Panzer Grenadier Battles on February 24th:
Errors? Omissions? Report them!
Battle Game 4: The Taegu Front
Counter Attack #69
(Attacker) North Korea vs United States (Defender)
Formations Involved

Overall balance chart for KWCA069
Side 1 1
Draw 0
Side 2 0
Overall Rating, 0 votes
Scenario Rank: --- of 609
Parent Game Counter Attack
Historicity Historical
Date 1950-08-12
Start Time 06:00
Turn Count 78
Visibility Day & Night
Counters 217
Net Morale 0
Net Initiative 0
Maps 3: 112, 113, 115
Layout Dimensions 56 x 43 cm
22 x 17 in
Play Bounty 212
AAR Bounty 163
Total Plays 1
Total AARs 1
Battle Types
Delaying Action
Enter & Exit
Kill Them All
River Control
Off-board Artillery
Randomly-drawn Aircraft
Scenario Requirements & Playability
Counter Attack maps + counters

Battle Game 4 consists of Scenarios 21 through 24.

At this point Gen. Walton Walker's Eighth Army was still holding the enemy off and hoping to build up more of its forces, to finally go on a general offensive. Until those forces were at hand, Walker wanted to use every possible opportunity to strike at the NKPA force. The North Koreans on the other hand had crossed the Naktong and were assembling their own forces for an attack around Taegu. The security of the perimeter, and the strategic construct MacArthur was developing, hinged on Walker's ability to hold.


If one thinks of the Pusan Perimeter as a rectangle standing on one short end, Taegu is at the upper left hand corner. Pusan, it should be noted is as far away from Taegu as one can be and still be in the same box. As a result, it seems odd for the NKPA to make a major effort to break through at that point. At least until one realizes that the best communications in the area ran from Pusan to Taegu and ultimately to Seoul. As a result, we see the repeated hammer blows by the NKPA in the Bowling Alley.

Failures in other sectors could, and did, benefit the United Nations due to the impossibility of a quick exploitation of any breakthrough by the NKPA due to the terrain. Only at Taegu could an NKPA breakthrough cause a swift collapse of the Pusan Perimeter.

Display Relevant AFV Rules

AFV Rules Pertaining to this Scenario's Order of Battle
  • Vulnerable to results on the Assault Combat Chart (7.25, 7.63, ACC), and may be attacked by Anti-Tank fire (11.2, DFT). Anti-Tank fire only affects the individual unit fired upon (7.62, 11.0).
  • AFV's are activated by tank leaders (3.2, 3.3, 5.42, 6.8). They may also be activated as part of an initial activating stack, but if activated in this way would need a tank leader in order to carry out combat movement.
  • AFV's do not block Direct Fire (10.1).
  • Full-strength AFV's with "armor efficiency" may make two anti-tank (AT) fire attacks per turn (either in their action segment or during opportunity fire) if they have AT fire values of 0 or more (11.2).
  • Each unit with an AT fire value of 2 or more may fire at targets at a distance of between 100% and 150% of its printed AT range. It does so at half its AT fire value. (11.3)
  • Efficient and non-efficient AFV's may conduct two opportunity fires per turn if using direct fire (7.44, 7.64). Units with both Direct and AT Fire values may use either type of fire in the same turn as their opportunity fire, but not both (7.22, 13.0). Units which can take opportunity fire twice per turn do not have to target the same unit both times (13.0).
  • Demoralized AFV's are not required to flee from units that do not have AT fire values (14.3).
  • Place a Wreck marker when an AFV is eliminated in a bridge or town hex (16.3).
  • AFV's do not benefit from Entrenchments (16.42).
  • AFV's may Dig In (16.2).
  • Open-top AFV's: Immune to M, M1 and M2 results on Direct and Bombardment Fire Tables, but DO take step losses from X and #X results (7.25, 7.41, 7.61, BT, DFT). If a "2X" or "3X" result is rolled, at least one of the step losses must be taken by an open-top AFV if present.
  • Closed-top AFV's: Immune to M, M1 and M2 results on Direct and Bombardment Fire Tables. Do not take step losses from Direct or Bombardment Fire. If X or #X result on Fire Table, make M morale check instead (7.25, 7.41, 7.61, BT, DFT).
  • Closed-top AFV's: Provide the +1 modifier on the Assault Table when combined with infantry. (Modifier only applies to Germans in all scenarios; Soviet Guards in scenarios taking place after 1942; Polish, US and Commonwealth in scenarios taking place after 1943.) (ACC)
  • Tank: all are closed-top and provide the +1 Assault bonus, when applicable
  • Self-Propelled Artillery: do not provide the +1 Assault bonus, even if closed-top (SB)
  • APC – Armored Personnel Carrier: These are Combat Units, but stack like Transports. They can transport personnel units or towed units. They are not counted as combat units for the +1 stacking modifier on the Direct Fire and Bombardment Tables (4.4). They may be activated by regular leaders and tank leaders (1.2, 3.34, 4.3, 5.43). They do not provide the +1 Assault bonus (ACC).

Display Order of Battle

North Korea Order of Battle
United States Order of Battle
  • Mechanized
  • Motorized

Display AARs (1)

Battle Game
Author JayTownsend
Method Solo
Victor North Korea
Play Date 2017-05-29
Language English
Scenario KWCA069

Ok, the Battle Game scenarios were added by Avalanche Press. After playing all four scenarios in this battle section there was two American victories, one North Korean victory and one draw.

The section states: A United Nations victory in this battle game requires only a single scenario victory. In addition they must keep the North Koreans from winning a major victory in at least one of Scenarios 23 and 24.

Since my only North Korean victory was a major one in scenario 23, the United Nations loses this Battle Game by a narrow margin. I won't post AARs for this, as I have already posted them individually in scenarios: 21, 22, 23 & 24.

You must be a registered member and logged-in to post a comment.
Errors? Omissions? Report them!