|
RPT-54 - An Italian Civil War - Part 1 Location: Madrid, Spain Date: 12 March 1937 Briefing: On March 10th, the Garibaldi Battalion (Italian Communists fighting for the Republicans) and the Black Arrows Division (Italian Fascists fighting for the Nationalists) encountered one another on the Toija-Brihuega road near Guadalajara. For the next two days, the fighting was a series of ambushes, attacks, and counter-attacks. The ebb and flow of the battle had centered around a country estate known as Ibarra Palace. On the 12th, the Garibaldi Battalion of the XII International Brigade made a final counter-attack to take Ibarra Palace from the Black Arrows. The Garibaldis were supported by Russian tanks of the International Tank Battalion and led by Captain "Pablito" (a future Marshal of the Soviet Union and winner of the "Hero of the Soviet Union" for this action). By nightfall, the palace had been retaken. In the midst of the Spanish Civil War, there was an Italian Civil War. Victory Condition: The Republicans win at Game End if there are no Good Order Nationalist MMC in buildings: sW4, sBB2, qY8, and qS9.  Republican Strategy Without a major advantage in troops, I have to take advantage of the amount of space and objectives that the defender must cover and advance quickly. I'm glad that the defender in this scenario chose to spread out so much, as the relatively short scenario and plentiful woods to cross could seriously hamper an advance when constantly threatened by shots from the enemy. I also need to make sure I don't throw away my tank, as they will be needed to deal with the Italian tankettes slated to appear later on.  Turns: 5.5 Special Rules Weather: EC is Moderate Simple Construction: All buildings are single story and ground level only. Radio Waves: All vehicles are radio-equipped. Turn 1 - Republican  The first turn of movement sees an advance on first two objective buildings, although a stupendous defensive fire kills a squad outright, and breaks another later on.  The advance phase sees units get closer to their assigned jump-off positions. Turn 1 - Nationalists  Little movement is attempted, and few shots as well. The only thing of note is breaking a squad to moved out of the stone buildings in the top-right. Turn 2 - Republicans  Many aggressive moves later, and 1 squad shorter, the Republicans make a lot of headway, crucially entering the victory building on the right and threatening the squad in the center.  Luckily, I was able to break the unit that subsequently retreated to the middle north. 2 Nationalist squads are eliminated for no loss. As well, half of the victory objectives are devoid of enemy units. Turn 2 - Nationalists  An absolutely disgusting shot from the 9-2 on the left, paired with an MMG, manage to catch the Nationalist reinforcements in the open, breaking the entire stack and wounding the leader.  A squad attempts some close combat against my tank, but neither side has an advantage. Turn 3 - Republicans  Further movement reveals that there's a lot of units in the final victory building. I don't need to kill them all, just make them lose good order, but uhh.... yeah.  Some failed CCs makes the attack a little annoying. I have to hope that the left flank isn't obliterated with point-blank fire. Turn 3 - Nationalists  The tankettes finally make a move, but will they be able to turn the tide?  And they kinda do. Some very unlucky rolls caused me to have units break while surrounded by the tankettes, causing them to be eliminated for failure to rout. Turn 4 - Republicans  More units break in the movement phase, but I'm still pushing as much as I can.  Advances and Close Combat. Turn 4 - Nationalists  The tankette moves out of harm's way, but not before breaking a squad in the open.  By the end of the turn, the far left flank is completely eliminated, but the middle is proven to be insanely stubborn. Turn 5 - Republicans  Out of desperation, I launch a tank into the building of W4.  Which doesn't go well. I believe there was an error here, as the tank was turned into a burning hunk of metal. The blaze by the vehicle is inside the building, thus the units in that hex should be required to move out. Either we didn't know/check or we played through it anyways. Game Over With 6 (maybe 5.5) squads defending a stone building, I didn't have much of a chance at breaking through considering I had no heavy weapons support. Another pair of squads broke shortly after this screenshot and I had to throw in the towel - just too few squads that had to survive too much shooting to potentially for everyone into melees (and hope I didn't lose any CCs). It was a close match, though I got the short end of the sniper rolls.
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2024 23:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 17:00 |
|
|
Oh, as a side-thing, if anyone knows a good, free, image hosting site that'd be great. IMGurs newest change makes uploaded anything take like 50 extra steps.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2024 00:00
|
|
|
 Hit a milestone tonight!
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2024 05:51
|
|
|
Jobbo (and anyone that might be reading this) - I have a question: how often do you replay scenarios? I ask this in the context of trying to learn to be a better player; having finished "Retaking Vierville" (in Retro), I've moved on to the next scenario in SK1, "War of the Rats", but I'm still thinking about to the Vierville game. Should I have concentrated the Americans all on one side, and then swept across? Could I have tried to take a more active defense instead of just sitting on the objective hexes? In War of the Rats, I mostly concentrated the German squads into big stacks for big FP, but if I was going to be crossing the main street on turn 1 anyway, whether or not Prep Fire broke the Soviets, maybe a dispersed approach would have been better? Things like that. And yet, at the same time, I also acknowledge that these scenarios are trying to slowly build up a base of knowledge. Pure squads-and-leaders only in Vierville, then you get MGs, and then it encourages the use of smoke, and later SK1 scenarios try to work with weather, and so on. And the SK packs themselves go from infantry-only in #1, to guns/ordnance in 2, to tanks in 3, to Pacific rules in 4. In that sense, I guess the other corollary is, what do you personally consider to be a "sweet spot" in terms of complexity? Do you have a preference for scenarios that run the whole gamut of game elements, or less of them? It seems like there's a lot of replayability even with just one or two scenarios, from just doing different things each time, especially with the dice rolls introducing a sense of variability (and the players trying to overcome it).
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2024 15:53
|
|
|
If there are multiple ways to attack or defend, that's a sign of a good scenario. If there's only one way to conceivably win a scenario and it becomes painfully obvious by turn 2 what that is, then the scenario needs to be adjusted or scrapped (and playtested better).
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2024 15:59
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I have a question: how often do you replay scenarios? Never, but my excuse is that I own so many scenarios that there is no need to replay any. There are many scenarios I've played so far that I would enjoy playing again, however. gradenko_2000 posted:I ask this in the context of trying to learn to be a better player; having finished "Retaking Vierville" (in Retro), I've moved on to the next scenario in SK1, "War of the Rats", but I'm still thinking about to the Vierville game. Should I have concentrated the Americans all on one side, and then swept across? Could I have tried to take a more active defense instead of just sitting on the objective hexes? There are two major factors to any ASL scenario: - The actions you choose to take - The results the dice give you Obviously, that's reductive. But the fundamental points are true - you could defend aggressively either due to terrain, your opponent, or because you have a good fire and retreat system in place. Sometimes you're validated when the dice go your way, and other times you're punished for waiting a turn too long in a hex because the dice turned against you. A complete understanding of the victory condition is required, especially as you move away from Starter Kit scenarios. gradenko_2000 posted:In War of the Rats, I mostly concentrated the German squads into big stacks for big FP, but if I was going to be crossing the main street on turn 1 anyway, whether or not Prep Fire broke the Soviets, maybe a dispersed approach would have been better? Things like that. There's also the prospect of using Opportunity Fire in some cases, or having 1 squad pop smoke in several hexes so that follow-up squads have an easier time of getting across the road. gradenko_2000 posted:In that sense, I guess the other corollary is, what do you personally consider to be a "sweet spot" in terms of complexity? Do you have a preference for scenarios that run the whole gamut of game elements, or less of them? This is a real tough question to answer. I want to say that a 1.5 or 2-board setup with about 40 squads total and a few Guns or Vehicles can be a pretty nice middle ground for complexity. You can get the same amount of complexity with some of the (special) rules on a smaller board (Deluxe is a good example of this). Once you drop down to 15 squads or fewer (maybe 20 at the most) you run into the very real problem of "every loss is catastrophic". There's something to be said about rallying troops and so on but a defense might hinge on having all 7 defending squads be active at all times. Just like how an attack needs to have a good # of units alive vice the defenders because otherwise you can't push.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2024 23:56
|
|
|
Another super important part of the ASL replayability is that scenarios are, in essence, infinitely replayable. Some games will be similar, but it is a similarity one can experience in Chess or Go as well. You might make the same moves or set up in a similar fashion, but the dice, at some point, will force a different result. You may choose a different attack, think about lesser-used rules, avoid the enemy, confront them, and so on and so on.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2024 23:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 17:00 |
|
|
I've got a lot of thread to catch up on but I'm just finding this, so god speed old friend.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2024 22:08
|
|
