Panzer Grenadier Battles on November 21st:
Desert Rats #16 - The Panzers Pull Back Desert Rats #19 - The Panzers Return
Desert Rats #17 - The Tomb Of Sidi Rezegh Jungle Fighting #7 - Line Of Departure
Desert Rats #18 - A Pibroch's Skirl South Africa's War #5 - Irish Eyes
Errors? Omissions? Report them!
Beaches of Guam
Ancient Armor #1
(Attacker) Japan vs Guam (Defender)
United States (Defender)
Formations Involved
Display
Balance:



Overall balance chart for AArm001
Total
Side 1 2
Draw 0
Side 2 0
Overall Rating, 2 votes
5
4
3
2
1
3
Scenario Rank: --- of 940
Parent Game Ancient Armor
Historicity Alt-History
Date 1941-12-08
Start Time 06:00
Turn Count 20
Visibility Day
Counters 38
Net Morale 1
Net Initiative 2
Maps 2: 101, 83
Layout Dimensions 56 x 43 cm
22 x 17 in
Play Bounty 168
AAR Bounty 165
Total Plays 2
Total AARs 2
Battle Types
Amphibious Landing
Inflict Enemy Casualties
Conditions
Naval Bombardment
Randomly-drawn Aircraft
Scenario Requirements & Playability
Ancient Armor Base Game
Marianas 1944 Maps + Counters
Saipan 1944 Maps + Counters
Introduction

The Japanese landings on Guam met with brief resistance from the Insular Guard (the territory’s equivalent of the National Guard) and the small garrison of Marines. The actual fighting lasted about an hour before Governor George McMillin ordered the troops to surrender. A stronger garrison might have forced the Japanese to conduct opposed landings.

Conclusion

In the actual invasion of Guam, the Japanese landed without opposition. Japan’s “marines,” called “Special Naval Landings Forces,” did not have the same amphibious mission and training as the U.S. Marines. They might be better considered as “landing parties” – well-armed and trained - landing parties, but not intended to storm a defended beach. Unless the beach were defended.


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).
  • 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
  • River Vessels: see Rule 15.2 ~ 15.22

Display Order of Battle

Guam Order of Battle
Guam Insular Force Guard
  • Leader
Japan Order of Battle
Imperial Japanese Navy
  • Mechanized
United States Order of Battle
Army
  • Leader
  • Mechanized

Display Errata (1)

1 Errata Item
Scen 1

In this scenarios, the entrenchments and minefields should be setup four hexes or more east of the beach hexes.

(JayTownsend on 2021 Feb 12)

Display AARs (2)

Outmatched
Author Schoenwulf
Method Solo
Victor Japan
Play Date 2020-03-31
Language English
Scenario AArm001

On an early December morning in the summer of 1941-42, the quiet on the western beaches of Guam was broken by the sound of many Japanese Daihatsu landing vessels heading east toward the shore. The shore protection for the island came from the island’s only HMG unit along with a couple of infantry platoons that had entrenched just northeast of the main beach area. Further inland, there were minefields and another entrenched group of infantry. Further east, along the track, a lone American M1917 platoon stood ready to move from the village against any Japanese units attempting to skirt the minefields. Elements of the 2nd Maizuru Special Naval Landing Force (SNLF) established a beachhead on Dunggas Beach at 0630 hours with all units ashore. They surrounded the shore position and moved northeast attacking the shore entrenchment. By 0700 hour, the remaining Guamanian units from the shore position were retreating northeast, but the HMG platoon was cut off near the beach and destroyed at 0745. The Japanese then crossed the minefield and assaulting the remaining Guamanian entrenchment at the edge of the jungle. By 0830, the home-guard units retreated east from the entrenchment under heavy assault, and they were joined by an American M1917 armor platoon. By 0945, the last Guamanian infantry has been surrounded; at 1000, the lone M1917 platoon also surrendered, and the Guamanian Sergeant was sent fleeing for help.

This 20-turn scenario supposes that a slightly larger force was present on Guam to oppose the Japanese landings there in 1941. The primary objectives involve either Japanese step loss or demoralization of Guamanian units. In addition to a manpower advantage, the Japanese also benefit from both airpower and OBA on every turn. The Japanese had the initiative on every turn, often with multiple activations, which helped in their pursuit of the Guamanian units. This is the one aspect of the scenario that is a bit gamey, since the Allies can get a draw by just having a single undemoralized unit survive. Thus, an Allied player could make it a chase-and-hide scenario. On the other hand, this could be deemed somewhat historical due to the fear of Japanese retaliation if they were caught. The Japanese caught a huge break early in the scenario when the first minefield they hit was a decoy. This opened a nice gap through the mines that they exploited to overwhelm the last entrenchment. It was a slow process as the outgunned Allies managed to hang on for a number of turns, but the end appeared inevitable. All fourteen Allied steps were lost against only two lost for the Japanese, resulting in a Japanese victory.

0 Comments
You must be a registered member and logged-in to post a comment.
Ancient Armor, Scenario One: Beaches of Guam
Author JayTownsend
Method Solo
Victor Japan
Play Date 2021-02-12
Language English
Scenario AArm001

Ancient Armor, Scenario One: Beaches of Guam

A novelty scenario but the Guamanian/American player has little chance of winning this one with the victory condition as they are. I believe my similar scenario from Marianas: Scenario #11: Out of No Where, the victory conditions at least gives the Guamanian/American player a little chance. Not to compare.

My game ended on turn 12 with a complete Japanese victory. The Guam Garrison lost 3 INF steps eliminated, 2 HMG steps eliminated, both M1917 tanks steps eliminated, both the American LT and the Guam Sergeant eliminated and the remaining 7 INF steps demoralized and running into the jungle hexes of map 83. The Japanese only had two demoralized SNLF steps and one Disrupted SNLF step. The M1917 is a cool tank counter but pretty useless, kind of like the Italian L3/33s.

Wasn’t balanced but I liked playing the scenario as an exercise and getting to play with unique unit types.

0 Comments
You must be a registered member and logged-in to post a comment.
Errors? Omissions? Report them!
Page generated in 0.365 seconds.