AAR - Blood On The Tracks - RO1

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
20,094
Reaction score
4,481
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
What about removing the hexrow K clause?
When I gave my thoughts on this above, I was still thinking in terms of the original VC. If the Soviets can't win by holding on to J32, they don't need to make it such a strongpoint. That means that the mines and the wire can move back to the wall and the fortified building hexes can also come back behind the wall. It would be useful to hold J32 for a while to delay the time until the Germans can build super kill stacks, but it need not be held with every resource that can be mustered.

JR
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
20,094
Reaction score
4,481
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
My opponent in this just suggested that altering the VC from both taking a building east of M *and* evicting the Soviets from west of K to either taking a building east of M *or* evicting the Soviets from west of K might change this into something close to balanced without making major changes to the OB and/or the length of the game. It's an interesting thought.

JR
 

Ganjulama

Tuco B.P.J. Maria Ramirez
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Messages
1,962
Reaction score
547
Location
Wilmington, NC
Country
llUnited States
My opponent in this just suggested that altering the VC from both taking a building east of M *and* evicting the Soviets from west of K to either taking a building east of M *or* evicting the Soviets from west of K might change this into something close to balanced without making major changes to the OB and/or the length of the game. It's an interesting thought.

JR
Make you wonder if there is a misprint on the VC....I'm getting my copy of RF on Saturday. Making the haj to the Gamers Armory
 

Justiciar

Elder Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2008
Messages
4,747
Reaction score
1,338
Location
Within Range
Country
llUnited States
The current "provided" clause seems to jam that...how MMP might* have added that from some earlier version which hand an OR option seems hard to grasp....though one might construct such an option different hexrow perhaps...

The above aside*, such a revised VC on the OR grounds is a plausible start...along with the other clarifications I asked about in the Errata section...

 

Perry

Elder Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2003
Messages
1,309
Reaction score
947
Location
Baltimore, MD
Country
llUnited States
My opponent in this just suggested that altering the VC from both taking a building east of M *and* evicting the Soviets from west of K to either taking a building east of M *or* evicting the Soviets from west of K might change this into something close to balanced without making major changes to the OB and/or the length of the game. It's an interesting thought.

JR
Funny you should mention that.

The discussion of this being so unbalanced prompted us (thanks, Klas) to go back and review the scenario's development.

We discovered that in converting the VC from in terms of what the defender's goals are to the attacker's goals, we DID mess up the VC.

The VC should read:

VICTORY CONDITIONS: The Germans win at game end if there are no Good Order Russian MMC on/west-of hexrow K and/or by Controlling ≥ 1 building on/east-of hexrow M.

We hope this errata balances up the scenario, but at least it restores the scenario to the designers's intent.

Thanks to y'all for continuing to explore this situation, and our apologies for messing this up.

Please someone post this in the Errata folder.

Thanks.
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
20,094
Reaction score
4,481
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
A group of us had an e-mail discussion. Some are of the opinion that even with the VC fixed the scenario is still pro-Soviet. I will say that even if it is, it is not so pro-Soviet as it was with the wrong VC. The jist of the claim is that the only VC building it is practical to take for the building control VC is Hall 5a; most of the others are too big and/or too far away. Link the J32 building (for clearing west of hexrow K VC) and Hall 5a with two tunnels, and which ever the German looks like he is pushing toward, switch masses of troops that way. It is a plausible argument.

As a side note, I just realized that you can move up to three squads at a time through a tunnel (or six if you move in both directions). I had always moved units one-at-a-time, or perhaps a squad and a leader, and it never occurred to me to think about moving more because generally that's all I had to move.

JR
 

'Ol Fezziwig

Repressed Dissident
Joined
Nov 18, 2004
Messages
6,605
Reaction score
363
Location
hazy fold of reality
Country
llUnited States
...and Hall 5a with two tunnels, and which ever the German looks like he is pushing toward, switch masses of troops that way.
JR
Still, the revised VC maintain a straight line to the scenario intro. I think the German would be wise to at least maintain a building grab posture to hopefully fix something of the Russian defense in place, but, more importantly, should also advance in such a way so as to be able to view any potential tunnel usage in or out of J32 so they can destroy the entrance. (Or, I suppose more correctly, possess) preventing the late scenario tunnel flood.
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
20,094
Reaction score
4,481
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
Still, the revised VC maintain a straight line to the scenario intro. I think the German would be wise to at least maintain a building grab posture to hopefully fix something of the Russian defense in place, but, more importantly, should also advance in such a way so as to be able to view any potential tunnel usage in or out of J32 so they can destroy the entrance. (Or, I suppose more correctly, possess) preventing the late scenario tunnel flood.
The tunnel probably won't be used until very late in the game, just as one or the other of the buildings is about to fall. Once they use the tunnels, the Soviets probably aren't going to use them again. Possessing an entrance (and in fact the rules speak of recovery, but they don't use the term, "possession") is of no value, except to allow you to destroy it. After it has been discovered but not destroyed it can still be used. It can't be destroyed until the end of the CCPh, and then only if the Location does not contain Known enemy units. I don't think the Germans are going to be in a position to recover and destroy the tunnel in this scenario. The entrance in the J32 building will be in the cellar, so the location will be fortified. If the Soviets can clear one or the other cellar, the Germans will probably have to clean them out with firepower, because they can't rely on being able to Advance in.

JR
 
Last edited:

Ganjulama

Tuco B.P.J. Maria Ramirez
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Messages
1,962
Reaction score
547
Location
Wilmington, NC
Country
llUnited States
VICTORY CONDITIONS: The Germans win at game end if there are no Good Order Russian MMC on/west-of hexrow K and/or by Controlling ≥ 1 building on/east-of hexrow M.

Please someone post this in the Errata folder.

Thanks.
@Jazz
 
Top