ASL-216 "CENTURIONS REVERSE!"

sunoftzu

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2005
Messages
938
Reaction score
483
Location
Taipei, Taiwan
Country
llTaiwan
Yesterday, I met Alan Smee in Taipei, where we played a scenario from the latest MMP module "Forgotten War". The scenario chosen was ASL-216 "Centurions Reverse!". Alan played the attacking (exiting) British, whilst I played the defending CVPA (Chinese). To help us both out, I jotted down some quick reference notes to make acclimatizing the new rules a little easier.

The scenario depicts a British fighting withdrawal along a mountainous valley. To win, the British need to exit 65+ VPs (from an OoB worth 109) off of the south edge, but only have 5.5 turns to do so. The British start with a small group (2 tanks, 1 (81mm) mortar carrier (which may set up with weapons removed), and 3 squads), which set up within 3 hexes of 81I6, and the main group (3 tanks, 6 APCs, 1 armored car, and 4 (walking wounded) squads), which enter along the northeast corner of the map. The Chinese defend with a group on each side of the valley road, one group (9 squads, 1 MMG, 4 leaders) setting up within 4 hexes of 83T4 (note that there is a very obvious error on the scenario card), and a second group (6 squads, 1 MMG, 3 leaders) setting up within 4 hexes of 81P10. KW Terrain (W.3) changes the Woods to Light Woods (B35), Rice Paddies to Paddy Fields (W1.2) (which in April are Irrigated), and Crags become Concealment Terrain (A12.12) and Ambush Terrain (A11.4). Mist (E3.32) is in effect, and provides a modest hindrance against fire beyond 6 hexes, but other than that, there is a serious dearth of cover in this environment !!!

To stop the British exiting, my squads are going to have to attack the vehicles in close combat. 6 of my squads (3 in each group) are Assault Engineers, I have 7 leaders to help increase the squad's CCV, and (vs Infantry) I can use HtH CC (@-1 unless entirely pinned), so my Chinese definitely enjoy a few CC advantages. I also have 6 MGs and 4 DCs with which to attack the British AFVs. With all of the exceptions afforded (6 Assault Engineers, 4 DC, and plentiful leaders), the restrictions of Infantry Platoon Movement (W7.42) is hardly felt by the Chinese at all. The lack of cover makes moving hazardous, but CVPA take step losses, so my Chinese can hopefully be resilient. I have to find a way to get into CC, as my ability to interdict is very restricted. The 2 problems for the British is (obviously) avoiding CC, and exiting the 4 (double value) Walking Wounded squads, which are never going to make it on foot, and only 1.5 of them can be BU in transport, the rest need to be Riders (D6.2), which makes them vulnerable to IFT fire (if within range).

At the start, Alan mostly ganged up on my board 81 group, which severely limited their ability to move, and I strove only to survive. If this group gets wiped out, then the APC convoy should have a pretty clear run of it behind the reverse slopes of board 81. But this meant that there was less interdiction against my board 83 group, which moved cautiously towards firstly the valley road, and later board 81. I enjoyed some pretty good MC DRs with my 81P10 group, and was eventually able to CC 2 British tanks, initially immobilizing and later eliminating both. At that point, the remaining APCs had to make a run for it, but a number of their riders bail out, and in CC, I eliminate the Oxford Carrier (along with their 247 WW passenger). On turn 4, Alan assembles his remnants for an exit, but sees that he just doesn't have enough left to work with, and we call it a day there. I don't accurately recall our start time, but would estimate a playing time of around 4 hours to that point.

Playing the scenario was great fun, as it was my first use of boards 81 and 83, my first use of the CVPA, and I got to face post-WWII AFVs !! I'm sure Alan enjoyed fielding the 4 Centurion tanks, although their limited (HE8) HE can be a bit of an issue. As far as balance goes, I feel that the CVPA need to immobilize/eliminate at least 3 AFVs, which increases to 4 when British balance is in effect, so perhaps players might like to use that as some sort of a barometer. After the game, Alan and I both wondered if the British might do best to forsake the Walking Wounded, and simply hit the gas, stay in motion, and race all AFVs off the map ASAP.

( to see some (very low quality) photos, follow the link: http://twasler.666forum.com/t40-asl-216-centurions-reverse-john-vs-alan#66 )

John.
 
Last edited:

JRKrejsa

Elder Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2005
Messages
3,667
Reaction score
1,094
Location
USA
Country
llUnited States
Nice write up. Ours was a British win, but not without some stress. The Centurions are ill suited to this, I bet the “L” version would be better.

What is the error on the scenario card?
 

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
19,778
Reaction score
7,201
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
Nice write up. Ours was a British win, but not without some stress. The Centurions are ill suited to this, I bet the “L” version would be better.
Yes, the British in Korea came to the same conclusion...from the Vehilce Note:
"...After the experience fighting the Chinese at the Imjin River in April 1951, the Centurion Mk III was re-equipped with more HE ammunition and less APDS, as well as with searchlights and an AAMG (sometimes a .50-cal, although more often a .30-cal Browning)...."


What is the error on the scenario card?
The set up instructions for the first CPVA OB group says:
"Set up on board 83, on/south of hexrow S, ≤ 4 hexes from 81T4:" - "81T4" should be "83T4".
 

Gunner Scott

Forum Guru
Joined
Jan 27, 2003
Messages
13,737
Reaction score
2,669
Location
Chicago, IL
Country
llUnited States
Played this one yesterday and was completely flummoxed on either side wins. It just struck me a very heavily scripted scenario. The Brits try to ram through the Chi Coms, One group of Chi Coms try to block the Brit force coming on board while the other group tries to engage the rear guard. In both cases the Chi Coms were blown away by the Brit fire power. The scenario really was not much fun to play, it just felt like you really had no choices in both defense and offense.
 

Mr Incredible

Rod loves red undies
Joined
Oct 26, 2004
Messages
2,496
Reaction score
386
Location
Perth, Australia
Country
llAustralia
Currently playing it and all my Centurions are out of HE and their CMGs all malfed. Mind you the Chinese sniper has gone bonkers and killed 3 leaders and recalled a Centurion.

Chicoms having full picking off the carriers with theirs MGs and knocking their riders off.

Looking a close cut thing ATM into Turn 3.

These early war Centurions are pretty useless against infantry, even with their CMGs.
 

JRKrejsa

Elder Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2005
Messages
3,667
Reaction score
1,094
Location
USA
Country
llUnited States
I kept the infantry close to the Centurions, especially the ht with a squad LMG and a negative modifier leader. The Cromwell led the column.

After the HE is gone, no reason for the Centurions to stay CE.
 

Conall

Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
8
Reaction score
36
Location
UK
Country
ll
Yes, the British in Korea came to the same conclusion...from the Vehilce Note:
"...After the experience fighting the Chinese at the Imjin River in April 1951, the Centurion Mk III was re-equipped with more HE ammunition and less APDS, as well as with searchlights and an AAMG (sometimes a .50-cal, although more often a .30-cal Browning)...."
They also concluded that APDS didn’t have a sufficiently destructive behind armour effect and added APCBC back to the combat load as well. I think this decision was, however, reversed after examining a T-54 purloined during the Hungarian uprising in 1956.
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,206
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
By my count, 110 EVP

unitcountperitem total
On-board
4-5-8326
9-1122
8-0111
9-1 al122
Centurion2816
Carrier 3”177
Enter
4-5-74416
9-1122
8-1122
8-1 al122
Centurion2816
Cromwell177
Carrier C4520
M9122
Daimler155
Oxford144
Grand total110

I have calculated this with many different results. This is my latest.

edit: left out 8-1 AL
edit: carrier halfsquad crews are worth 2 VP when inherent [A26.213].

JR
 
Last edited:

Juzek

Steve Kyle
Joined
Sep 1, 2012
Messages
383
Reaction score
145
Location
Yardley, PA
Country
llUnited States
Centurion2816Cromwell177Carrier C4416M9122Daimler155Oxford144
By my count, 106 EVP

unitcountperitem total
Centurion2816
Cromwell177
Carrier C4416
M9122
Daimler155
Oxford144
Grand total106

I have calculated this with many different results. This is my latest.

edit: left out 8-1 AL

JR
I get 6 CVP for the Cromwell - 1 Veh +1 MA+2 AF (8) +2 CS
5 for Carrier C - 1 Veh +1 MA+1 AF (0) +2 CS

What am I missing?
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,206
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
I get 6 CVP for the Cromwell - 1 Veh +1 MA+2 AF (8) +2 CS
5 for Carrier C - 1 Veh +1 MA+1 AF (0) +2 CS
The Carrier C has a halfsquad "crew," which I believe makes it worth one point.

The Cromwell has a box 8 AF, i.e. the turret is 11 AF.

edit: the Carrier C halfsquad is worth two CVP/EVP when inherent [A26.213]

JR
 

jrv

Forum Guru
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
21,998
Reaction score
6,206
Location
Teutoburger Wald
Country
llIceland
I'm sure I've missed this before, that the box AF might increase the CVP value. Very sneaky, rulebook, very sneaky.
I looked for the CVP/EVP of the Carrier halfsquads, but of course I looked in the Carrier rules and A26.211. I have added a cross-reference. As you probably have seen, total now stands at 110 EVP. I am hoping it won't change again.

JR
 
Top