Entrenchments in river/bridge hexes and/or airfield hexes.

[Brett Nicholson]

I have currently begun a scenario ('South Africa's War' #1: South African Armour) where the defending player is allowed to place 3 entrenchments during intial deployment. I looked through the annotated rules and didn't see any restrictions about placing entrenchments and there aren't any mentioned in the scenario rules. My main concern is if I am allowed to place an entrenchment at the bank of the bridge would the defenders get additional defensive bonuses during the first round of an assault as there are no engineer units on either side. Meaning a total of (-4) v.s. an assault with (-2) for the entrenchment and another (-2) for being a river/bridge hex (re:rule 5.75)? I am not sure whether the bridge negates the river hex assault modifier or not. Also, the airfield hexes provide a natural (-1) modifier but if I am allowed to place an entrenchment there would the modifier jump to (-3)? A final question arises about the river. It is my first time using 'Eastern Front' maps (map in question is EF#3) and the scenario instructions do not indicate whether the river is major or minor, only mentions the bridge. In this case should I assume that the river is major since there is a bridge? There is one AAR written for this scenario but I couldn't find any answers there.

[vince hughes]

Brett,

reading the historical intro etc and seeing as it is the mouth of the Juba river, I would say it is a Major river and thats why they need the only bridge in that area as VC's.

The scenario 'Other' section on card 1 is poor not to mention what type of river this is and it should be submitted for errata by yourself. It seems strange that none of the five other plays have mentioned it. There are no crossing numbers probably because there are no ENG units, but one could argue that there are no crossing numbers because it is a Minor river. Either way, major or minor is usually clarified in the 'other' section of the scenario card.

ALL modifiers count in assault, there are no maximums. So stack em' up if they apply bud !! The -2 for the river is only in the first round though.

The bridge negates the -2 for assaulting into a major river. This -2 is for an opposed ENG crossing of a Major river hex, or if not crossing, it counts that the 'defenders' are probably lined along the bank taking easy pickings at enemy units entering the bank side on the other side of the river. Remember, assault is not always hand to hand if hardly ever. But instead, close in SMG, Grenade throwing nose-to-nose point blank fighting, with both sides trying to out-stealth the others as well as kill em'.

[Brett Nicholson]

Brett,

reading the historical intro etc and seeing as it is the mouth of the Juba river, I would say it is a Major river and thats why they need the only bridge in that area as VC's.

The scenario 'Other' section on card 1 is poor not to mention what type of river this is and it should be submitted for errata by yourself. It seems strange that none of the five other plays have mentioned it. There are no crossing numbers probably because there are no ENG units, but one could argue that there are no crossing numbers because it is a Minor river. Either way, major or minor is usually clarified in the 'other' section of the scenario card.

ALL modifiers count in assault, there are no maximums. So stack em' up if they apply bud !! The -2 for the river is only in the first round though.

The bridge negates the -2 for assaulting into a major river. This -2 is for an opposed ENG crossing of a Major river hex, or if not crossing, it counts that the 'defenders' are probably lined along the bank taking easy pickings at enemy units entering the bank side on the other side of the river. Remember, assault is not always hand to hand if hardly ever. But instead, close in SMG, Grenade throwing nose-to-nose point blank fighting, with both sides trying to out-stealth the others as well as kill em'.

I find the scenario kind of vague in areas. For instance, the South African victory conditions state that the airfield hexes must be controlled and that either the town on map three OR the bridge must also be in South African control. Well, if this is a major river and there are no ENG units then the bridge has to be taken as there is no other way across the river to the airfield. Anyway, thanks for clearing up the bridge matter in the case of assaults and glad I placed one of the entrenchments at the airfield as that is where I placed half my force. I'm on the 10th turn and the South Africans are just now in the vicinity of the bridge.This by the way has been a very fun scenario so far; Italian colonials are some of the quirkiest units with the Bande units behaving like bumbling keystone cops. The first real battle at the bridge should be interesting. With 21 turns left to go the colonials still have a shot at it. I will finish the play as counting the river as major as it would be an easy rollover if South African foot units could bypass the bridge to the other side and storm the airfield as the town on map 3 is just about secured. Thanks again Vince!

[Hugmenot]

I agree the bridge must be taken but you can lose control of it if your opponent retakes or contest it.

[Brett Nicholson]

I agree the bridge must be taken but you can lose control of it if your opponent retakes or contest it.

Well, by now the bridge entrenchment has been taken and has been reinforced with two HMG units in the rearguard while other units advance towards the airfield. The only Italian colonial units left on the east side of the bridge are some Bande but they keep getting disrupted or demoralized before they can get enough strength up to attempt another charge. Plenty of South African troops remain in the eastern town to keep the Bande at bay and far away from the bridge. 12 turns left to go and it appears the Springboks have this one wrapped up but then again it's far from over. The colonials still have 6 units of FAN entrenched and dug-in at the airfield and as long as one step is left in the airfield in the end the Italians can at least hope for a draw which would be better than any previously recorded plays. It's been so long since I've played on any non-desert maps that I've forgotten that there is a whole world of terrain out there. The thorn forests here remind me of something out of middle earth or a Tolkien book - a nice break from the normal desert grind. I am very moved to give this scenario a high rating with all it's quirks.