It is currently Sat May 25, 2013 7:50 pm
Post a new topicPost a reply Page 1 of 2   [ 16 posts ]
Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: 3 FoF AARs
PostPosted: Mon Apr 06, 2009 10:29 am 
Osprey Raider!

Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 10:36 am
Posts: 201
Location: Haslett, Michigan
Here are three AARs for my first FoF games:

Last Friday, we played the 1st scenario from the FoF rule book (Brits vs Germans in Normandy, '44). I played on the German side. Turn 2, I had a LMG/Rifle team on Overwatch, with the PL attached. Opened fire on a unit moving across a road and into some woods to my front... no effect. Return fire, however, took out my whole team, including the PL (1 KIA, 3 HW). Later on, a FoW card (Tougher than they Look) compounded our problems, as we now realized that our opponents were hardened veterans.

Turn 3: We (Germans) occupied the ruined manor, but could advance no further as the Tommies moved a section onto the wooded hill overlooking the position. We opened fire on them from the manor, but their return fire caused 3 casualties and set the structure on fire (FoW Card- Fire! Fire!). On our right flank, we drew fire from the hedges to our left as we bounded a Rifle Team across the road (4 Casualties- 1 KIA, 1 HW, 1 LW, 1 OK). This triggered our only success of the evening, but also the last straw in our continuing slide toward failure: our remaining LMG Team (on Overwatch) fired on the Bren Team (that fired on our guys crossing the road) and inflicted 4 hits- the entire team. Another Brit squad on the wooded hill also fired on our right flank element (now occupying the farm house), and caused some more hits. Our Reaction test resulted in another FoW Card (Praise the Lord and pass the Ammunition). Low on ammo, and low on personnel, we accepted that we were not going to be able to complete our mission of scouting all 3 objectives, and had to content ourselves with occupying only 2. To shore up our position, 2 Soldiers were dispatched to retrieve the lost MG-42.

The Brits, meanwhile, completed their recon mission and withdrew from the wooded hill, but not in time to meet their mission objectives. It was thus up to VP to determine the victor. End result was Germans 10 VP (we occupied 2 of the 3 objectives) , Brits 13 VP (they completed their mission, and inflicted 3 KIA, which we failed to do).

The previous week, played several FoF games: #1 Brits... I mean CANADIANs vs Germans, July '44. 2 Sections of Tommies backed up by a tank troop (3x Sherman, 1x Firefly) vs 1 German Squad and a Panther.
Turn 1: Brits, I mean CANADIANs advanced from the west through some farms and orchards until they drew fire. The Panther crew, having completed repairs to their tank, moved into firing position and was engaged by the Firefly- Ping! The Kraut's return fire immobilized the Allied tank, and forced the crew to bail out. Meanwhile, I advanced with all haste to try and get into a flanking position, firing as I moved.

Next turn, I drew the attention of the Panther which easilly penetrated my Sherman, and forced the crew to bail out, and the tank riders to seek shelter behind the tank. My second Sherman reached the north-south road the Germans were defending along, and fired into the flank of the Panther, immobilizing it. The cheering didn't last for long, as a second Panther appeared from the east, and promptly removed my turret. As my infantry advanced from the north-west, they came under fire from a German Rifle team in a farm house to their front, and a LMG team to their flank. The survivors falling back to the shelter of my immobilized tank.

Turn 3: With the threat to their right flank neutralized, the Germans returned their attention to our center and right, finishing off the Firefly, and knocking out a Sherman that had maneuvered into a hull-down position on a hill to the south. As more German reinforcements arrived (a Pz IVJ with 1/2 squad) from the south, they were surprised to learn that my tank crew had "screwed up their nerve" and reoccupied the immobilized Sherman, which put a round through the flank of the new arrival, forcing the German crew to bail out. The two Panthers then destroyed my tank.

End result, 4 knocked out Allied tanks and about (I mean, "aboot") a squad worth of infantry casualties vs two immobilized panzers.

General consensus was something seemed fishy with the tank vs tank rules: statistically, at less than 500m (assumed ranges of the game), a 17 Pdr should have easilly penetrated a Panther, even from the front. Game-wise, it was against the odds of even achieving 1 good "hit". A lot of this could be dismissed as uneven dice rolling, but the chances of success were still low.

Game #2 (Saturday): Kursk counter-offensive, Eastern Front, '43. Germans vs Soviets. Germans deployed their Panzer Pionier squad in two teams: flame thrower team to their left rear, concealed in a woods, and Assault team (with AT mines, etc...) and SdKfz 251 half-track on a wooded hill in their center, overlooking the north-south road and the bridge across the stream that divided the board. Soviets deployed a Rifle squad and PTRD Anti-Tank Rifle team on their right flank, in some woods, and overlooking the bridge. The Soviets infantry drew fire from the German half-track as they crossed the stream, but only suffered 1 casualty. The ATR returned fire, but caused no damage. The Pz Pioniers, however, gunned down the ATR team once they revealed their position. Panzers soon arrived on the scene, 3 Pz IVG west of the hill, and 2 Tiger Is hull-down behind a ridge west of the wooded hill.

Turn 2, a platoon of T-34s (plus the tank company commander) arrived along the road from the north, and engaged in a gun duel with the Pz IVs, and the commander's vehicle was hit and the crew forced to bail out.

Turn 3, another platoon of T-34s arrived from the north to provide covering fire while the first platoon advanced toward the stream, German tank fire knocking out one of their number. A KV-1 added to the weight of Soviet firepower, but also had little end effect. Return fire forced the crew of the Soviet heavy tank to bail out.

Turn 4: German mortars (FoW Card?) rained down on the Soviet tank crews, causing 1 casualty to the KV crew and forcing them to flee the battlefield. Meanwhile, the Soviet tank company commander and crew reoccupied their damaged tank and tried to provide cover fire for the Soviet's advance to the stream. Additional fire support was provided by a SU-122 sheltering behind a ridge. The Soviets managed to get 2 T-34s up to the stream, but were halted there (one being immobilized). The second tank platoon swung west, through the woods and tried to maneuver to get flanking shots on the German panzers. Somewhere along the way, a German crew was forced to abandon their damaged Mk IV, and a FoW Card resulted in an errant artillery round landing smack-dab on top of the German half-track rendering it so much flaming scrap metal.

Turn 5: The Germans halted their advance, and withdrew one of their Pz IVs to the wooded hill, to provide overwatch. This drew so much unwanted attention, they were tempted to withdraw it. When they tried to do so, the ATR team (revived and reinforced by dismounted tankers seeking pay-back) got a lucky hit, and brewed it up. Soviet infantry appeared at the edge of the woods and began firing at the dismounted crews of the remaining Pz IVs, but were almoust wiped out by German mortars and fire from the overwatching Pioniers. The Soviet second tank platoon then advanced out of the woods, tw T-34s attempting to cross the stream, and one pushing on toward the bridge. The Germans then shifted their Tigers (which had thus far been unengaged) from their right to their left/center to stop the Soviet thrust there.

Turn 6: The German mortars pounded the ATR team, and the survivors fled the field. One T-34 raced across the bridge and reached the wooded hill, where it was close assaulted by the German Pioniers with Teller Mines and bundle grenades, but escaped unharmed, as did the attackers. 2 other T-34s attempted to cross the stream, one making it, the other getting bogged in the soft bottom. The Tigers advanced and forced one crew to bail out, machinegunning the survivors. This soon became a pattern. Meanwhile, the SU-122 moved behind a low ridge to a new position, where it fired on the dismounted crew of one of the Pz IVs. An attempt was made to close assault a Tiger by a surviving Soviet rifleman, but he was gunned down before he had a chance to use his molitov.

Turn 7: The T-34 on the hill was again close assaulted but detected the threat and sped out of range of the German Pioneer team, who retreated back into the woods. The tank was now sheltered from the Tigers, and poised to make a break for the exit zone next turn. The Soviets advanced with the Tigers, while a damaged Pz IV (no main gun) kept watch for any Soviet infantry who might have suicidal thoughts of close assaulting the German armor. The Tiger's 88mm guns soon dispatched the remaining Soviet tanks (including one which attempted to push on through despite having no main gun).

Turn 8: The Germans mopped up the Soviets to their front, and even advanced a Tiger as far north as the bridge, and disabled the gun on the SU-122 as it emerged from the stream east of the bridge. The T-34 on the hill, was thus afforded a rare chance, firing on the rear of a German Tiger! Unfortunately the results were less than hoped for.

Turn 9: The Tiger on the bridge immobilized the SU, and the other dropped back to engage the T-34 maneuvering arround the wooded hill, the final shot of the game, removing the gun of my T-34 and forcing the crew to bail out.

Conclusion: The Soviets lost ALL of their infantry and ALL of their armor. The Germans lost 1 Pz IV and 1 SdKfz 251 (and crews) with both remaining Mk IVs either immobilized or sans main gun, and with crew casualties. I guess this was probably historical. There is still some question if the tank on tank rules are not statistically skewed somehow.

Chris Maes

_________________
1 SQDN 126 CAVALRY RGT
"Courage Sans Peur"


Top
OfflineProfileSend private message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 06, 2009 10:44 am 
Osprey Raider!

Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 10:36 am
Posts: 201
Location: Haslett, Michigan
Sorry, no pictures to accompany the previous AARs. My digital camera has joined a list of other items that have succumed (albeit belatedly) to the dust, heat and vibrations of my fun-filled, but ultimately, uneventful trip to sunny Iraq and Kuwait.

Suffice to say that the scenery was beautiful, a perfect representation in miniature of the historical terrain in each battle. The figures were professionally painted, in fact it was hard to believe that they were not actual, live, 2-inch tall Soldiers (except for the lack of foul language- that was limited to the players... mostly me). And the vehicles were exquisit, museum quality representations of the actual combat vehicles.

If you believe tis, I have a bridge to sell ya'. A 1/72 scale bridge... but it is a perfect recreation of a bridge...

Maybe I'll get a new camera and figure out how to post pics with my AARs.

Chris Maes

_________________
1 SQDN 126 CAVALRY RGT
"Courage Sans Peur"


Top
OfflineProfileSend private message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 06, 2009 10:50 am 
AAG Co-Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 8:03 pm
Posts: 6534
Location: USA
Wow! Your Non-Pictures are BEAUTIFUL!!! Let's not see more of them!!

:lol:

_________________
Shawn Carpenter
Game Designer, Ambush Alley Games

"I don't wanna be remembered as the guy who died because he underestimated the threat posed by a monkey."


Top
OfflineProfileSend private message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 06, 2009 11:41 am 
Captain
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 11:48 pm
Posts: 367
Location: Los Angeles, California
Is it true a thousand words equals one picture?

_________________
"Audaces Fortuna Iuvat"


Top
OfflineProfileSend private message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 06, 2009 11:57 am 
Sarge
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 11:52 pm
Posts: 71
Location: Charleston, SC
Hmmm, is the Bridge you're selling true 1/72, or is it really HO? I'm a bit of a scale purist...

Thanks for the AAR!


Top
OfflineProfileSend private message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 06, 2009 2:17 pm 
Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 10:10 am
Posts: 3333
Location: Ireland
Quote:
There is still some question if the tank on tank rules are not statistically skewed somehow.


How so?

One thing that made judging the stats difficult is the level at which Force-on-Force engagements take place.

All fighting takes place at close range and for tanks, even WW2 ones, these would be short ranges.

This means that the weapons have less of a differential than is usually seen in wargames rules. That German 88mm is highly effective at 2km, but at close range, you may as well have something smaller. Conversely the same is true of the armour ratings. Because the range is so short, the weapons have a penetration power in excess of what most may expect.

At close range a Sherman could, and did, take out Panthers and Tiger Is. At close range the T-34/76 main gun was very effective.

So our stats had to reflect these weapons and armour at these close quarters engagements, not at the big long ranges wargamers are used to.

_________________
http://www.guildwargamers.com


Top
OfflineProfileSend private message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 8:27 pm 
Osprey Raider!

Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 10:36 am
Posts: 201
Location: Haslett, Michigan
The comment about armor penetration was not that they were too high, but that some seemed too low. I've started a little research project to compare the penetrative abilities of WWII tank and anti-tank guns; we'll see what that produces, and what conclusions can be drawn. At this point, I am not convinced either way, merely that some of our experiences seemed... odd.

Chris Maes

_________________
1 SQDN 126 CAVALRY RGT
"Courage Sans Peur"


Top
OfflineProfileSend private message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 08, 2009 3:19 am 
Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 10:10 am
Posts: 3333
Location: Ireland
Well bear in mind research penetrative data is virtually worthless as far as tank penetration goes... They give far higher results than was probably seen in the field during WW2.

Most are tested at flat angles and against well finished homgonised steel plate. This gives skewed results compared to actual combat results. Some of the US and British tests were done at a 30 degree angle but none of the tests could recreate battlefield tests.

Also bear in mind that armour itself degrades. The Panthers built in 1944 for example, used low grade steel and suffered terrible spalling from non-penetrative hits. That needs to be considered. Also consider the many ways that a tank may go out of action in game terms without suffering non-penetrating hits.

Be interested to see what you come up with Chris.

_________________
http://www.guildwargamers.com


Top
OfflineProfileSend private message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 22, 2009 4:18 am 
I think the tank rules for WWII are skewed to be honest, even when the bail out effect is taken into account ... when the survivability roll got put into the equation the WWII stuff got skewed IMHO. Try playing without the survivability roll for ammo over 50mm.

I have knocked up a document refining the rules for late war WWII armour which includes changing the FP dice a bit, altering the survivability dice types. Also tweaked the damage chart to make the damage more in line with what I have gleaned from reading and interviews.

We use it at our club and it works fine - WWII tanks are now quite 'brittle' at the FoF distances, as they should be.

However they can still survive - in a lot of interviews (and in the book 'Death Traps') tankers often talked about the fact they knew that the Jerries were about when the 'clanks' of panzerfausts hitting and bouncing off the sides! This is where where the survivability roll kicks in - we use a d6 for most medium armour not a d8 so the 4-6 roll is less and then represents such as the above.


Rich J
Anyway when Shawn has had a good look I might put it in the files etc.

Rich


Top
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 22, 2009 4:59 am 
Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 10:10 am
Posts: 3333
Location: Ireland
Rich has some great ideas for WW2 armour... Certainly reduced survivability is a good place to start.

_________________
http://www.guildwargamers.com


Top
OfflineProfileSend private message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 22, 2009 6:00 am 
Piers when I get home I'll send you what I have done.


Top
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 22, 2009 6:03 am 
In fact I have it with me but not your address so PM me your addy


Top
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 22, 2009 6:47 am 
Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 10:10 am
Posts: 3333
Location: Ireland
RichJones wrote:
Piers when I get home I'll send you what I have done.


Already got it... Shawn sent it to me... 8)

_________________
http://www.guildwargamers.com


Top
OfflineProfileSend private message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 22, 2009 7:40 am 
Ok
Tweaked the table for 3 and 4 hits to include catastrophic damage on a 6 so:
BREW ñ vehicle instantly set on fire, all crew roll a d6, on a 6 they manage to escape, on any other roll they are KIA.
CATASTROPHIC BREW ñ round hit something, probably ammo which caused an instant internal explosion. All crew deemed KIA and if turreted the turret is blown off to the side. Any unit within 2î of the vehicle will take a 4d6 attack roll.


so what's your thoughts ?


Top
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 22, 2009 9:08 am 
AAG Co-Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 8:03 pm
Posts: 6534
Location: USA
OUCH!!

_________________
Shawn Carpenter
Game Designer, Ambush Alley Games

"I don't wanna be remembered as the guy who died because he underestimated the threat posed by a monkey."


Top
OfflineProfileSend private message
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post a new topicPost a reply Page 1 of 2   [ 16 posts ]
Go to page 1, 2  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Code Black-Bird Style by FanFanLaTuFlippe contact: fanfanlatuflippe@live.fr