VOTG - SASL CGIV - Take 2 (AAR)

Ahriman667

Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2008
Messages
360
Reaction score
243
Location
Here
Country
llCanada
Given the recent discussion on the other CGIV SASL thread about the Germans having too easy of a go, I'm going to retry this campaign as the Germans with some implementations:
  • at the beginning of ea RU RPh (after the standard Wind Change/RE roll) make a DR, provided no RE is received that turn. If a 34-41, or a 44-51 occurs, conduct that RE (EXC, ignore the Additional Reinforcements note of 36-41 and 46-51).
  • When conducting an EN Artillery Strike, and no FR units are under the FFE, when conducting the Automatic Correction DR, first place the FFE over a target unit within 3 hexes, make an accuracy dr (</= 3) and then half the DR distance if inaccurate.
  • When conducting EN Assault, place S? as per Idle Enemy as per VOTG SASL 20.41, then conduct Attacking Enemy rules on the first two rows to see what units attack. Reserves are placed as per Idle Attitude.
  • To increase the chances of a Nighttime counter-attack, when rolling 12.625 Initiative Determination, change the </= 1 to a 2 for Attack. >/= 3 means Idle.
14D Sept - German Assault

17172

As before the German assault will be broken down into 3 Kampfgruppe for ease of control.

KG1
This Kampfgruppe will secure the buildings around Communalnaya, while a lone 247 scout will secure the northern map edge. The German assault will be preceded by two aerial bombardments (hexes G5, H9), to soften up the enemy. Reinforcements in the form of Rifle Coy 3 and Stosstruppe 3 will enter from the FBE on a dr less than the current Turn.

KG2
This Kampfgruppe, with the bulk of GE forces, will attack eastwards to secure the Railway Station (Stalingrad-2 E22) and the buildings north of Rail Station Stalingrad-1, while pioneer and stosstruppe spearheads will gain control of Stalingrad-1. This building must be secured at all cost by the end of day in order to better prepare support subsequent attacks into the Nail Factory. The attack will be preceded by an aerial bombardment (G30), and will have access to OBA batteries, a 100mm+ battery (Normal Ammo) and a Nebelwerfer battery with a Full Ammo load. Rifle Coy 4 has been delayed and should be arriving at some point (a DR < the current Turn) to assist in securing the objectives.

KG3
Kampfgruppe 3 will focus their attacks on securing the south map edge, the buildings bordering Kubanskaya, and the Children's Home. A platoon of StuG G (w/ another 10-2 AL), and StuG B's will offer direct support, while they await the stosstruppe reinforcement to enter on a DR < the current Turn.

General Notes
EN/FR Parameters
  • EN AC is 3
  • EN RE is 3/4/5
  • EN SAN is 5
  • EN Boobytrap Level is B
  • FR SAN is 3
GE OoB
17173

As before, there are a total of 515 S?, 293 Hold, 222 Reserve. In pre-game activations (proximity/bombardment) 22 S? successfully activated and 19S? were Dummies.

I'll be playing through the turns faster, and only do a daily AAR as opposed to Turn based, with comments on how the amendments play out. I'll also continue to track kills by the RU sniper and CC.
 
Last edited:

BigAl737

Elder Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2011
Messages
1,393
Reaction score
1,130
Location
AK
Country
llUnited States
There’s a lot of black ? out there. Looking forward to this one!
 

Ahriman667

Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2008
Messages
360
Reaction score
243
Location
Here
Country
llCanada
SITREP #1

The commissar's in town...these are the dead ones. Five more are still alive.
17251

This has resulted in a +6 DRM on the R3 leader table.

And its only turn 3.

This run through has been weird for leaders. First I roll 2 x 10-2 AL for the StuG's (AL in general tend to be rare), then the RU gets a crapload of commissars at the expense of normal leaders. The highest normal leader for the RU is a 8-0. This is the breakdown of the leadership that the RU have (incl dead ones)
10-0 x 2 (incl one that BH on an RU RE this turn).
9-0 x 3
8+1 x 4
8-0 x 1
7-0 x 3
6+1 x 3

They also have 88 MMC that are either NKVD 628 (36.5) or 426 (51.5). Throw in a couple of 447/1x 527 and its definitely interesting. Again, its only turn 3, but at least the CVP is weighing my favour again (GE has 100 RU has 16). GE have also captured 16 VP (four more to go to win the day).

Note, that none of the proposed adjustments I implemented in the OP (artillery strike, reinforcements, local counter-attack) have occurred yet, so I can't test them out. However, one other change I've implemented is having the RU act normally if they pass their PANIC check. I.e. if they are supposed to fire and there is not target, or its long-range, then I'll move them smartly. Ditto for the RU leadership, having them run around trying to rally the plethora of broken MMC.
 

Ahriman667

Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2008
Messages
360
Reaction score
243
Location
Here
Country
llCanada
Sometimes Random drops in my favour. GE Sniper lands on a Melee, and breaks both RU MMC (ties on RS).
17255
 
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Messages
165
Reaction score
151
Location
Virginia
Country
llUnited States
It's a bit of an obscure rule, but if a sniper attack results in a tied random selection result, the sniper player chooses which target is hit - it doesn't automatically break/pin both units. (Though the sniper player gets to make a fresh result dr on the unit(s) that tied on the random selection dr to see if they are also hit - maybe you did this and didn't bother to note that following the tied RS you got a '1' for the 2nd squad, but that seems fortunate enough that you would have commented on it?)

It's just another weird ASL rule exception that the rulebook likes to throw at us, and clunky to boot since it introduces another dr. In general my take on ASL snipers is a great concept with poor execution.
 

Honosbinda

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2014
Messages
904
Reaction score
263
Location
Eastbourne Sussex UK
Country
ll
It's just another weird ASL rule exception that the rulebook likes to throw at us, and clunky to boot since it introduces another dr. In general my take on ASL snipers is a great concept with poor execution.
If that's obscure, then all rules are obscure. Heh. But more to the point, how do you think this concept should be executed in a way that would be more gratifying to the world of ASL? It's one thing to complain about a rule....
 
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Messages
165
Reaction score
151
Location
Virginia
Country
llUnited States
If that's obscure, then all rules are obscure. Heh. But more to the point, how do you think this concept should be executed in a way that would be more gratifying to the world of ASL? It's one thing to complain about a rule....
Well, for the sake of argument, not all rules are exceptions to a general case rule and embedded in a big block of text. You may well have a different standard for obscure, and that's fine, but it meets my requirement.

I don't have a fix for snipers & even if I did it wouldn't go anywhere anyway so there doesn't seem to be much point. It would be about as futile as expecting wargamers to stop complaining about rules they don't like (myself being a case in point.) I suspect fixing snipers would require completely replacing the game mechanic with something else. I can certainly go through the things I don't like about how snipers work but I worry about hijiacking this thread.
 

Honosbinda

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2014
Messages
904
Reaction score
263
Location
Eastbourne Sussex UK
Country
ll
Well, for the sake of argument, not all rules are exceptions to a general case rule and embedded in a big block of text. You may well have a different standard for obscure, and that's fine, but it meets my requirement.
I'd argue that this is not an obscure exception, just an explanation of the case of tied random selection dr. If anything, what's obscure is the last line of A14.2, which refers to two exceptions, then goes on to list rules A14.21, A14.22 and A14.23. None of these strictly seem to be exceptional, except for 14.22, non-targets -- leaving one wondering what the second exception is.

I don't have a fix for snipers & even if I did it wouldn't go anywhere anyway so there doesn't seem to be much point. It would be about as futile as expecting wargamers to stop complaining about rules they don't like (myself being a case in point.) I suspect fixing snipers would require completely replacing the game mechanic with something else. I can certainly go through the things I don't like about how snipers work but I worry about hijiacking this thread.
It's true your first remark to the thread is pertinent as it does appear the OP had neglected to take into consideration subsequent sniper effect dr in the case of random selection of two possible targets.
The overall direction of this thread has seemed to evolve into pointing out odd and brutal outcomes of random selection, so such should be accurately portrayed, I agree.

My mildly snarky comment in response to your second remark about rule weirdness/clunkiness is now clarified to your satisfaction, I hope.

WRT ASL 'sniperology' (or lack of it), you're right to point out that further discussion on the matter would be a digression and should be carried on elsewhere, if at all. cheers!
 

Ahriman667

Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2008
Messages
360
Reaction score
243
Location
Here
Country
llCanada
It's a bit of an obscure rule, but if a sniper attack results in a tied random selection result, the sniper player chooses which target is hit - it doesn't automatically break/pin both units. (Though the sniper player gets to make a fresh result dr on the unit(s) that tied on the random selection dr to see if they are also hit - maybe you did this and didn't bother to note that following the tied RS you got a '1' for the 2nd squad, but that seems fortunate enough that you would have commented on it?)
Looks like I forgot about the second Sniper check for multiple targets. Good point, thanks. FYI, I have dropped this campaign (again), hence the lack of reporting, and in fact haven't even touched ASL/SASL in a couple of months. I hope to get back into it, but will likely look at a bigger RB/RO campaign when I do...at least that is my hope.
 
Top