- Jan 27, 2003
- Reaction score
- Chicago, IL
Funny! Yeah, I usually take scenario titles and their historical write ups with a grain of salt. I like to read them, but seldom do the scenarios actually play out as they did historically. If they did, why play them? In this case, the scenario did play out as written. The only "debacle" I made was not seeing the situation when I prepped for the scenario. I've played scenarios where a force is hit on multiple sides before, but usually there is something in the defender's favor - attacker crossing open ground, restrictive terrain, good defensive position, good fall back positions, etc. In Teranu Meat Grinders, the Japanese must set up in palm trees with overlays covering up any obstacles. The Americans can march up with cover and mass serious firepower wherever they please - and they did! Looking back, maybe a lucky banzai charge might allow for a slight chance for a Japanese win. They can win if they have more CVP than the Americans. However, with that much firepower facing them, they'd have to be awfully lucky.
Agreed. I never buy thier stuff except a few scenario packs I picked up way back when. Having said that, though, I have had some luck with some of their earlier scenarios. Not the case this time!I try to avoid scenarios with the words CH.
As I think is everyone's preference. Once I realized the situation I was in, I gave it my best shot. I said it was fun for the Americans because how often do you get the opportunity to blow away an opponent with multiple 20+ FP shots per turn? I can't think of any off the top off my head. Did my friend enjoy it? Of course he did because this pretty much never happens in any of our games. Would we have rather played a more balanced scenario instead? Sure we would have. But like I said earlier, had we realized this would be the case, we would have skipped it.The Slaughterhouse too.
Btw I don't see how a side which has no challenge to get a win (the Americans in the evoked scenario) can have fun. I personally prefer situations where I and my opponent have reasonable chances to win a scenario.
So you won, but it didn't come easy?It Don't Come Easy [J158] Played this DASL scenario Friday with my stalwart opponent, Dave Stephens. I had the attacking Germans trying to envelope Noville in January '45. Initially the Americans are outnumbered 2-1 and no tanks but then Major Winters (10-2) comes on turn two to even the infantry struggle. I kept my three tanks alive despite the 1945 bazookas in a real nail biter. Last turn of the game I had two tanks off but not the requisite infantry (one MMC). I made it look like a run to the board edge the previous turn which caused Dave to strip some infantry out of the optional victory buildings and then I went for the buildings. I got infantry to the buildings but had to perform and survive two CC's (both 3-1) and not be ambushed as GO American Infantry was needed in two of the three victory buildings. No ambush and the Americans fail to take me out. A very close and exciting scenario by our favorite designer, Pete Shelling, who never fails to give us both exciting games.
Whatever about deliberately cleared areas, I suspect that is as much a reflection of woods with a high canopy. I have walked through some mature forests that were planted with pine and similar. Due to the sunlight blocking canopy there is little undergrowth and the trees only started to branch out at waist or chest level, often even higher. So I could see a situation where LOS is blocked from a standing position but only partly hindered at knee height.It has a SSR that makes it unique, but at the same time silly. The SSR allows units in foxhole hexes to treat the Pine Woods as hindrances instead of obstacles for LOS and LOF. It is a neat way to represent cleared fields of fire. However, the cleared fields of fire can change, which makes no reality sense; even the Americans in foxhole hexes can use the SSR to fire at the Germans, who may or may not be in foxhole hexes, in front of them.