So what scenarios have you played Recently?

[Jude]

Played TAC 53 Pyrrhic Victory taking it on the chin as the Germans. My friend pretty much always made the shot when he needed to - like rolling snakes on an ATR to kill or always managing to get one extra shot with that 1 ROF ART piece of his - while I always seemed to come up just a bit short. I think the dice were fair; I just needed them to come up better for me in a few critical situations (or bad for him). Ultimately, I feel I committed my forces too piecemeal and never had enough coordination to push hard for a building win or an exit victory. Most of my armor went down without taking out his in return so my attack on the village was contested by all of his infantry and most of his armor. By the end of turn 6 I felt I didn't have enough left to try for a final push either way and called it. One thing I would do next time as the Germans is group the turn 1 and turn 2 armor and make a bold push through Board 18's rolling hills on turn 3. Difficult because of the British 3 and 2 ROF AFVs but en masse, with the aid of the stuka, they might have a chance at a decent breakthrough. Couple that with the halftracks close behind and the British might be swamped with too many targets. But then again, sometimes ROF can turn back even the most wicked odds. Even though my showing was uninspired, I'd recommend it for either side.

 

[hongkongwargamer]

RAFFS RULES I lost by one lousy half CVP....the half CVP that he bought as the US player pre game.

I WAS winning until he fired at my 9-1, 467 with the HMG. NMC....the 9-1 rolls.... 12, dies of wound. Squad, breaks from the NMC, then 12 on the LLMC. 4 CVPs just...like...that.

I love ASL.....it's a cool game but it'll break your heart....

I did HORRIBLE in J183 Raff's Rules myself!

 

[JRKrejsa]

Gotta Get Out ASL HF7 American attack on my favorite French village in midwinter. The German were set to receive an attack from any of the American entry areas. I came from the south, and quickly took the RR station. After that, my attack stalled, as the mist went away and the PaK 40 held the German west flank very securely. I got rolling again, took out both J model panzer 4s, but my opponent continued to fall back to the north, occupying all the north most victory buildings. I launched everything I had in the last player turn, but was denied by a single 2-3-7 HS in S17. German victory, and a fun medium sized scenario.

 

[von Marwitz]

I did HORRIBLE in J183 Raff's Rules myself!

I have yet to play this one. Setup is done for the defending Germans.

von Marwitz

 

[dlazov]

Perry Sez are not official rulings at the same level than published errata and debriefing.

I would disagree, Perry does work for MMP and he is the official Sez on what the rules say from MMP, so if Perry Sez it must be true.

 

[von Marwitz]

I would disagree, Perry does work for MMP and he is the official Sez on what the rules say from MMP, so if Perry Sez it must be true.

For those interested, here is the link to the poll along with the discussion that came with it:

http://www.gamesquad.com/forums/index.php?threads/how-do-you-treat-q-a.124381/

von Marwitz

 

[Robin Reeve]

For those interested, on this forum, the title of the folder where people post the Perry Sez is: "The Unofficial Perry Sez Collection".
Perry Sez never were meant to be fully official.
Q.E.D.
No poll or personal opinion can change that fact - no more than they can impose house rules.
As I already said, I have a very high respect about Perry Sez and I take the immense majority of his rulings as the best interpretation lacking an official one.
But MMP and Perry himself don't present them as absolutely official answers, i.e. at the same level as published errata or debriefings.
When published errata reflect preceding Perry Sez, I then consider the ruling as official.
Especially because many of Perry's answers simply don't appear here and because GS is not an official site.

 

[von Marwitz]

For those interested, on this forum, the title of the folder where people post the Perry Sez is: "The Unofficial Perry Sez Collection".
Perry Sez never were meant to be fully official.
Q.E.D.
No poll or personal opinion can change that fact - no more than they can impose house rules.
As I already said, I have a very high respect about Perry Sez and I take the immense majority of his rulings as the best interpretation lacking an official one.
But MMP and Perry himself don't present them as absolutely official answers, i.e. at the same level as published errata or debriefings.
When published errata reflect preceding Perry Sez, I then consider the ruling as official.
Especially because many of Perry's answers simply don't appear here and because GS is not an official site.

The question in the poll was:

I treat Q&A (Perry Sez) as having equivalent force as the ASLRB.

To which 89 out of 113 (78.8%) subscribed with "Only the ASLRB and errata published on the MMP website have equivalent force of an official rule." being the other option supported by 24.

The vast majority does not necessarily claim that Q&A (Perry Sez) are "official", but they treat them so anyway.
So there is no point in your critisizing people for claiming Q&A (Perry Sez) were "official".

At the same time, it is nonsense IMHO to say that for not being "official", they are of no consequence. The fact that some of the Perry Sez do have errors does not change this. Klas' compilation of Q&A and Perry Sez now amount to 256 pages. To think that these Q&A could be free of errors is just as ridiculous as to believe the same of the ASLRB. The same way it would be ridiculous to discount all Q&A because some have errors.

von Marwitz

 

[Robin Reeve]

Don't misread me, please.
I never said that Perry Sez are of no consequence!
I simply stick to facts.
Fact is that Perry Sez are not official rulings: they are clearly spelled as unofficial ! No poll can turn that adjective to its opposite meaning.
But I appreciate the value of the Perry Sez a lot and most of them do help solve rules questions.
I certainly do take them in consideration when I have a question about the rules - and I invoke them when a question is asked in the rules section.

What I contest is that you need a poll to try to push your agenda of equating the authority of the Perry Sez with the rulebook and official published errata.
It is a quite desperate recourse, as you are not able to base your statement on facts.
You have abandoned any recourse to sound logics and you are trying to use a majority vote against facts. That is political, not logical.

My criticism only is aimed at the endeavour to create a form of parallel authority besides the rulebook and the officially published errata.
It stops when people relativise the authority of the Perry Sez source.
Which certainly doesn't mean rejecting it or despising it.
It is just saying that its degree of authority is inferior to the rulebook and to the officially published errata.
Are you able to express something else than a manichean "all or not" opinion?

I am also quite convinced that Perry and MMP are wary not to declare the Perry Sez fully official, so as to be very cautious to publish only tried and deeply checked errata.

Now, do ask MMP if the Perry Sez are as official as the rulebook and officially published errata.
If they answer positively, I will readily adapt.
Do please ask: if you are that much certain of your belief, you risk nothing.

 

[dlazov]

Personally I look at the Perry Sez in the same light as the original Q&As that we’re found in Avalon Hills ‘The General’ back in the ole days before the internet. A lot of the old AH wargames had Q&As and errata like that and were used to play the game

I believe that the Perry Sez are like that just not published in print, yet. And help folks to understand the nuances of the game. I mean how many times has folks got stuck and asked Perry, one of the officials of MMP, so that technically makes it official when Perry Sez.

 

[Robin Reeve]

I believe that the Perry Sez are like that just not published in print, yet. And help folks to understand the nuances of the game. I mean how many times has folks got stuck and asked Perry, one of the officials of MMP, so that technically makes it official when Perry Sez.

I agree with most of your statement.
Perry Sez help me a lot.
As already said, not all the answers of Perry are recorded (only those which are posted on GS) and there is a difference between Q&A and errata published in official modules or journals, and what is gleaned on GS (where only a fraction of players go to).

Now, from a practical view, I don't think that our diverging considerations make a great difference in reality: we will look up Perry Sez when stuck with a rules question and we will take his advice very seriously.
The only possible difference will be that, if a Perry Sez seems wrong, I would contest it.
I admit that the case would be extremely rare.
But I wouldn't want to submit to a Perry Sez without any critical thought.

 

[klasmalmstrom]

From: http://www.multimanpublishing.com/Support/ASLASLSK/ASLOfficialErrata/tabid/107/Default.aspx

"Official rules errata are published in issues of the ASL Journal and on the MMP website."

It seems (to me) rather clear that MMP do not consider Q&A sent into MMP and published here (or elsewhere) as "official". (There are, btw lost of Q&A that are asked/answered, but not published anywhere.)
Whether individual players treat them as such is, of course, another matter. As is e.g., whether a TD chooses to invoke them or not.


...and to stay on the thread's topic - I played The Hour Zero (J180) a couple of weeks ago.

 

[Eagle4ty]

Perhaps it's time to move this to another thread?:dontknow

 

[custardpie]

167 Breakout From Praaza from HP, quite a close game with my Finns being almost all killed as they tried to keep the road covered

Full AAR on my ASL blog

Ian

 

[von Marwitz]

What I contest is that you need a poll to try to push your agenda of equating the authority of the Perry Sez with the rulebook and official published errata.
It is a quite desperate recourse, as you are not able to base your statement on facts.
You have abandoned any recourse to sound logics and you are trying to use a majority vote against facts. That is political, not logical.

Look, Robin - I have no agenda.

The poll was created to find out how people think about it. Read its OP:

Originally Posted by Mister T
"For players, Q&A are ASL case law and are deemed to have equivalent force to the rules."
Originally Posted by Binko
"That's total BS unless they print them on their webpage or publish them along with the official errata."

Well, let's find out...
How does everyone see this?
von Marwitz

There is no pushing, and the idea that I would venture on a 'quite desperate recourse' to that effect is - with all due respect - quite ridiculous. If I understand you correctly, you seem to believe that I am on some sort of crusade. That's not the case.

What I have done it one simple thing:
To find out how everybody sees this.

And the result was that out of 113 participants so far, 89 (78.8%) chose to follow the view expressed by Mister T, while 24 (21.2%) that of Binko. Full stop.

My criticism only is aimed at the endeavour to create a form of parallel authority besides the rulebook and the officially published errata.
It stops when people relativise the authority of the Perry Sez source.
Which certainly doesn't mean rejecting it or despising it.

Once more, there is no endeavour.

If the question comes up, then it is certainly interesting for people who have not yet delved into the matter, how others see it. And this is more helpful compared to simply being presented with what they should think in the opinion of one or the other. They can follow up the arguments for and against each view. Then they themselves can make up their mind how they think about it - and not someone for them.

If you want people to think, you don't hold up a pencil and then tell them: "This is a pencil." You hold up the pencil and ask them "What is this?"

It is just saying that its degree of authority is inferior to the rulebook and to the officially published errata.
Are you able to express something else than a manichean "all or not" opinion?

In this sense and with all serenity, I can confidently leave it to the general public to conclude who is able to express something different than a manichean "all or not" opinion or not.

If anyone sees need to discuss this further, I propose using this thread.

von Marwitz

 

[Richard Weiley]

Played Head of the Mace from AP4 at the monthly Paddington Bears meeting yesterday. Unfortunately my opponent's dice were stone cold leading to an early concession. An easy win for my defending Poles.

 

[commissarmatt]

I played "Black Day in Hatten" today against David Reinking at the Austin ASL Game Day. The scenario is pretty basic in terms of terrain, units, and tactics. As the German defender, I was hoping to just hold out in the stone buildings as best I could. David had bad luck with his WP, but was good at passing morale checks. My shooting wasn't great, but I had good luck with the sniper early, which basically put a platoon out of the game for a couple of turns, and then really good luck in CC, winning much more than expected, en route to a German victory by holding 3 buildings at game end. With even luck, I think the Americans have the edge in this one due to their higher firepower; once they get up close in stone buildings they're quite intimidating.

 

[xenovin]

I played Rally Points' Got me a Tank RPT 144 as the North Koreans (NK) against Kevin's US. Interesting situation with a small NK force and a single T-34/85 holding a small village cluster with the 2 VC buildings, a NK relief force coming in from the west with 3xT-34/85s and the US set up in between with 3x Super Bazookas and a bunch of concealment counters (plus a 10-2 and a HMG). In classic Schwerpunkt style there are only 4.5 turns to get it done. The US massed against the NK relief force and held me up for the first 2 turns until VB freeze shut down two key positions allowing my guys to finally break through and unite in the VC village on Turn 3 at the cost of 2x T-34/85s. US Turn 4 they were now forced to attack through the open against the 2 VC buildings but the KW fire was too much. Afterwords we both agreed to US needed to attack the VC village early on when they had the advantage but this would require calculating out the exact minimal blocking force needed to hold up the NK attack. the US was also at a disadvantage as Mr. 10-2 and his HMG never really got into the fight marching and counter-marching against various threats. Fun scenario, interesting situation, and the slight KW terrain tweaks kept it interesting.

 

[Roy]

Jonathan Kapleau and I recently played A59 Death at Carentan in the VASLeague. Jon's Americans managed to hold of my counterattack for the victory. A full AAR is available at my blog:

https://cardboardwarrior.blog/

Thanks for reading!

 

[Jude]

Played U22 Road to Kozani Pass. Old school SL with hoary boards 2, 3, 4, and 6 - plus 13 turns! I played it when it first came out for SL but I have no recollection of it. Even though my Germans were forced to traverse boards 4 and 6 before they started to get into action, I still liked how it played out. Too often in current scenarios there isn't much time nor room to maneuver; not so in this one. So, after a long slog across the two boards, I started to make contact with the British. Their Mk. VI tanks were set up in decent positions but were no match for the German Mk. IIIs. In the last scenario I played, I didn't feel I was aggressive enough so I pushed my guys hard. By turn 3 I was investing the outskirts of the village. The British are way short on manpower and my forces began to overpower them. Once I broke the two 40L AT crews, my tanks pretty much moved with impunity. After a few more turns, I had taken out all the British armor except for one tank with a loss of only one Mk. II. The turn 6 British reinforcements were too little too late as I held key buildings in the village with serious firepower and leadership. My friend soldiered on for a couple of more turns but the writing was on the wall. The British were overcome by sheer inertia and I got a relatively easy win. I think this one is tougher on the British than the win/loss record on ROAR suggests. It was a fun scenario, though, and I'd recommend it for either side - just plan on a long day!