[SotM] 2012 September - Prepare for Battle!

[Shad]

Hmm, I will unpack my scenario book and maps tonight for a closer look. There's no reason we can't tweak it a bit.

[campsawyer]

Do the Americans even have a chance in this one. The bridge doesn't enter until turn 72. It takes 2 turns to reach a bridge hex. With 3 engineers, there is a 50% chance of rolling a 1, so 60 turns and it's now turn 134. That's 6 turns to cross 2 boards and take a town. Am I missing something?

Looked at this one last night. It seems that there will be a small fight south of the river in the first part of the game, then building a bridge for most of the turns in the second part, with a lot of dice rolling. I believe that J6A does raise a good point.

There is the capability to cross the river for foot and motorized, but not mechanized. I am concerned that the river crossing numbers are using the old 1d6 numbers from the prior rules set rather than the 2d6 from the 3rd edition. What do others think on this?

[vince hughes]

Bin it now !

[Poor Yorek]

Have not looked at it yet, but with Engineers, can they not cross the river without a bridge ?

"Where's that confounded bridge?" Led Zeppelin

[J6A]

Do the Americans even have a chance in this one. The bridge doesn't enter until turn 72. It takes 2 turns to reach a bridge hex. With 3 engineers, there is a 50% chance of rolling a 1, so 60 turns and it's now turn 134. That's 6 turns to cross 2 boards and take a town. Am I missing something?

Looked at this one last night. It seems that there will be a small fight south of the river in the first part of the game, then building a bridge for most of the turns in the second part, with a lot of dice rolling. I believe that J6A does raise a good point.

There is the capability to cross the river for foot and motorized, but not mechanized. I am concerned that the river crossing numbers are using the old 1d6 numbers from the prior rules set rather than the 2d6 from the 3rd edition. What do others think on this?

I think they are 2d6 numbers. If the river is so deep that tanks can't cross at all, then having it be very difficult for foot makes sense. Plus, there are a ton of turns.

[J6A]

If we tweak, I think giving the engineers a success on a 1 or 2 might do it. That means about 30 turns if all 3 are there which puts the crossing at noon. The problem is that this is 3 hours ahead of history and may give the US too big of an advantage. If we said, 1 or 2, but maximum of 2 rolls per turn, that would push it to about 1430, right about historical.

[waynebaumber]

Well I was going to start this scenario, I know its a day earlier but I am away for two weeks in the middle of the month and with such a large scenario, and my other PG commitments already sorted this month, I will only be able to play this in small 3-4 hour installments.
At first glance its looks a interesting scenario but a more in depth look at it and I think its going to be a bit of a dog. Very similar in style to AK2 which Vince and I played a short time ago and we rated a 1. As to the terrain rule I can not believe that in an area the size of this scenario there were no woods of any size, this is the NW Europe not Mars.
However I will play it as per the Scenario rules and see what happens.

[Shad]

All the other unplayed Bulge scenarios have their own flaws. I think this is the best of the bunch, excepting the Bailey Bridge problem.

Because the point of SotM is fun, not self-flagellation, I propose the following tweaks:

• Bailey Bridge arrives on Turn 48
  
• a Bailey Bridge construction point is awarded for 1d6 <= 3
  

Note that only one engineer is required to be stacked with the BB. The others only need be adjacent, so you could have each platoon in their own hex, thereby minimizing the ability of Germans to interdict.

I also am assuming the other crossing numbers are for 1d6.

To review, if the BB arrives at Turn 48, reaches the nearer bridge by Turn 51, and begins building with 3 engineer platoons in range... you're looking at a repaired bridge in 20 turns on average (1.5pts per turn)... leaving you another 70 or so turns to engage the northern town and/or the heights in front depending on the German disposition.

[J6A]

I think this is too generous. The scenario notes say the advance resumed about 1500, you're making it 11 hours earlier. I think that will make it way too easy for the US. What I proposed earlier retains the historic timetable.

[Matt W]

I believe that the AARs must indicate what "variant" if at all is used for the BB during play.