Search results

Yet another thoroughly enjoyable episode! I hope you have something special planned for #100. indy

Generally speaking, you are correct (47W10 is OG using RAW). Having said that, perhaps an erratum is in order. At the very least, scenario designers should add an SSR, for clarity if nothing else. Roll low! indy

Good morning! I don’t have the new pages, but it seems this is covered in A19.13 (ELR Replacement) and A19.132. In your example, a 648 drops to a 447 (if it fails ELR and its morale is NOT underlined). If said unit subsequently gets BH, I think it goes to a 457 (SSR notwithstanding), losing...

Agreed...fwiw, the brush and grain rules are written using almost the same verbiage. indy

I would say no, you don't roll for M8. Since / is "and/or", the SSR that says "placement in runway/road hexes is NA" seems to make it clear that pre-existing roads are not rolled for. I hope that helps (and is correct), and that you roll low! indy

The rules ARE the rules. I feel obligated to point out that the ASOP is part of the rules and specifically says “Minor transgressions should be allowed in the spirit of sportsmanship.” That’s the rule I (like to think I) play by. The rules are the rules, after all. YMMV indy

I think the intention was to ask “could the Germans set up in/adjacent to X, but not Y or Z?” My interpretation of your intent is that this would be an acceptable setup. insy

I call that "getting older" when it happens to me. And it happens with too high a frequency! ymmv. indy

Nice AAR! My regular opponent (Rob as the Germans) and I had a very similar experience. The Germans had to run through lots of residual on the final turn, but fell short. As the Greeks, I felt I would get completely overwhelmed by the Germans initially. The ability to fall back in an orderly...

This. Compare Lost Opportunities from Paratrooper with the SME version. The terrain is vastly different. IIRC, Hill said that the scenarios were designed to give players a feel of the tactical situation. His example was The Tractor Works, and he points out that the scale in the scenario is...

Only played it once, last millennium...what a blast! I was defending as the Germans, and every time I felt the damn was going to break (and that was often), the cavalry (Kavallerie?) arrived to save the day. It was a rollercoaster ride for both sides. I seem to remember that I hung on for a...

Sorry about my lack of clarity... Thanks for the replies folks, that's the way we thought it would work. indy

Ha! Love it! My friend Rob and I played it yesterday. I'm going to rate it an 8 on scenario archive. I was attacking with the evil Germans and played rather poorly, imho, so the game wasn't even close...an easy US victory. Again, I attribute this to my poor play rather than poor design...

Folks, Here's the situation: one unit is in a foxhole, one outside. You fire ITT at the hex and roll a 2. There are no hindrances or other TH modifiers. The TH number is 8. The final TH against non-foxhole guy is a 2, against foxhole guy it's a 4. Therefore the non-foxhole gets a CH. A...

Thanks Scott, That's the way we played it... We assumed that, since it is an MMP scenario, they were careful with their wording. Personally, I would have said something like "The at-start American 9-1 is fanatic. In addition, blah blah blah." Thanks again for your advice. indy

Folks, SSR 2 says "American units in the same hex as the at-start American 9-1 leader are Fanatic (A10.8)..." A strict reading says that this means the at-start American 9-1 is fanatic, as he is in the same hex as himself. Do you agree? Thanks in advance. indy

Dave and Martin, Thank you for another enjoyable episode...also, it was fab to see the crew at Double One. Regarding SM02, I was defending and had my first line at the top of the screen where Martin's second line started...that way, the US couldn't strip concealment easily on Turn 1. Rob...

Rescinded. It was on the Chapter B divider. MMP said the -1 on the chart represented the possibility of FFMO applying. Forgive me if I’ve made a mistake…this is from memory.

Exactly. Why can a 127 with a 3-8 LMG put down a firelane while a German 467 with an inherent 3-8 LMG cannot? Because the rules say so. Why is the rule the way it is? Who knows? Who cares? Perhaps it would encourage a-historical play if the rule were different. YMMV, but the rules don't...

I don't think that's correct. I think that it is possible to rout through a building if that building is ignorable: see the EXC at the end of the first paragraph of A10.51 in your quote. I hope this helps. indy