Jump to content

Somerseter

Members
  • Content Count

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Somerseter

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    -
  • MSN
    -
  • Website URL
    http://-
  • ICQ
    -
  • Yahoo
    -
  • Skype
    Somerseter

Profile Information

  • Location
    Eltham, London, United Kingdom
  1. Hurrah! Well done FFG for recognising that ToI needs more focussed and nimble management to develop the brand and thank you 1A for picking up the gauntlet. There is a long list of possible expansions and I am sure no two players will have identical priorities. For me, top of the list is a Pacific expansion with all of the mobile invasion capability that entails. If you start with the early Japanese expansion this could include v. light sea squad level sea transport for rapid movement along rivers and coast lines. Whatever way you take it, I am sure to buy and look forward to new challenges.
  2. Somerseter

    Mines

    i haven't played memoir - does the player get a number of points at the beginning of the scenario and the ability to distribute them as densely (or not) as he wishes?
  3. Somerseter

    Mines

    I think this is a good idea ... attacker gets the potential that a minefield is a dud, defender gets wider coverage. I'd certainly be willing to try it out. If an attacker is unwilling to take the risk of identifying a dud it may contrict axis of approach too far. The Desert would be a good place to test it out. If you do (or have) tried it, can you post here on it actually works out?
  4. von Stichen - many thanks for your post - very interesting and thought provoking. I shall certainly be trying out some of your ideas.
  5. Somerseter

    Mines

    Interesting suggestions. I'm not sure I expect minefields and tanktraps to take a major role in a scenario. I expect them to perform one of two tasks: (a) divert the enemy axis of advance in a manner that is beneficial to me as defender and (b) delaying the approach of enemies to permit my heavy weapons to inflicit damage on the enemy while they are dealing with the obstacle. I would not like to see these potential benefits lessened by the attacker thinking the obstacle may well be a dud and I would not like to base my defence of approaches to my position to have obstacles that could potentially yield no benefit to my defence in either time of fire corridor.
  6. Super pictures, thanks for posting ... I am getting to the point where I will have to put away slime green and chainmail and get some WWII colours!
  7. Good questions - most of them have already got really good answers, here is my thoughts on the unresolved ones: 3. The rules don't currently permit self-destruction whilst they do specifically permit voluntary fatiguing so I am not keen. I agree with the earlier posting that this is poor play by your opponent, manipulating the rules to create a perverse result. For me a good resolution is, as suggested, to treat placed units as "moving" (i.e. stacking limits do not apply) and check for stacking limits at the end of the first action turn in the action phase. The rule on placement of reinforcements is very clear and this requires a change. Change it too much and good play pinning enemy units in a re-inforcement hex will also lose its value. 5. AT guns as vehicles. The vehicle analogy breaks down and I would not permit them to place smoke - no engine, no random kit like smoke grenades are likely to be around so it doesn't make sense. 9. In a four-player game I would not allow both commanders to use the same card in a turn. For this to be ok would imply the card would need to specify that each division can roll separately in a two-player game. 11. Assault advance: this move happens after the assault combat and does not require movement points
  8. Can anyone help me. Is there a forum top find local opponents for ToI? I split my time between Somerset and London (central and SE). I only have one friend to play the game with and he is really in love with ASL.
  9. Sounds interesting. When the scenario is done will you publish it here?
  10. I am just getting into TOI and i'm finding the mechanics are simple to play and the combat system has a high degree of uncertainty which is both "realistic" and a leveller for people of different abilities playing. Comparing to other squad based games i am familiar with (Squad Leader, Ambush, Raid on St Nazaire), it is much quicker/easier to get into with much less need to be re-reading rules during play.
  11. I like the point on officer with mg to resist suppression - i'll try it for the US in At the Breaking Point. Is there a thread anywhere discussing/analysing tactics/option in At the Breaking Point? I have scanned a few pages of threads with no success.
  12. Good questions. I re-checked the rulebook and the answers are pretty clear on p39: Determination (+1 cover against suppression attacks) applies where the hex has "one or more officers" and Increased mobility (+1 movement value) applies when the squad has "at least one officer". From this I would answer "No" to both questions.
  13. I know this thread is very old but as a newcomer to the game I wondered if your thinking had developed on this. The comments so far fit with my thoughts after a couple of play-throughs. Pure elite squads can lead to loss of elite figures, dispersal provides a level of cover from suppressive attacks to more squads, the 1-3 captures the rounding bonus for M&F actions while the 2-2 is better for assault squads. I hadn't thought of putting leaders with medic squads but this seems a really good place for them.
×
×
  • Create New...