The Citadel. The Russian Balance.

[Tim Niesen]

I am in preparation for playing the classic ASL scenario, the Citidel. As the Russians, with the balance, which is one fortified building. Normally, if I remember correctly, having a fortified building means one floor, and I think that is limited to the ground floor, but the balance states "completely." This seems to imply the entire building selected is fortified. Correct? I have not played this scenario for about a decade, and likely my scenario copy is from my first edition of Beyond Valor. Were there slight changes in the order of battle? I remember the isolated Germans in the Citidel as having a HMG instead of a MMG. Is this an error...likely I suppose...a faulty memory. Tim

 

[chris_olden]

Russians don't need the balance.

 

[Tim Niesen]

I have lost twice in this scenario as the Russian player. And once to a player I almost always beat. Unluckly perhaps. Never have taken the key isolated building. Perhaping losing twice is not enough to establish play balance. Tim

 

[ScottRomanowski]

Normally its given in some number of Fortified Locations, and yes, you must Fortify a building hex from the ground level up. I'd read the balance, "The Russians may completely fortify any one building of their choice." as you did, all levels of all hexes of one building.

If people think it's unbalanced pro-Russian, they should take the Russians with the balance and use it to completely fortify building 20H3.

 

[chris_olden]

The patented "Sam Belcher Defense"(RIP Sam, we miss ya!) used by the Russian player,
is as close to a "sure thing" as I've ever seen in an ASL scenario.

 

[Tim Niesen]

Maybe you folks are correct. It is too much of an advantage. Tim

 

[ScottRomanowski]

Remember, the Russians are attacking. The Germans control and can set up in 20H3. The Russians can use it to set up a strongpoint to slow down the German 1st Battalion units.

 

[ScottRomanowski]

The patented "Sam Belcher Defense"

What is that defense?

 

[chris_olden]

What is that defense?

The Russian player sets up his fortifications around the victory building.
Which, with units in them, prevents the German defenders from ever
gaining concealment, and cutting their rout choices, making it MUCH easier
for the Russians to take the victory building early in the game.
Sam used this defense when we played "The Citadel" at Wild West Fest
one year.

 

[ScottRomanowski]

Clever! Thanks @chris_olden (and Sam).

 

[Tim Niesen]

Duh, pardon my ignorance. Why would the fortifications thwart or alter German routing within the building? Why would a fortification be different than a Russian MMC or SMC?

 

[David Reinking]

Re-read his post. The Russian units stop Germans from regaining Concealment, while the Fortifications keep the Russians safer from German firepower.

 

[Tim Niesen]

Okay. That makes sense. But they are already in plus two or three building TEM. I would think that the bunkers would be better used to impede the German relief force. Tim

 

[Eagle4ty]

Mission accomplishment (VC) is your primary objective, everything else is secondary. If you are able to accomplish your primary mission in a quick & timely manner your opponent is left in a position to attempt to take back the objective. Force allocation should be predicated upon that mission (FIRST) and even your secondary dispositions should enhance your ability to accomplish that mission while at the same time preclude your opponent in interfering with your successful accomplishment.

 

[Actionjick]

Very nice. Keep your eyes on the prize.

 

[chris_olden]

Re-read his post. The Russian units stop Germans from regaining Concealment, while the Fortifications keep the Russians safer from German firepower.

The way Sam set up the Russians, the German units in the Victory building never have/gain concealment.
It was a really well thought out set up.

 

[Tim Niesen]

The Sam plan does sound interesting in particular because of large size bunkers. I am a little unclear exactly how an armored cupola functions and defends? Are they akin to a vehicle in damage status and crew survival? They Shock but are immune to Immobilization? What target size are they for the Stugs? Does their 6 firepower function in close combat against enemy infantry? How does their slow turret transverse affect their HMGs? Tim

 

[klasmalmstrom]

I saw this being played a couple of weeks ago - it is pretty easy to set up a few Russian units "around" the VC building so that all hexes/Locations are in LOS - hence no "?" for the Germans in the building. The trick in that particular playing was for the Russians to get the dr high enough to able to move enough units to assault the VC building.

 

[Tim Niesen]

Steve send me the extended footnote on them. A dug in vehicle. I will reread again, but I saw no explanation for possible crew survivial after a KIA by one of the Stugs. Not sure if a close in MG could affect the armored cupola. Perhaps with snake eyes or a dr roll of three. Tim

 

[apbills]

The Sam plan does sound interesting in particular because of large size bunkers. I am a little unclear exactly how an armored cupola functions and defends? [D9.5] Are they akin to a vehicle in damage status and crew survival? [D9.5 & D9.51] They Shock but are immune to Immobilization? [D9.5 & D9.51] What target size are they for the Stugs? [D9.53] Does their 6 firepower function in close combat against enemy infantry? [D9.51] How does their slow turret transverse affect their HMGs? [D9.5; just like an ST CMG] Tim

The SSR gives you the reference to D9.5, which covers your questions as indicated above in red. those references should answer all of your questions.