has set up, there might not be much to do other than to wait, sitt still and fire. This also leads to the setup for the defender being extremly important. I've actually won a game where I had NO units left on the board. I heavily damaged the last vehicle by a blind artellery. That was slighlty fun. But, yes playing defender can be slightly frustrating at times, cuz there is nothing you can do. However scenarios where the defender needs to be agressive themselfs are often far more entertaining. But back to the scenario, I read it that the AT gun is kept alive during the entire game? And yes, if its alive and kicking when the germans gets their tanks, it would most definitively be a major factor. And most importantly, scare the US from making bold moves. With a bit of luck and somewhat aggressive US player it may be able to take out the AT gun in round two or three without to heavy cassulties. It greatly depends on what you sacrifice, but would it be worth it playing the US aggressive the three first turns? It would atleast make the game completly different if the AT gun is removed in round 2 or three.
  9. FoTB gave us a beautiful russian army with nice fun stats for their tanks etc. However, I still havent played with them, cuz there scenarios are mostly broken. I do want to play the last one at some time, but its monsterly big so its not the first thing which happens. I would be suppriced if they dont make scenarios which requier all the expansions at some time. However, what I do want from a japanese expansion, is fanatic japanese infanteri, and real amphibius landings including some time in the water. Just imagine the bloody omaha scenario if the germans could I) Fire at the US landing ships BEFORE they reach the beach. If each landing transport includes two infanteri, sinking of any one of the would be costly. You could include an extra random-ness for attacks at sea. A lightly damaged whatever sinks at the roll of 5-6 on a die roll. Maybe some infanteri could survive by swiming ashore. (cost 4 movement per hex) II) all US infanteri in bloody omaha enters the beach by movement or fire & movement action. III) and just imagine the bloody omaha battle if not all infanteri apears at the same time. Would you then apply the same tactic for the US? This would lead to bloody battles, and a lot of carnage even before the US has been able to fire a single shot. Obviusly the bloody omaha scenario would need to be rebalanced. Another thing to include would obviusly be a US/Japanese combined air strategy deck. A third thing would be jungle map. With no or little visibility. But then, I'll rather take good scenarios over new stuff any time.
  10. In round I'm guessing the US will hide their anti-tank halftracks, or I would atleast. Which is another nice feature of having the AT-gun. But hiding them in round 2 would be counter productive I guess, as then the push by the US in turn 2 and 3 would be impossible. Concussive firepower is to good not to be used. Due to the extra cover from the fog, its indeed not that easy to take out the 88. A sherman firing with a move and ifre will have 4 dices, and no combined fire, and the 88 will easily gain 5-6 in cover. The US may be lucky and take it out with a fire and movement actions in round 2, but then the question is who has the initiative round 3. If the germans has that initiative, they can get another shot of. And hopefully, it would have heavily damaged atleast one enemy, before its destroied. And in round 4 and 5 they have a nasty artellery card for free. Which may further aid the german advance. The real pain for the germans is however that the US can sacrifice everything to heavy damage the four tanks neccessary. Even infanteri firing with a movement and fire action (2 dices) is a potential threat to a lighly damaged panzer III, even with fog.
  11. So to play this scenario you only need one example of the base game, one example of fury of the bear, a few extra tokens for the expert and a few more elites for the germans?
  12. Why??? (this is just some random words to fill out the minimum length of a post)
  13. This actually sounds very encouring. Sounds like a very fluent battle, going back and forth. And yes, the germans do have a few things going for them, elites, not shaken, and three free cards in round 4 and round 5. So if its not terrible broken, this one sound very fun. Interesting twists: 1. I'm guessing that if the AT gun is taken care of, the shermans and the US shermans may a few rounds of free bear (round 2 and 3). But in round 4 the tide will turn, things changes. 2. The german command objectives, they have to be fought over. Will the US take the bridge first thing they do, or will they wait, use it as a bate and destroy the squad who tries to take it? Every single squad for the germans are packed with specilizations, elites, mortars and what not. But they dont have many of them. So every single one of them is precious. I geuss that the intention of that spesial rule was to allow vehicle to have slightly better range versus infanteri and they overlooked the infanteri attcking vehicles part.
  14. Yes thats correct. Vehicles only. And yes, it should be a quick one. Althougth I suppose thinking time may be fairly large I also geuss that this one plays out fairly differently in solo as, its hard to trick yourself.
  • Create New...