AARs: Show Us Yer Games!

[foxbat]

That Polish armored train was very inspiring. I love how you built a great scenario around it too!

[pmskaar]

Hey Gang

Here is an AAR that I did for a game played back in January. This one is North Africa around the time of First Alamein.

Here is the link to the AAR: http://microarmor.com/pete/Micro_Armor_Game.pdf

Pete - Binpicker, Out!

[Mk 1]

Here is an AAR that I did for a game played back in January.

Great AAR Pete!

Good pics of great looking models. That low-view of the Pz3s is killer! (I'm always impressed by Thunder's camera work

Did the infantry get into the action at all?

[mluther]

Nice looking game. I really like the paint job on the large building.

BTW, do the Italians ever win in anyone's games?

Mark

[TAMMY]

Nice looking game and very good photographs.

I have a question for the Axis player. If he intended to use the wadi to turn the British flank why exit from it in front of the British left flank and not behind it? Or so it seems from the photos.

Without manouver, charging head on in the open an anti-tank line without artillery support has a discounted conclusion. And this in the desert happened more than once to both sides.

[pmskaar]

Hey Gang

Thanks very much for the comments.

Mk1: Thunder is a great photographer. The frontal shot of the Pz III's advancing is actaully my favorite of the 70 plus photographs that he took. Out of those more than 70 photographs, I managed to pull out just over 20 for the AAR. It was a difficult process to decide which ones to use and which ones to leave out.
The German infantry did not become a factor in this game since they did not have a chance to get to a dismount point where they could assault the British postions. Even if the game had gone a little longer where some German infantry at least could assault the British postions I don't think it would have made a great difference even though it would have been neat to get some infantry fighting in the game. The Italians were pretty much spent by turn 4 so that there would be little support.

Mark: Thanks very much. The building is by Leva and I had a lot of fun doing it. This was our first game using the Italians so I can't say if the Italians ever win or not. They certainly did not win this game but I'm sure scenarios could be devised to allow for that possibility.

TAMMY: Thanks very much for your comments. When I set up the game, I gave both sides a fair amount of latitude in setting up. The British set up a Valentine troop overlooking the wadi on a small rise with a clear shot down the wadi. When the Axis forces in the wadi started taking fire and started losing some armored cars that is when they left the wadi on one of the few egress routes out of the wadi right into the teeth of the waiting British. In retrospect, the wadi route was not a great way to go with the Valentines in their positions. Without the Valentines, a flanking move through the wadi may have been successful using one of the egress points behind the British positions.

Some general comments: I think the players had fun despite the lopsided result. With more experience with the artillery rules, we could have added some prep fire which may have given the Axis forces a little extra help. The German forces did not get into the fight much at all due to setting up the main tank force too far to the right. This was due to a communications breakdown between the German commander and the Overall Axis commander as to what the intent was. Some additional support from the Pz IVF1's may have been able to assist the Italians in knocking out or suppressing some of the British infantry positions.
I will be doing a Mein Panzer game for Monstercon in June 2011. If any of you guys are planning to come to the Phoenix area for that you are welcome. Monstercon is primarily a historical boardgame convention but I talked with John Kranz who runs the Consimworld Forum and he is giving me the green light to do this. I will plan on a fairly simple game since many if not all the players will be new to the rules and maybe even miniature gaming in general. Have a great day!

Pete - Binpicker, Out!

[Panzer Commander]

Just a small part of a larger battle, particularly a small fictitious town on the road to Baghdad. US reinforcements were moving through the town to Baghdad, and encountered heavy insurgent activity.

Turn 1(of the small skirmish)
US infantry, Humvees, and an M1 Abrams are moving down the main road into the town. Insurgent artillery opens up on the main road, inflicting little to no casualties.
Turn 2
US infantry engage contacts, establish perimeter around convoy while 2 M1025 Up armored humvees break contact and drive off the road.
Turn 3
Mortars begin firing, forcing units off the road. Broken off Humvees swing onto 'Street Elizabeth' and begin flanking into the town. North of town a CH-47 breaks off from a flight group to bring extra reinforcements.
Turn 4
US Area commander designates town as a priority target for any companies in the area. US forces in the surrounding area begin the drive on the town.
CH-47 arrives. 2 Humvees lost to IED. Flanking humvees destroyed by RPG fire. remaining humvee begins to flee. Infantry take positions in buildings on the outskirts of town. New objective targeted:Eliminate enemy artillery and mortars commanding the town.
Turn 5
M1 destroyed by artillery fire, M2 Bradley company arrives, begins push into the town. Insurgent casualties are reaching the hundred mark.
Turn 6
Mortar positions overrun by US forces. Artillery shelling the square, stopping all US advances. Air support requisitioned.
Turn 7
Two Super Cobras attack the hill where artillery is stationed. Artillery is suppressed, leaving the US forces to punch through the enemy forces and capture the hill and artillery. Mopping up begins.
Turn 8
Insurgent forces retaliate with mass IED attacks. Eight humvees and two strykers lost.
Turn 9
Two Little Birds are shot down by RPG fire. Crash sites secured, enemy forces repelled.
Turn 10
US forces finally secure the town.

It was long and hard. I was the Reinforcement's commander, and I nearly lost the whole group. The insurgent commander had lots of resources to throw at me. He held out well after the main road was secured.

[HKurban]

I held a small skirmish this weekend testing my new rule set "Task Force Command" for a near future WWIII campaign. The skirmish involved a battle between US and Russian forces over a Russian Air Defense battery. The game mainly tested the effectiveness of infantry with light vehicle and armor support (heaviest units in the game were BTR-80s and ZSU-23-As). If you're wondering why the US units are painted and based in desert camo, it's because eventually the US forces will be fighting Iranian troops and middle eastern insurgents while the Russians will be up against a Joint NATO Force (Joint Brit and German). I apologize for picture quality, as I'm still not used to photography at this scale, although I tried to cut any pictures that don't provide worthwhile information.

US Army WARNORD:
Human intelligence assets have indicated a possibility of a strong Russian air defense battery in the vicinity of the occupied Polish town of Ostrowo. A Recon platoon has investigated the area and confirmed this intelligence. The recon platoon identified at least one SA-2 Guideline Surface to Air Missile platform and at least two ZSU-23-A Shilka Self Propelled Anti-aircraft Guns. This air defense battery poses a serious threat to both strategic air assets and close air supports. Due to the significance of this battery, a light infantry company from the 3rd ID and a detachment from AFO Foxhound have been tasked to the area for a fast attack raid on the battery.

US Forces:
Company Command Element (HMMWV)
2 Light Infantry Rifle Platoons (HMMWV)
1 Light Infantry Weapons Platoon (5 Ton Truck)
1 Cavalry Scout Recon Platoon (HMMWV)
1 Field Medical Detachment (HMMWV Ambulance)
2 SFOD-D A Teams (Civilian vehicles)*

* The SFOD Detachment (2 teams) may infiltrate as an unknown/civilian activity marker (either together or seperate). The Detachment may also commandeer two civilian vehicles as transport to facilitate infiltration of enemy lines (unknown activity marker will be revealed as civilian vehicles rather than SF team if searched). In order to commandeer the vehicles, the SF teams must spend two turns performing no actions at the beginning of the game.

Russian WARNORD:
An Air defense battery has successfully been established at the liberated Polish Town of Ostrowo. According to intelligence estimates, the battery is well within range of NATO strategic air-lanes. Unfortunately, the secrecy of this location has been compromised. Interrogation of local Polish resistance personnel has determined that not only were the resistance fighters in contact with NATO forces, but they have alerted NATO to the presence of our battery. Security personnel have spotted NATO Scouts, possibly American, observing the anti-air battery. The garrison forces in Ostrowo have been put on high alert in preparation for an imminent NATO attack.

Russian Forces:
Company Command Element (UAZ-469)
1 Motor Rifle Platoon (BTR-80)
1 Rifle Platoon (Dismounted)
1 Motor Rifle Weapons Platoon (BTR-80)
1 Mortar Section (Dismounted)


The game took place on this GHQ terrain maker based Hex board. The Northeast end of the map is the town of Ostrowo (one of a dozen Polish towns of the same name). Russian forces occupy the eastern half of the map, while the US hold the western half. There is a small strip of "no man's land" in the middle.








-- An unlucky A-10 that got too close to the ADA Battery.

As the game began, Russian security forces spotted a small group of US Troops (A rifle team, a recon team, and a Javelin ATGM team) moving along the Northern edge of the map behind a Mountain. The Russians dispatched two BTRs to the area in the next turn and tore into the infantry squads with their 14.5mm Autocannons. The results were devastating.




The US commander brought out several HMMWVs including one with a mounted TOW to contend with the BTRs, but the Humvees' light armor was easily torn up by the high caliber BTRs. Additionally, Russian Mortars began falling on the exposed US forces. Meanwhile, across the map, US recon teams spotted heavy Russian activity along the main road: several occupied buildings.





Further South, in the large patch of woods, the Delta Force teams finally forced an unhappy old Polish couple out of their vehicle, and began their drive towards the Russian occupied town. To the North, more BTRs enter the fray and finish off the U.S. troops and vehicles spotted at the beginning of the game.



After scouting ahead the Russian occupying forces, a mass of Humvees rolled across the countryside toward the town, tearing into the Russian held buildings and inflicting massive casualties.





A recon team armed with an M82 Barret .50 cal sniper took aim and fired at one of the Russian Mortar teams hiding deep in the woods. The M82, however, only inflicted minor casualties.



The advancing Humvees take their first vehicle loss, and the passengers bail out, seeking cover in a nearby ruined building (formerly held by Russians).







The two mortar teams within range of the M82 decide to pack up and run for cover behind a low hill, while a Russian sniper team provides effective counter sniper fire against the M82 recon team.



More BTRs and their dismounted teams push through the incapacitated Americans and their destroyed vehicles in the North. Two BTRs and two rifle teams turn their attention to the South, attempting to outflank the Humvee advance, which is already starting to stall from losses.









The Russians scout ahead into the woodline in search of hidden American positions (the Russian player will get points for finding and eliminating the US Staging camp). During the search, the Russians find a 5 ton truck on the treeline. The American player quickly dismounts his teams from the 5 ton, revealing several Javelin ATGM teams and M240B LMG teams.



The Russian mortars begins falling on the newly dismounted U.S. troops, while the two BTRs tear into the Humvees. The surviving Humvees and heavy weapons teams concentrate their fire on the BTRs, knocking out both vehicles, wiping out one Russian dismount squad and severely crippling the other team.











At this point, the SF teams finally get into the fight, hopping out of a civilian vehicle and storming a Russian held cabin on the woodline. Unfortunately, by this point, the U.S. forces have suffered too many losses, and decided to pull back before losing any more men (actually the game store was closing so we had to pack up).

At the end of the firefight, the Russian anti air battery remained intact, capable of shooting down any high altitude bombers passing within radar range. The Russian player had the option to send some of his ZSUs into the firefight because of their high effectiveness against infantry, but he wisely refrained from doing so. Both sides had managed to inflict numerous casualties upon the enemy, although the vehicle attrition rate was higher on the U.S. side due to the thin skinned Humvees heading into direct combat with armored vehicles and heavily armed combattants. The Special forces teams proved of little use in the short time frame because they were out of action in the first two turns trying to commandeer a civilian vehicle. Had the game gone on longer, their C4 and infiltration ability would have proved invaluable in taking out the AA assets.

Perhaps in my next playtest I will send in a Stryker Brigade to finish the job, although by that time, the Russians will have had a chance to reinforce as well

[mluther]

here is a link to the latest East Front game we played.
The scenario involves elements of the 4 Pz Dv clearing the Orel Mtsensk Road in Oct 1941.

It was really just an excuse for me to use my 85mm AAA guns and some fall trees. the Soviets only had a chance if the German players did something stupid, which they did not.


http://www.flickr.com/photos/6mmgaming/ ... 200323116/

Mark

[pmskaar]

Hi Mark Luther

Another great AAR with pictures of your really cool terrain and minis. It looks like the game was short and sweet ..... for the Germans. I know that having run several games now, not all the games turn out to be well balanced contests hinging on the final roll of the dice. A case in point was the most recent AAR I posted here on the forum in which the game only lasted four turns before the Italians and Germans conceded defeat.

Pete - Binpicker, Out!

[RFSU]

G'day team.

Gee I have been enjoying some (all?) of the AARs on here. I have began painting my little GHQ army and have been contemplating doing a few AARs of my own as I solo play test the rules I am looking at using for my WW2 gaming. I'm afraid I am a long way off though, due to my poor modelling ability, but hopefully over the new year, (I have to do the terrain as well. Why oh why did I choose Syria, so many hills!!).

But having read the AARs on here, I have been thinking about AAR 'techniques' a little. It may be a little off topic, but while we wait for the next breathtaking debriefing, perhaps a little discussion might help pass the time before we once again get to ogle the great games being played by some of our colleagues.

What is the best approach to AARs? Obviously we all enjoy the fantastic photos, with the miniatures, the terrain and the battle effects. But what about the battle itself, where was it won and lost? What mistakes were made? What were the key points to the victory/defeat?
Many of the better AARs cover these things, but I was also interested in what approach people take.

Do you discuss the gaming system? E.g. After loosing a few squads, the platoon had to roll for moral, luckily I rolled well and they fought on.
Or do you report it as if during a real battle? Perhaps even with a little creative embellishment to add to the drama.
E.g Despite heavy losses, the platoon held the position resolutely.

I have been turning this over in my mind, not sure which is the best way to go. We are all wargamers, so the game has an interest, but then you could get a really good AAR with a bit of creativity. I have always chastened mates who have complained about poor dice rolling or luck in wargames. To me, this represents the ability of your troops, their NCOs and junior leadership (that is, any leader that is not represented by you!!) or indeed, the luck that plays such a part in real warfare.
For example, I like dice to represent those little things that you read so much about- little twists that have changed history, e.g. the Sun of Austerlitz, recon teams being compromised by goat herders, etc.Instead of rolling a 1, the only way your 88s could miss at that range and cursing the dice, perhaps your men were a little unsteady? Perhaps something unforeseen occurred creating the miss?

So when describing your battle, what is the best way to go? There are a few interesting examples above. Do you say, he needed a 6 to hit and he got it!! Or, do you say the highly skilled gunner scored a hit at long range!!

Moral to can be a good one, I like to name all my officers (in Coy level games), it makes it more personal and fun, especially if you can include historical characters. Makes you more mindful of casualties too!! E.g again, the Platoon had to roll for Moral, and passed.
OR despite heavy losses, LT Chowne rallied the men and personally led the attack...

I guess you can go a bit overboard but just a bit of food for thought while we wait for the next AAR!! Mine will be months away I fear.

[Gompel]

So when describing your battle, what is the best way to go?

LOL
I like your thinkering, but a search for the best way to make an AAR is without end I think. I mean: it's rather personal, is it not? Personally I like to read an AAR as an immersive story, but that doesn't mean I can't enjoy a AAR that is written as a game.
But for writing an AAR, that's something else! Why do you write an AAR in the first place? Is it for a militairy debriefing, to improve your games, to enjoy the comments of other people, to keep other people updated, to inspire orthers to play those games or to enjoy writing the AAR yourself? A debriefing is likely written very differently from a game report.

If I would write an AAR it would be mainly for expressing my creativity. That means that the answer to your question of 'what would be best' would be: it doesn't matter how you write an AAR, but it does matter why.

Not sure if that answers your question, but I definately think there is no 'best way'. Nice food for thought btw

[Mk 1]

MLuther: I run out of superlatives to describe how much I enjoy your AARs. I just hope you don't run out of gaming scenarios, gaming opportunities, and the patience to share your gaming with us!

Panzer C: Reads like an interesting game. Sure would love to see some pics, though. Even if you find it uncomfortable to photograph a whole game, a couple of pics interspersed with the play-by-play makes a more interesting read.

Still welcome the play-by-play. Just hunger for pics, too!

HKurban: Great AAR, and looks like it was a great game, too! Shows a lot of creativity and attention to detail in putting together the scenario. Sure do like seeing moderns having at!

Gee I have been enjoying some (all?) of the AARs on here.

Me too! Can you tell?

I have began painting my little GHQ army and have been contemplating doing a few AARs of my own as I solo play test the rules I am looking at using for my WW2 gaming. I'm afraid I am a long way off though, due to my poor modelling ability ...

Well, don't hesitate to snap a few pics of your work as you progress, and drop it into the Show Us Yer Stuff thread.

I am constantly amazed at how much my own modelling has improved since I joined this forum. Decades of figuring things out on my own never got me anywhere near what I'm now doing on a regular basis.

My terrain has improved as well. And my games have gotten better, too. Both the scenarios, and the way I run them. Not just other folks' ideas (which I regularly adopt), but also my own ideas that are stimulated by the discussions in the threads.

You've taken the first step, by posting this much. Now jump on in, show us a few models, and see how hobby-on-warp-speed feels.

... (I have to do the terrain as well. Why oh why did I choose Syria, so many hills!!).

Huh? Wha ... wait a minute! Did I read that correctly? WW2 ... Syria ...

Are we talking Vichy vs. FFL? Do tell!

What is the best approach to AARs? Obviously we all enjoy the fantastic photos, with the miniatures, the terrain and the battle effects. But what about the battle itself, where was it won and lost? What mistakes were made? What were the key points to the victory/defeat? ...

Do you discuss the gaming system? E.g. After loosing a few squads, the platoon had to roll for moral, luckily I rolled well and they fought on.
Or do you report it as if during a real battle? Perhaps even with a little creative embellishment to add to the drama.
E.g Despite heavy losses, the platoon held the position resolutely.

Can't speak for others, but for myself I often take a hybrid approach. Kind of like a TV show where the lead character occasionally turns to the camera (or audience) to make a comment or two. I think the theatrical term is "stepping out of character".

So I might make a comment about how a rule did or didn't play, but also put it into the storyline context. In your example, it might be: "After loosing so many compatriots, this platoon started to loose it's interest in continuing their attack. I discovered this on the next morale roll, where a 1 on a D10 told me just how badly they were missing the quiet barracks life, and so they turned tail and headed home."

... not sure which is the best way to go.

I agree with Gompel. I don't think there is a best way. Just try one way, and see if you like it. We are all wargamers, with an emphasis on the ...gamers. I happen to game with many vets who have seen recent combat. They are very in to the history of our games, but let's be blunt -- these guys know when it isn't a game, and so when we are sitting around the gaming table nobody takes it too seriously! I often get a little playful in setting up my scenarios. So also in my AARs I get a little playful too.

Moral to can be a good one, I like to name all my officers (in Coy level games), it makes it more personal and fun, especially if you can include historical characters.

You might see from my AARs that I tend to pidgin up the names of the gamers, to suit the side they have in the game. So I might become Comrade Markov, while my (VERY Irish) gaming buddy Capt. Moran might become Colonel Moranni of the Regio Esercito.

I guess you can go a bit overboard but just a bit of food for thought while we wait for the next AAR!! Mine will be months away I fear.

I've been overboard for so long I can't even remember what boat I was on to start with!

But I always enjoy chatting about wargames and micros. Even if I do get long-winded from time to time (to time to time to time ...)

[RFSU]

G'day MK1..
Yes I am doing the Australian campaign in Syria/Lebanon 1941. It was Commonwealth forces plus Free French vs the Vichy French and army of the Levant. I am concentrating mainly on the Australian 7th division, but the French did fight the French and indeed there was a Regiment of FFL on each side. I guess seems that I bought commonwealth and obviously French forces, there is no reason why I couldn't chuck in a bit of French vs French in my scenarios too!! The main problem is, as I said in my previous post, my appalling modelling does not lend itself to a primarily infantry force!!!

There definitely is no right or wrong way to write an AAR, I guess I was just throwing it out there for discussion while I impatiently wait for the next AAR....

I like your suggestion of the mixed method, e.g. how the dice correlates to the battle. I guess I was leaning towards the realistic approach, but as I think of it, perhaps an in depth look at the rules is not a bad idea either. How many discussions are there on which rules are best? Lots!! In fact as I write this, I have just decided that I will do my little scenario using the Panzerfaust/Ironfist Rules I have at home, then the GHQ micro armour rules and AAR them both!!![/i]

[6mmwargaming]

Interesting discussion on AARs and so good ideas. Most of my AARs suck but "practice makes perfect" or at least I hope so.

It can be hard to write them and play at the same time, as you tend to get caught up in the game and forget to keep track of the game. I like the mixed type of review as it is hard to maintain a commentary style review the whole way through.

Cheers
Kieran