#51 Tank Only Scenarios

Gordon

Forum Guru
Joined
Apr 6, 2017
Messages
2,072
Reaction score
2,339
Country
llUnited States
Did the section with Toby's tips get cut-off prematurely?
 

Gordon

Forum Guru
Joined
Apr 6, 2017
Messages
2,072
Reaction score
2,339
Country
llUnited States
Oh, did I mis-hear? I thought I heard later in this episode. My bad. Regardless, excellent episode as always.
 

Tuomo

Keeper of the Funk
Joined
Feb 10, 2003
Messages
4,232
Reaction score
4,504
Location
Rock Bottom
Country
llUnited States
About that Russian platoon's motion attempt near the wall toward the end of the game - is there any penalty if not all members of the platoon can see the enemy tank that's prompting the motion attempt? I don't THINK so, but somehow it seems like a missed opportunity to add an extra drm to the rules :)
 
Last edited:

JoeArthur

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2016
Messages
983
Reaction score
918
Location
Broadstairs
Country
llUnited Kingdom
One tip I picked up from watching Craig at Blackpool was to go to the board edge with your tank and point its back to that edge. No outflanking and no rear shots. It was a Panther so no worries about a frontal attack / shot.

I thought - sneaky and good.

I should also add. I have a relative who gets away from his wife and makes a bit of extra money by moving sailing boats around the world. So - you want to sail the med but your boat is in England? You pay him to sail it to the med and then you fly out for the two weeks.

Which strikes me as odd. You buy a sailing boat and then pay someone else to sail it for you.

Good luck with that dream Dave :)
 
Last edited:

VonHutier

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2021
Messages
313
Reaction score
259
Country
llUnited Kingdom
Agree with Martin...love AFV, but don't necessarily like all AFV scenarios...the rules are complicated enough..
 

macrobo

King of Boxcars
Joined
Nov 5, 2005
Messages
1,241
Reaction score
568
Location
Geelong Melbourne
First name
Rob
Country
llAustralia
Hi All

I had a question to the Collective - Do you want another Tank analysis of a mainly Tank game - can have infantry but Tanks/ halftracks etc etc are the key to the game)
It just that it takes a bit to do and I do enjoy it but I have to:
Pick a scenario (happy for suggestions but I may not have the models so please understand)
Do prelim stuff - Models vs Rules etc etc
Get Dave and Martin to play it after that Part 1 of the Video
Then do a "What they should have done" and "What they did do" - maybe with a neutral commentator

So if you keen for more let Dave/Martin Know thru this thread (comment or like the thread) or the actual Youtube or another means - maybe a PM to Dave/Martin or me

Basically do you want more Tank stuff

Cheers

Rob :)
 

Eagle4ty

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
6,277
Reaction score
4,285
Location
Eau Claire, Wi
Country
llUnited States
Agree with Martin...love AFV, but don't necessarily like all AFV scenarios...the rules are complicated enough..
Yes a Tank only scenario in ASL really sucks as the rules for ASL were intended to portray infantry combat primarily with vehicles as an adjunct supporting role. The vehicle rules are just too bare bones to offer a reasonable tank vs tank combat on their own but would be a good starting place should one consider designing a tank only game/scenario. [EX: A PSW 222 on the move is just as vulnerable as the slow moving FT-17 on the TH chances (perhaps tie the Case C & J modifiers to a % of MP allotment as opposed to a fixed MP expenditure).]. Also the range of combat result probabilities are just way too simplified leaving out things like turret jams, MA gun destruction by enemy fire, basic ammo load reduction, etc. Whereas the current AFV rules are good enough for our current ASL combined arms scenarios, they fall FAR short of an effective rule set to be utilized for an all armor engagement scenario (or at least anyone that makes a reasonable attempt to portray actual armored combat).
 

AdrianE

Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2003
Messages
894
Reaction score
235
Location
Ottawa, Ontario
Country
llCanada
When it comes to rules challenges: its always better to look it up to be sure.

Toby took it easy on you guys, Those three tanks could have swarmed that one stug by the wall
 

The Purist

Elder Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2004
Messages
2,917
Reaction score
1,475
Location
In my castle by the sea, Trochu, AB
First name
Gerry
Country
llCanada
Counterattack at Sidi Bou Zid is the classic 'tank training" scenario. Give the new guy the Germans and the grog the Sherman tanks. This scenario has it all - black v red TH, L guns, vehicle dust (even though Dust does not exist the conditions are dry so light dust "can" occur as per F11.71), large target modifiers, Smoke Dischargers and the like.

The German roll on the map into HD positions and begin banging away. They don't need to worry about multiple hits if HD as any doubles on the TH DR will hit the hillock. If the Shermans get too close the Pz IIIs can go for DI but a turret hit shock/kill is arguable a better odds shot

Played this one 12 times back in the day and we never could get a US win. :unsure:
 
Last edited:

Doug Leslie

Elder Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2017
Messages
1,086
Reaction score
929
Location
Scotland
Country
llUnited Kingdom
Counterattack at Sidi Bou Zid is the classic 'tank training" scenario. Give the new guy the Germans and the grog the Sherman tanks. This scenario has it all - black v red TH, L guns, vehicle dust (even though Dust does not exist the conditions are dry so light dust "can" occur as per F11.71), large target modifiers, Smoke Dischargers and the like.

The German roll on the map into HD positions and begin banging away. They don't need to worry about multiple hits if HD as any doubles on the TH DR will hit the hillock. If the Shermans get too close the Pz IIIs can go for DI but a turret hit shock/kill is arguable a better odds shot

Played this one 12 times back in the day and we never could get a US win. :unsure:
I think that you have overlooked this from C3.8-

The first To Kill DR of a Multiple Hit vs a vehicle is also used to determine the location of the second hit as per 3.9. An Improbable Hit (3.6) cannot achieve Multiple Hits.
 

The Purist

Elder Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2004
Messages
2,917
Reaction score
1,475
Location
In my castle by the sea, Trochu, AB
First name
Gerry
Country
llCanada
Rule C3.8 does not contain any exceptions for HD targets. To hit a HD target the coloured die must be lower than the white die. This makes multiple hits impossible whether the target is behind a hillock, wall or HD due to height advantage. Only a CH is considered to hit the turret/upper hull of a HD target on doubles.
 

Doug Leslie

Elder Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2017
Messages
1,086
Reaction score
929
Location
Scotland
Country
llUnited Kingdom
Rule C3.8 does not contain any exceptions for HD targets. To hit a HD target the coloured die must be lower than the white die. This makes multiple hits impossible whether the target is behind a hillock, wall or HD due to height advantage. Only a CH is considered to hit the turret/upper hull of a HD target on doubles.
And there is even a Q&A to confirm that...

Presumably if the shot hits the turret of a HD target but the first TK roll produces a hull hit for the second one, the latter won't be counted?
 

Doug Leslie

Elder Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2017
Messages
1,086
Reaction score
929
Location
Scotland
Country
llUnited Kingdom
Just watched the video. The Mr and Mrs segment was hilarious as Dave discussed the "business meeting" question while his partner could be seen moving around in the background.
The BO section brought to mind a rather shameful event from my younger days when I was a keen chess player and had recently moved out of my parents' home to live in my own flat. I had decided to cook a meal which involved making a casserole of some description, the recipe for which included a clove of garlic. Unfortunately, my cooking experience at that time was rather limited and I thought that a head of garlic constituted a clove. I therefore cooked and ate a portion of a casserole that contained a whole garlic bulb. I then headed out to play a chess match for my local club.
As you can imagine, my breath smelt appalling. Garlic was oozing out of every pore of my skin. It was basically chemical warfare across the chess board and my poor opponent as well as the players on either side of me were reduced to spending much of their games considering their next move from the far end of the room!
When I told my team captain that I couldn't understand what was causing my breath to smell so bad and it came out what I had put into my evening meal, the look on his face was priceless. From then on, it was back to my parents' house for my tea.
 

Faded 8-1

Elder Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2006
Messages
1,768
Reaction score
655
Location
Ohio
First name
Mark
Country
llUnited States
Well, this was a nice surprise. Just watched this last night. First time I've watched one of my scenarios played in a video, or by players I don't personally know. :)

I'm glad you noticed my note on the Scenario Archive and used the 4 Stugs version. I really feel that 5 Stugs is too many.

Well-played by both sides, although I agree with Martin that Toby may have made a mistake by remaining in Motion with his platoon at the end. Easy to say in hindsight though, and Toby likely had his reasons for doing that (not my intention to second-guess an expert player like Toby). I'm not so sure this is a 'puzzle' scenario. I see Dave's point, and agree that small all-armor scenarios like this are a good way to refine AFV vs AFV skills. Once you have played it once, it can be set-up and played in probably an hour or so, which lets you try experiment with different tactics, different engagement ranges, whether to stop every turn or stay in Motion (or whether to have some tanks stop and others stay in Motion), whether to go for ESB, whether to chance Bog entering a Woods hex (as Dave and Martin did), and what ammo to use for the Stugs. It's quick and bloody, which is what I like about all armor scenarios. :) It's also why this scenario was easily the most in-house play-tested of my designs (and why I was disappointed when the LFT gang decided to add a Stug to the OB). I personally play-tested it ap. 25-30 times (maybe half of them by myself), trying various approaches and tactics. I didn't find a single, optimal 'solution to the puzzle', just several viable approaches (along with a few foolhardy ones).

As an example, one tactic I've tried (to both great success and abject failure) as the Russians is to break off platoon movement on the first turn in order to ESB for enough MP to take the wall and stop. Can't use ESB with a platoon, unfortunately, so it does require a NTC to break off. It's risky, but perhaps not as bad as you might think, as an immobile Russian tank is still a turreted gun platform, and the Stugs still have to get by them in order to exit. The Russians don't really HAVE to move much.
Immobilization of a Stug of course is a different matter entirely. With no turret, they suddenly become a hen in a fox den, and of course the Exit VP for that Stug becomes NA.

I hope you enjoyed the scenario as much as I did watching it. It was a real treat to see players, especially of this caliber, playing and talking about something I created two decades ago. Thanks guys!
 
Last edited:
Top