01/08/2015 at 07:12 #28427
How do you strike a balance between a historical scenario and a balanced game? For our last Battle Group Kursk game at the Uni, I clearly went too far in the direction of balance: Tiger Ambush?01/08/2015 at 07:19 #28430kyoteblueParticipant
Nice looking Tigers !!!01/08/2015 at 09:35 #28438
Thanks Mate!01/08/2015 at 13:12 #28448Norm SParticipant
If the balka was not there and the Tigers had the more typical open ground that a Tiger company might seek, how much would that have changed the outcome.
The pinning of Tigers frontally by T-70’s with 45mm guns might on occasion be arguable (probably some generosity on my part here and probably only against a lone Tiger), but it seems that on every occasion this scenario is run under the same rules, it would bring about a similar result.
Did Tiger I battalions still have their Pz III coy’s with them at this time of the war to take care of flanks and the likes of the T-70 etc?01/08/2015 at 23:55 #28470
I think the problem was having both the balka and the turret deep dead ground at opposite ends of the table. With just one, some of the Tigers could have dealt with the flank attack whilst pulling back, thus getting more time in their ‘invulnerable’ zone, as it was, getting flanked from both sides there was nowhere to go except back off the table!
Good point about the PzIIIs as flank guards, the account suggests it was just 18 Tigers and a couple of FAOs who sprang the ambush…02/08/2015 at 04:08 #28477kyoteblueParticipant
FAO Forward Artillery Observer.02/08/2015 at 10:03 #28481
Thanks for the kind words Tim! Pinning fire is suppressive fire, very easy to apply in these rules, which if successful results in the target being ‘pinned’ rather than damaged in any way. Needs a 6D6, so fairly hard to achieve, but when you’ve got shedloads of T34s all doing it on a handful of vehicles it tends to add up. Then you can’t fire in your turn, which is frustrating! Works well overall, usually!02/08/2015 at 18:02 #28492willzParticipant
Nice looking game Sparker, as to your problem one way is to try the same game with an event card deck. Yet an other way is to tell your players they are playing one game and or period and surprise them or give different players different objectives (via sealed orders).
I did a WW2 game several years ago where a German battle group had to make a supply gap / column through a Russian encirclement. There were 4 German and 4 Russian players each side had the overall tactical objective they needed to achieve, but each player had an additional objective they wanted to achieve for personal reasons. These objectives were given to each player in sealed envelopes, it gamed very well.02/08/2015 at 21:56 #28503
Thanks William! Yes event cards a la Donald Featherstone – never tried those yet, must get around to it!03/08/2015 at 05:14 #28524
Yes that’s the general idea. Its quite clear from Col Chris Wilbeck’s analysis that the Sovs had given up on trying to frontally penetrate Tigers, but occasionally immobilised or held them up momentarily by aiming for the vision blocks, tracks etc, so as frustrating as this fire is, particularly from a 45mm!!!, I’m happy that its realistic…
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.