Thus far....

[Grognard Gunny]

A couple of observations from a newbie:

1) The game system is very well designed for a simplistic game. (That statement made in a relatively understated mode, in that this game COULD be made MUCH more complex.)

2) Having said that.... I'm only now getting all the rules down pat, and some of them are well beyond what I have seen before in my travels. (i.e. I'm used to the old "my turn, your turn" type of movement system, not the "my single stack, your single stack".) This precludes extremely large scenarios, say a Division vs a Division conflict.

3) I see in these forums (often) a desire to cover every contingency. THAT cannot be done.... about the best that can be done is to mimic reality but STILL make the game playable. That has been done and is best kept that way.

4) The graphics and game pieces are excellent, self explanatory and lend themselves well to those of us who are somewhat "handicapped". (That's an inside joke about those of us with arthritic hands.)

5) I like the historical aspects of the game and how it affects the movement and utilization of the units without over complicating the game.... making it a historical piece rather than "remember the rule" ordeal. Much the better!

6) If there is a flaw in the "pie", it IS because more attention is made TO the historical aspects of the individual scenarios. For a purist, this is a good thing, but makes for some very one sided scenarios (Not much fun in one on one competition.)

At any rate, you have a convert here and I hope to continue on in the games, in these forums and eventually in some Vassal competitions.

GG

[joe_oppenheimer]

A couple of observations from a newbie:

...I'm used to the old "my turn, your turn" type of movement system, not the "my single stack, your single stack"...
GG

With careful placement of leaders you can moves some pretty large forces at once. Of course that tends to fall apart after you make contact.

[Grognard Gunny]

Oh, I know all about the "...best laid plans of mice and men..." adage from the games as well as from the 'Nam.

GG

[goosebrown]

Oh, I know all about the "...best laid plans of mice and men..." adage from the games as well as from the 'Nam.

GG

Thank you for your service there GG. I appreciate that. 

So the activation rules and chaining the activation is really key as I found out playing a couple folks here. Being able to move half or more of your forces at once can be a shocker. 

Also you are right, a divisional battle here, unless it is Marines on some little tiny island would really not be fun. At that point you might also decide that the Fog of War rules are a little too strict. A few of us modify that rule to only kick in after a set number of turns, a set number of leader losses or some more complex method so that in a huge scenario, half your stuff does not get stuck not moving on most turns. I would think about that and experiment till you find what you think simulates well. 

Finally, a pitch for you to play on VASSAL. 
First, I can play with you and I would like that. 
Second and more important, you can zoom in on everything. I have bad eyes so this is literally the only way to play.
Third. I never have to clean up a game from night to night. I tend to play with two folks here one night a week each and we do a game over a couple weeks/months. 

Welcome and enjoy the games.

[Grognard Gunny]

Thanks for the sentiments, Goose. As for the Vassal..... I'll keep you in mind for when I get my feet on the ground with this system of gaming. I STILL find myself making mistakes.... I don't mind getting my butt handed to me in an honest contest but I'd hate to be the one who messes it up through my misunderstandings of the rules or some other silly mistake.

GG

[plloyd1010]

Mentoring Scenarios
Look here! 5th item from the top.
PG learning in small bites.

[goosebrown]

Thanks for the sentiments, Goose. As for the Vassal..... I'll keep you in mind for when I get my feet on the ground with this system of gaming. I STILL find myself making mistakes.... I don't mind getting my butt handed to me in an honest contest but I'd hate to be the one who messes it up through my misunderstandings of the rules or some other silly mistake.

GG

Respectfully it doesn't work that way. We mentor. I know that I don't ever approach a game wanting to win more than wanting to teach. When you are ready, let us know I can promise you good conversation at the least. 

I am new here too. Just over a year so I am still learning and being taught by my mentors every week.

[treadasaurusrex]

For what it's worth, I could not agree more with Goosebrown and plloyd1010 about how best to learn how to play this fiddly, but interesting game -- especially for those of us that have the time and also the visual & dexterity issues that most older, board gamers have! Learning to use the somewhat fussy, Vassal platform is best done with one, or more, experienced and fun-to-play with mentors.

Like learning how to play PanzerBlitz, one often learns best by playing the darn game with unpredictable & wildly innovative opponents who aren't afraid to "swim in the deep end," while learning the game system. PG-HQ contains a vast wealth of game experience recorded in the online AARs that are at one's fingertips. This makes taking that deep dive into shared play a much simpler & easier proposition. There are tactical observations & suggestions galore, as well as ways to improve the play of particular scenarios -- OR, perhaps most importantly -- insider advice as to which scenarios to avoid in either solo, or shared play mode.

Respectfully, I suggest that you consider registering your online contact information, and exploring the shared play options with the many others who are in the PG-HQ Player Finder. Many of these individuals have also indicated the scenarios that they would like to play. There are plenty of players in the same boat you are, who are learning the game by playing solo, which is an great option geared to a certain learning style. For me, that was just too sterile a way to learn a game system as immersive as PG is.

[Grognard Gunny]

Since I don't have access to the new thread line, I'll post my latest queries in this thread:

1) It seems likely, but is not specific, that while a Leader can combine fire with his own stack as well as those in the six adjacent hexes (with the appropriate combat modifier). If there is a same ranked Leader in that adjacent hex he cannot activate that stack to fire. That does not seem logical! It seems to indicate that combined fire is allowed if the adjacent hex has no leader or a subordinate leader.  (In a world full of Lts., THAT could get a bit hairy!

2) AFVs are not "protected" defensivley by their armor in Assaults, does that mean they are affected by other than just "x" on the CRT? (I woudn't think so..... but.....)

3) I thought I saw it written somewhere, but can't find it.... Only ONE stack (3 combat units) can Assault a hex, yes?

That's all I have for today. (I'm settling down into a pretty smooth application of the rules.... Finally!)

GG

[joe_oppenheimer]

Since I don't have access to the new thread line, I'll post my latest queries in this thread:

1) It seems likely, but is not specific, that while a Leader can combine fire with his own stack as well as those in the six adjacent hexes (with the appropriate combat modifier). If there is a same ranked Leader in that adjacent hex he cannot activate that stack to fire. That does not seem logical! It seems to indicate that combined fire is allowed if the adjacent hex has no leader or a subordinate leader.  (In a world full of Lts., THAT could get a bit hairy!

2) AFVs are not "protected" defensivley by their armor in Assaults, does that mean they are affected by other than just "x" on the CRT? (I woudn't think so..... but.....)

3) I thought I saw it written somewhere, but can't find it.... Only ONE stack (3 combat units) can Assault a hex, yes?

That's all I have for today. (I'm settling down into a pretty smooth application of the rules.... Finally!)

GG

1) You could have a Lt activate two adjacent stack and combine fire (assuming he has the appropriate modifier). You'd just leave the Lt in the second stack unactivated.

2) Yes, tanks are more vulnerable in assault so all combat results apply.

3) You are limited to three combat units (plus potentially three APCs) in an assault but they don't have to come from the same stack. Let's say you have a Lt in one stack and another stack adjacent to him. He could activate all the units, some could use direct fire and then three of them could enter the hex for assault.