Jump to content

Ghengisgarber

Members
  • Content Count

    42
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

About Ghengisgarber

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

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

Profile Information

  • Location
    Littleton, Colorado, United States
  1. Sorry about the pictures, we were to busy keeping track of what was going on, we forgot to take pictures. As to the game set up, I may be able to reassemble the orders of battle , the boards used, the starting setup, the victory point objectives and special rules. We did have recon(armoured cars) mobile artillary (priests and Wespes) revised rules ( for tanks,such as flank and rear shots, facing) , vehicles not included in the games basic lists, additional engineer functions. As an example, non turreted vehicles could only fire in the 45 front arc (no stugs firing to the rear when their barrel is pointed forward. It will take some time to reassemble all the information, as several of us put it together. If I can get it done, I will post it
  2. Well said. It is a game of small unit actions. A squad is a squad , a tank is a tank. For larger unit actions, build from the basics up. a platoon is 3 squads a company is 3 to 4 platoons excetra, excetra, excetra if you are going to build and game at the regimental level, you will need a few copies of the game and will need more than a two board wide front. While gaming on the regimental level can be fun and interesting, it will take a lot of resources in boards, bases, figures, different weapons and time to play. My group has done it, but we had a 9 board wide front, with 3 players per side using a three board front per player. Incidently our debth was 4 boards ( longside) for a total of 36 boards. We had 4 copies of the initial game, two copies of Days of the Fox and two copies of Normandy. It was a play test of two fictional regiments in a meeting engagement. We used a seperate command figure for each player, with a command radius for activation of his units. The idea for this was so that the left flank players forces did not end up all the way to the right flank without someone to lead them It was a fun encounter, bloody, back and forth, and winner not determined until the end. ( 5 points dif, with 100 total availble) However it did take 3 sessions to resolve
  3. I agree with Klaus, give me all that, plus Russian artillary bombardment. They had lots of arty , not very accurate but they fired enough of it that something was bound to get wiped. It also kept German heads down and movement was not wise.
  4. to kainarian, you missed a lot of the discussion about the value of the 50 cal mg, whether it was jeep, haftrack or other vehicle mounted. some forum members seemed to think that it was comparable to the German lt MG, or that it had no value at all.
  5. I recently talked to a Marine Veteran of the Tarawa invaision. He told me that sometimes the Japanese snipers in the palm trees could not be spotted. Their solution was to bring up a jeep with a 50 cal mg and litterally cut down the palm trees with mg fire. He said that usually took care of the problem. He also said they could cut down a lot of palm trees with a few bursts, the only disadvantage was that it left a rather dense mat of jumbled , fallen palm trees.
  6. 1. for the 50 cal mg I'D give it a firepower of 6 with a range 0f 7 0r 8 2. Smg all nations, all officers and Russian assault troops fire power of 2 at adjacent hex only. 3.BAR firepower of 2 instead of one for any infantry equiped with it (max of 1 per squad) at range 4 , 1 at range 5 plus 4. Recon, would be as simple as allowing it to call in artillary even if fatigued (it could move and still call in artillary) 5. Engineer bridging, only if there is a truck, fatigued or not in the same hex , two full unsuppressed turns to build. 5a Engineer destroying a bridge, must be on the bridge to spend two full turns unsuppressed to wire it, must move off to detonate ( from adjacent hex, there must also be a truck or halftrack adjacent to the bridge. once detonated ,place a smoke marker on the bridge We have tried these rules and they work well with no slow down in the flow of the game. We did a scenario called NO BRIDGE FOR PEIPER, a real life battle buring the BULGE . Seems like the 4th US Engineer Battalion kept blowing the bridges in his face as he raced to Secure at least one. played four games with a 50-50 outcome 6. Jeeps,Kublewagons, ARE NOT INFANTRY TRANSPORT and it never was a good use to move them in front of enemy with an MG or enemy tanks. I invision their use in the game as fast recon to get an observer into where he can call in artillery, or to get a 50 Cal MG to where it can be used as infantry support, to interdict enemy movement or to just constitute a threat. A jeep with a 50cal on op fire parked in the woods, in rough terrain on a hill top is going to have to be dealt with 7. WP willie pete was used to set burnable buildings on fire, and as a fear factor, sure it was used against infantry, only the victorious get to hold war crimes trials 8. HE of 105 and above can ring the bell on any tank (crew stunned) 150 and above caused concussions and jelly brains not to mention what it does to a tank hit on the engine grates, think marshmellow toasting time (toast em if you got em) TONGUE IN CHEEK
  7. To settle the discussion, about what to use and not use, what to add and what not to add, my group has already added many features to the game to give us a more realistic and historic feel. We find that it does not detract from the flow of the game and it certainly does not put it beyond the scope of understanding of the novice. We found Tide of Iron to be a really good platform to add onto as one would desire, to accomplish a higher level of historic accuracy. We have already added several vehicles to the mix. My writings were only as suggestions to make the game more enjoyable to other players of the game, not to attack anyones personal domain in the game. The group that I game with are basically military historians and ex Tractics players (read frustrated Tractics players) When a corporation or company has a brainstorming session with their employees , suggestions are brought up, written down (without critical discussion) and then the few really good suggestions are explored in more detail I am sorry if I offended anyone in trying to make the game somewhat more enjoyable for you.
  8. Actually the game should appeal to a wide variety of players. When you appeal to only a narrow segiment, you are likely to lose players to the next latest and greatest being published. Are you trying to tell me that the game should not appeal to the experienced avid WW2 gamer???? A lot of game publishers go out of business when they lose sight of what their market really , or who buys the games??? I do not plunk down 50 bucks for a beginner game.
  9. If I wanted to play ASL, I would dig it out of my game collections. What is wrong with trying to improve the game??? Also , who died and made you the boss of Me???
  10. Ther are a few that I would like to see added. 1. Some adjustment needs to be made for the American 50 cal MG. U.S. halftracks and priests had a 50 cal mounted as well as some jeeps. The 50 cal is a much better MG than what the Germans and Brits had, yet by the existing rules it is the same or little better at best. 2. BAR browning automatic rifle. Standard equipment for the U. S. , but does not even appear in the rules. 3. Recon Sorry guys, but the rules do a very poor job for recon. A speciality token does NOT cut the mustard. We need Jeeps, Grayhounds, Humbers, 250 German halftracks and various German armored cars, ie 222, 234 , puma etc. Recon was an important part, the EYES so to speak of any advance. There were many conflicts of a larger nature brought on by opposing recon units stumbling onto one another. In addition a battle between light vehicles such as a recon force can be an interesting scenario and there were many that actually happened. Also all recon vehicles had radios ( for calling in artillery, amoung other uses) 4. Additional abilities for engineers such as bridging. All forces used assault bridging. The most notable is Rommel in his dash across France, the Brits in operation market garden and the Americans 2nd bridge at Remagen, finished under fire just before the Lundendorf rail bridge collapsed 5. Submachine guns, what an oversight that they have not been included. Every nation had them in large quanities. All American officers had one , all assault engineers had them, panzer grenadiers had them, British officers had them, Russian infantry had them ,nearly 25% 6. Flails, flame throwing tanks and bridging tanks. No figs required, just additional rules. These were extensively used by the Brits and Americans.To give the Germans all the vehicles that have been in the various games and expansions and the Americans got a sherman and an M10, well excuse me but what a big whoopie. Sounds like bias towards the Germans to me. Yeah I have heard your responses before ( The Germans had so many more varieties of vehicles) Yes, however the Americans and to some extent the Brits had a greater VARIETY OF USES 7. A speciality token for exceptional squad leaders. All nations had heroic leaders in the basic ranks. I know the leader decks have generic effects that apply to all the squads. I am talking about the individuals that rose to a crises, whether they were a private, sargeant or Lt. These were the men who earned the various medals such as the Iron Cross, Medal of Honor, Victoria's Cross. This specialty token should be cabable of being assigned to ANY squad, including squads with other special abilities, or weapons. 8. Different loads for tank and artillery. Armor piercing, high explosive, smoke, WP (willie pete) 9. Corrections for target size and movement. A fast moving armored car or jeep (kublewagon) is a lot harder to hit than a stationary King Tiger.(a whole bunch harder) 10 Sherman turret and gun stabilization. Moving fire did not bother the Sherman any where close to the effect on a German or British tank. It was not quite as easy for the Tiger tank to knock out a moving Sherman as the rules indicate ( more bias for the Krauts ???) Well thats quite enough for now. I have tried to mention only the major deficiencies and not the manushia.
  11. I believe that the arc of fire restriction applies to anything attempting to fire, not just the built in MG. The reason , these bunkers were built to defend from the sea, not from the rear, they had no means to defend against rear attacks unless the men inside opened the door and came out. Many were actually knocked out by attacks from the rear. As I recall in the reading I have done, 4 different books, one by Stephen Ambrose, the only bunkers knocked out from the front were KO'd by U.S. destroyers moving in to just off the beach and blasting them away by direct fire with their 6 inch guns.
  12. A priest is more than a super mortar. It can move and fire like a tank. It fires a 75MM gun which can fire direct, or a 75 high explosive that can fire indirect like artillary ( same as a German Wespe). It also mounts a 50 cal MG. There was some discussion about the amount of time to move and set up artillary. Well the priest and wespe are the answer
  13. You are overlooking two uses of the jeep. 1. It can tow an antitank gun 2,.It also mounts a 50 cal MG. The 50 cal is a pretty awesome MG, capable of penetrating halftrack armor, deadly against soft vehicles, has a longer range than the other MGs in the game and has more stopping power. I give it an 8 at a range of 10. It makes a great support weapon for an infantry advance. It is not very portable by infantry, but vehicle mounted it is very portable and also very stable. 3. Under the optional rules published by players, there is a deduct for small vehicles 4. In addition to all that , the jeep with a 50 cal would consitute a threat that must be dealt with, possibly drawing fire away from other targets
  14. Bunkers in the Normandy expansion can only fire out in defined arcs, they would not be able to defend against an assault from the flank or rear, so they would be crispy critters and do no damage.
  15. These are the U.S. vehicles I would like to see added LEE Grant , great for dessert scenarios, particularly for the British. Stuart, a fast recon tank with some punch, particularly against half tracks , infantry Greyhound, nice armored car fast enough to run away from anything it can not out fight, has turret stabilization so it can shoot and scoot Priest, mobile artillary with some anti tank ability, simular to German Wespe Special Sherman, need rules for several varieties ( these would only need rules additions for use) Flame thrower, nice bunker buster Flail, good for clearing minefields on the run Bridger, quick way to bridge a narrow deep stream, Germans wished they had a few of these at the battle of the bulge Caliopie, Rockets mounted on a rack on top Yes the Germans had more varieties but why should they have all the fun ???? The above mentioned vehicles had a roll to play in the ultimate defeat of the Germans. And why not jeeps ??? A 50 cal has very good light armor penetration and a greater range than any German MG. Also it is a VERY small target and difficult to hit even when standing still. On the German side, how about PUMAS, 250 halftracks, Wespe, 8 wheeled arm. cars ( 240, 242, 244) Also I have a news flash, the British Bren was not an infantry transport. It was called a Bren Carrier because it mounted a Bren Gun
×
×
  • Create New...