Albany 2016 AAR (part 2)

bo_siemsen

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2004
Messages
430
Reaction score
475
Location
Copenhagen, Denmark
Country
llDenmark
(continued)
http://www.gamesquad.com/forums/index.php?threads/albany-2016-aar-part-1.129153/

Round 4 - Hart Attack - Bret Hildebran

"There weren't no Panzerfaust in 1942"

Round 4 paired me up with Bret Hildebran. A first time opportunity for me. We both preferred to play Hart Attack. Hart Attack is a Gary Fortenberry design that we - at Scandinavian Open - were able to introduce as a "secret scenario" 3 years ago when the scenario was still unreleased. I had played it a couple of times back then and found it to be an excellent scenario. I was happy to see it in the Albany scenario list unchanged.

I bid to play the British and Bret opted for the Germans.

Bret set up a very up-front defence. He seeked to delay my attack right at the board edge. Unfortunately for Bret he had set up his forces thinking it was a 1944 scenario and that his infantry had Panzerfaust capability. Suffice to say that left his setup vulnerable.

I was able to punch a big hole at the center. Overwhelmed both squads holding the middle and pushed my infantry through the center while also diverting enough troops to harass his flanking forces as they were looking to fall back into the victory areas. On turn 2 I was able to catch another pair of squads on my left flank as he had stacked a pair of squads with a leader on the little hill. I parked one tank on top of them, encircled them with another pair of tanks and rushed up the infantry to blast away at them in advance fire and if necessary defensive fire. With that another pair of squads were eliminated and it was full court pressure on the Germans. I deployed a tank and a squad on my right flank to prevent his infantry on that flank from rushing back.

By turn 3 I had captured all the stone buildings, eliminated the AT Gun and I was pushing in on the wooden buildings area which was largely unguarded. He still had infantry on the flanks though that could potentially recapture some of the stone buildings. On turn 3 he pushed in his PZ III’s on the hill looking to fend off my onrushing infantry and tanks. It certainly did slow down the attack for a turn, but the PZ III’s hadn’t brought any APCR to the battle which made them easy targets for my remaining tanks. One PZ III was knocked out by one of my tanks and when the second one was eliminated by my 9-2 and a squad in CC it was game over and Bret conceded.

... and "Hart Attack" is still a great little scenario.

3-1


Round 5 - To the bitter end - Andrea Pagni
" Lesson to be learned – bid higher if you have a strong preference for sides."

In Round 4 I was paired with Italian Andrea Pagni. I knew Andrea had been in an ASLOK semifinal recently so I was in for a challenge. We agreed to play “To the bitter end”. A scenario that neither of us had played before. We both preferred to play the Germans. His bid of G2 won him the preferred side. I got an ATR as a balancing provision.

To make a long story short, my setup was pretty poor and he was able to chew up my infantry and the first ART Gun (the other was way out of position and never factored in the game) piecemeal before I was able to adequately reorganize my defenses. His 4 tanks were largely unopposed and I had no luck shooting at them with MG’s and the ATR until it was too late. I did manage to make a sneaky counterattack with my 9-2 leader and 2 squads sneaking into a major CC with 2 of his squads, his 9-1 leader and tank, ambushing them and killing his AE Squad and the 9-1. It was from the level 1 hill ground level of a different level building to the ground level. My withdraw was somewhat aggressive (and in hindsight a bad decision) just upstairs to fend off the remaining german infantry's approach. The squad that I didn’t attack in CC broke all my guys in prep fire and that was effectively the game.

Overall, not a great effort by me with a very poor setup. Well-deserved win for Andrea. I should definitely have bid more to get the Germans rather than trying to be clever and get them on the cheap balance wise.

3-2


Round 6 - Bedburg bite - Paul Chamberland
"Don't ... rubble ... victory buildings"

The final round of the tournament paired me up with Paul Chamberland. Paul and I had a fantastic game in 2012 when we played halfway into the night in a game of “a frosty morning” so I was only too happy to take him on again. I can’t quite remember who bid what, but I ended up playing the German defenders.

I chose to block the path into the first two victory buildings by a trio of minefields in the wooden buildings just ahead in I3, I4 and J3. The 4th and final minefield was a 2 strength AT Minefield in E6. The most obvious path for the Kangaroos should the try to drive through for the rear area. All 4 minefields worked perfectly. The AP mines in the buildings stalled his infantry attack and the AT minefield stopped the first Kangaroo and diverted the rest to go the long way around. I had my 81 mm Mortar in H6. One squad, the 8-0 and an LMG set up to run back towards the 5 point building in the rear. The rest were given the “Not one step back” order and were obligated to stand and fight in the village to limit the number of VP’s that the Brits could earn.

Much to my delight Paul decided against the head-on attack and tried to push into the village through the Row H woods and the graveyard. My Mortar and Panzerschreck both misfired on the first shot, but my infantry and the minefields never the less kept his attack at bay and it wasn’t until turn 3 that he made an impact on the victory buildings and he did that in a less than ideal way. He crashed one of his tanks into one of the victory buildings and the building was rubbled. Effectively that meant the game was over as Paul could not possibly score enough victory points after that.

We agreed to pretend that it never happened and play on. The squad inside the building promptly stepped outside and fired a Panzerfaust hitting the tank that was inside the building, then they went back inside to warm their feet and roast marshmallows next to the burning wreck. It wasn’t until the top of turn 4 that Paul was able to take control of one of the victory buildings with 2 halfsquads … only for me to recapture it in my turn 4 … I broke one of them in prep fire and killed the other in close combat. In turn 5 he was finally able to break through and take control of the first victory building with the adjacent building vacant but the brits had too few troops to get there as well. Once again the minefields were effective. The 3rd and final victory building fell in turn 6 when my remaining 2½ squad all went berserk inside a few minutes. They did not survive that. With that Paul only picked up 7 victory points in the village and he was mathematically unable to win at that point as he had also lost a Churchill.

4-2


The 4-2 record earned me a 10th place at this years’ tournament. I am very happy with that given the strong field of players. I had been unsure of myself going into the tournament as I haven’t had as many chances to play in the summer and fall as I’d like to but I found my game pretty quickly once the dice started rolling. I had a great time, it's a great tournament with a lot great people inside that room. I learned something too. Win-Win-Win.

Once again Michael and I were inspired by our Excellent Albany Adventure and we will offer a Heretical ASL Mini tournament based on Steve Pleva's rules at ASO a few months from now.

We will be back in 2018. If not sooner.
 

Eagle4ty

Forum Guru
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Messages
6,918
Reaction score
5,102
Location
Eau Claire, Wi
Country
llUnited States
Bo, there is a Q&A that relates to a similar situation with J63 when a VC building is rubbled but not intentionally. In the reply it simply states the required VP is reduced by the amount of the rubbled building. I realize that this does not specifically apply to the scenario in question, but I would guess it could apply in general fashion.
 

Jacometti

Elder Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2008
Messages
3,913
Reaction score
1,898
Location
Halifax, NS
Country
llCanada
Bo, there is a Q&A that relates to a similar situation with J63 when a VC building is rubbled but not intentionally. In the reply it simply states the required VP is reduced by the amount of the rubbled building. I realize that this does not specifically apply to the scenario in question, but I would guess it could apply in general fashion.
I think that would be a great rules change, but should apply to all VC and all scenarios.

Including that as an errata or clarification to an existing scenario is simply poor design.
 

Carln0130

Forum Guru
Joined
Mar 25, 2006
Messages
5,996
Reaction score
2,621
Location
MA
Country
llUnited States
The old "rubble the sanatorium for the win" strategy in Stumont CG's springs to mind. Whenever assigning VP to buildings or building locations, they should be worth as much rubbled as they were whole. Otherwise, you throw open the door to unwanted sleaze.
 

Jacometti

Elder Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2008
Messages
3,913
Reaction score
1,898
Location
Halifax, NS
Country
llCanada
The old "rubble the sanatorium for the win" strategy in Stumont CG's springs to mind. Whenever assigning VP to buildings or building locations, they should be worth as much rubbled as they were whole. Otherwise, you throw open the door to unwanted sleaze.
This rule should have been changed in the Version 2 Rulebook.

No one would have been upset about it, I am sure, and it would have removed a very silly and gamey element from ASL.
 

MajorDomo

DM? Chuck H2O in his face
Joined
Sep 1, 2003
Messages
3,180
Reaction score
1,033
Location
Fluid
Country
llUnited States
I agree, that would stop designers from needing to put "rubbled buildings still count for VC purposes" into every design with VC buildings.

Rich
 

bendizoid

Official ***** Dickweed
Joined
Sep 11, 2006
Messages
4,646
Reaction score
3,262
Location
Viet Nam
Country
llUnited States
I've lost to Holst because of the rubble building thing not counting.
 

wrongway149

Forum Guru
Joined
Aug 25, 2005
Messages
9,410
Reaction score
2,120
Location
Willoughby, Ohio
Country
llUnited States
I would not change it for this case. The Canadian player had the choice to run his tank into the building or not. Like all things ASL, a player must evaluate the risk prior to making the decision.

Great AAR, though!
 

'Ol Fezziwig

Repressed Dissident
Joined
Nov 18, 2004
Messages
6,642
Reaction score
730
Location
hazy fold of reality
Country
llUnited States
The old "rubble the sanatorium for the win" strategy in Stumont CG's springs to mind. Whenever assigning VP to buildings or building locations, they should be worth as much rubbled as they were whole. Otherwise, you throw open the door to unwanted sleaze.
'sleaze', the we way you say it, sounds dirty and accusatory...
 
Top