Honosbinda
Senior Member
Okay, so enjoying very much the OZ Bay overall, but I don't care for the allocation of machine guns, specifically MMGs and HMGs.
I've done an analysis of the amount of MGs each side can get in a refit purchases, and it's easy to get 2-3 times the number of MMGs or HMGs any DYO game would allow for the Rumanians. Buying these are an excellent value compared to simply buying regular troops in the CG. I would say that purchasing these companies is worth double the amount of an equivalent purchase of HW Platoons in Red Barricades.
In our game, my wily opponent Rumanian opponent has purchased mostly MG and Assault Engineer companies in the first couple of days. He uses the engineers in the forests, who must be approach by adjacent squads, who will get flamed and incidentally he can torch up the forest while doing so.
In the draw between the heights and elsewhere, he's got over half a dozen MGs (the amount of MGs he's got would only be allocated to about 90-110 squads in a DYO scenario, of course he has about 30 or so total). In the previous scenario, I was able to destroy 3 MMGs and 1 HMG, and I've got two others trapped in bunkers that can't get away.
I find the whole situation broadly ahistorical. I've looked at all the Lone Canuck CGs and I see that these refit purchase options are heavily favored for getting scads of MGs.
For example, in this CG [EDIT -- this illustration is from another Lone Canuck module -- DRIVE For ST. LO] it's possible to make the following purchase: combat Engineer platoon for 6, HW platoon for 3, and MG section for 2.
This would be the OB
3 x 667, 1xFT,3xDC, 2xMMG, 2x346, 3x60mm Mortar, 3x346 and 2xHMG, 2 x 346.
That's 7.5 squad equivalents (adjusting for the assault engineers) for 2xMMG 2xHMG 3x Mortar. The DC and FT allocation is okay.
a 1944 allocation from DYO measures would be 1 MMG for 6 squads, 1 HMG for 10 squads, and 1 mortar for 6 squads.
Thus in a DYO game, the Americans would get 1 MMG, 1 Mortar, 1 FT and 3-4 DC. No HMG.
It looks like George has designed these CGs [EDIT, such as Drive for St. Lo and Oz Bay] around buying troops to flesh out support weapon purchases, not buying SW to flesh out troop purchases.
I've played Oz Bay one other time and won as the Rumanians, and indeed the excessive use of Assault engineers in the woods played a part (this was before the errata correcting how forests burn between missions). It's certainly true that assault engineer purchases are abused in other CGs like RB or FB (buy as many as you can as soon as you can to use the FTs and DCs as long as you can). I don't like this ahistorical aspect of CGs either (these assets were in demand by many other formations for use in assaults and so shouldn't be automatically available, imo, even if they are expensive to buy). But in the Lone Cannuck CGs the assault engineer factor is now compounded by the ability to purchase way too many MGs.
I'm not seeing that any others have commented about this, and would welcome any input from those experienced with the module.
I've done an analysis of the amount of MGs each side can get in a refit purchases, and it's easy to get 2-3 times the number of MMGs or HMGs any DYO game would allow for the Rumanians. Buying these are an excellent value compared to simply buying regular troops in the CG. I would say that purchasing these companies is worth double the amount of an equivalent purchase of HW Platoons in Red Barricades.
In our game, my wily opponent Rumanian opponent has purchased mostly MG and Assault Engineer companies in the first couple of days. He uses the engineers in the forests, who must be approach by adjacent squads, who will get flamed and incidentally he can torch up the forest while doing so.
In the draw between the heights and elsewhere, he's got over half a dozen MGs (the amount of MGs he's got would only be allocated to about 90-110 squads in a DYO scenario, of course he has about 30 or so total). In the previous scenario, I was able to destroy 3 MMGs and 1 HMG, and I've got two others trapped in bunkers that can't get away.
I find the whole situation broadly ahistorical. I've looked at all the Lone Canuck CGs and I see that these refit purchase options are heavily favored for getting scads of MGs.
For example, in this CG [EDIT -- this illustration is from another Lone Canuck module -- DRIVE For ST. LO] it's possible to make the following purchase: combat Engineer platoon for 6, HW platoon for 3, and MG section for 2.
This would be the OB
3 x 667, 1xFT,3xDC, 2xMMG, 2x346, 3x60mm Mortar, 3x346 and 2xHMG, 2 x 346.
That's 7.5 squad equivalents (adjusting for the assault engineers) for 2xMMG 2xHMG 3x Mortar. The DC and FT allocation is okay.
a 1944 allocation from DYO measures would be 1 MMG for 6 squads, 1 HMG for 10 squads, and 1 mortar for 6 squads.
Thus in a DYO game, the Americans would get 1 MMG, 1 Mortar, 1 FT and 3-4 DC. No HMG.
It looks like George has designed these CGs [EDIT, such as Drive for St. Lo and Oz Bay] around buying troops to flesh out support weapon purchases, not buying SW to flesh out troop purchases.
I've played Oz Bay one other time and won as the Rumanians, and indeed the excessive use of Assault engineers in the woods played a part (this was before the errata correcting how forests burn between missions). It's certainly true that assault engineer purchases are abused in other CGs like RB or FB (buy as many as you can as soon as you can to use the FTs and DCs as long as you can). I don't like this ahistorical aspect of CGs either (these assets were in demand by many other formations for use in assaults and so shouldn't be automatically available, imo, even if they are expensive to buy). But in the Lone Cannuck CGs the assault engineer factor is now compounded by the ability to purchase way too many MGs.
I'm not seeing that any others have commented about this, and would welcome any input from those experienced with the module.
Last edited: