AARs: Show Us Yer Games!

This is a general forum for all types of posts related to Military models.

Moderators: dnichols, GHQ, Mk 1

Post Reply
Mk 1
E5
Posts: 2383
Joined: Fri Dec 24, 2004 3:21 am
Location: Silicon Valley, CA

Re: Show Us Your Games

Post by Mk 1 »

pmskaar wrote: When the forces get larger and combined arms are in effect it helps if at least 2 players know the rules really well to keep things moving. This is probably true of most games.

One thing I learned from hosting many games of Mein Panzer is that I need to study the rules really well before the game and maybe even make a couple of "Cheat Sheets" that have any new rules and procedures to help speed up play. It also helps grealy to have all the necessary player aids ready as well.
Geez Pete, if you keep posting things like that, people are going to start thinking of you as clear-headed and insightful! I don't know of any good that can come from that reputation. :roll:

Yes, I think you are quite right. I too have found that doing some homework in advance helps the game to play much better.

I have had several of my games bog down as I scrambled to find, read, and understand the rules on some particular topic. I should have done that pre-game! Play-testing one or two rounds of the unfamiliar rules solitare a day or two before would have made the game SO much simpler.

So also I have seen games run smoother when I put the stats for the units for each player on a player's sheet pre-game.

These ideas are not the sole domain of the extra-smart. But somehow they seem to be lessons that I need to learn and re-learn. I spend so much time researching my scenarios, writing up unit orders and player briefings, and building my terrain, and I forget to do the things that actually help the game play better! If only I could find some clear-headed and insightful guys to game with. :wink:
-Mark 1
Difficile est, saturam non scribere.
"It is hard NOT to write satire." - Decimus Iunius Juvenalis, 1st Century AD

pmskaar
E5
Posts: 2207
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2005 5:45 am

Show Us Your Games

Post by pmskaar »

Mark

I have discovered this the hard way. Everytime I plan a game I always try to have a good game. I don't think I ever try to have a bad game. That having been said, sometimes certain elements of preparation are lacking such as gaining a thorough knowledge of the new rules to be added and trying them out in a solitaire setting or even getting a couple of the guys together to go through the new rules in a relaxed setting before the big game.
As you have described it yourself, in the past, I have spent weeks painting miniatures, doing up new terrain, creating and writing a really interesting scenario and then doing some last minute glancing trough the rules hoping that I will somehow remember them in the heat of battle.
I will try to take my own advice and spend more time in studying and working through the rules - this applies to any game by the way. I have been busy the last several months with a lot of things but am now looking to do another big game at Outpost. Before I do that I will see what rules we will use, study them, do an exercise or maybe even a small friendly game with a couple of the regular guys to make sure we all understand them, and then do up any additional charts, cheat sheets, or markers to ensure a smooth and enjoyable game.

Pete - Binpicker, Out!

ACWBill
E5
Posts: 667
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 10:33 pm
Location: Buford, GA
Contact:

Prairie Grove

Post by ACWBill »

I ran a scenario for the battle of Prairie Grove AR in 10mm at HMGS South Recon. I used Regimental Fire & Fury. The battle took place on December 7, 1862. My version took place last weekend. Here is a short AAR with PIcs.

The CS army was under the command of Thomas Hindman. Their positions on the ridge were formidable and the Yanks were outnumbered. Historically, the troops remained on the ridge most of the day repelling several attacks by the Union General Francis Herron.

Image

Yanks under Herron advanced on the CS right/US Left with limited success.

Image

Completly contrary to historical outcomes, Confederate Artillery duelled and bested the Yankee Artillery by grouping their bombardment and firing accurately. They patiently reduced each Federal battery by two or three sections each turn.

Image

Image

After several turns of exchanging fire and weakening the US batteries, the Confederate brigades of Parsons, Shaver and Roane advanced off the ridge.

Image

Image

The outnumbered Yanks were forced to begin a withdrawal and re-direct their remaining batteries to defend against the steady CS advance.

Image

The attack continued and eventually forced the Yanks into the northeast corner of the board.

Image

Image

Reinforcements in the form of James Blunt's Kansas Division arrived on the northwest side to awaiting Rebel infantry. The Confederates aggressive strategy split the Federal Army in half and won an easy victory.

Image

The rules are fun to play and fast to learn. The scenario is one of my favorites. I will be pubishing the scenario along with a nice long article on the terrain and complete AAR in a future issue of Wargames Illustrated. I hope you enjoyed the short AAR.
"I was worse scared than I was at Shiloh" - Sam Watkins
Perryville, KY - October 8, 1862

BattlerBritain
E5
Posts: 628
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2005 7:00 pm
Location: Somerset, UK

Post by BattlerBritain »

Wow! That looks a really great game there ACWBill.

Look forward to seeing that article.

How did you find the Regimental Fire and Fury rules?

I've played the old Fire and Fury rules and found them OK, and played a lot of the WWII Battlefront rules. In fact there's been discussion over at the WW2 Battlefront forums recently of using the Regimental F+F Morale rules for the WW2 system.

So I'd be interested to hear any feedback you have on them.

Also, be really great if you could post this AAR (or a link to it) up on the Regimental Fire and Fury forum?

Many Thanks,

Battler

ACWBill
E5
Posts: 667
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 10:33 pm
Location: Buford, GA
Contact:

Regimental F & F

Post by ACWBill »

How did you find the Regimental Fire and Fury rules?

I've played the old Fire and Fury rules and found them OK, and played a lot of the WWII Battlefront rules. In fact there's been discussion over at the WW2 Battlefront forums recently of using the Regimental F+F Morale rules for the WW2 system.

So I'd be interested to hear any feedback you have on them.
The rules are more detailed than Basic Original Fire & Fury (BOFF) while keeping the same basic mechaniques. There are some real, and needed differences in the fire tables to account for various weapons and gun types.

Another fundamental difference is that two disorders = lifting a stand. Also, changes occuring during fire phase go into effect immediately (yes, during the ensuing melee phase) and charges may be checked by fire. I am very fond of both rules sets and have written many scenarios for both. I reccommend them highly.
"I was worse scared than I was at Shiloh" - Sam Watkins
Perryville, KY - October 8, 1862

pmskaar
E5
Posts: 2207
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2005 5:45 am

Show Us Your Games

Post by pmskaar »

Hi Bill

That is a great looking game. I am interested to know how you made the fields but everything looks superb. Excellent job, Bill!

I had the opportunity to visit Prairie Grove almost 3 years ago with my grandson. My Son-in-Law is from Russleville, Arkansas and my oldest daughter, Elena, and he were getting married in Eureka Springs. I was there to walk Elena down the aisle but had a couple of days to spend in the Fayetteville area. We spent one day at Prairie Grove and one day at Pea Ridge. Pea Ridge was actually my first Civil War battlefield excursion which I made in 1972 and revisted in 2008. I had a great time.

Pete - Binpicker, Out!

ACWBill
E5
Posts: 667
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 10:33 pm
Location: Buford, GA
Contact:

Prairie Grove

Post by ACWBill »

Thanks Pete, the fields were made using Silflor Tall Static grasses a various shades. One of the books I read in researching this sceario was Fields of Blood by William Shea. In it one of the Federal commanders referred to the fields as having the appearance of a checkerboard due to the various colors of field grass and the wooden rail fences that separated them. I painted on a base coat of brown on the whole field. Once dry, I plainted sqaure and rectangular shapes and poured on the static grasses while the paint was still wet. This holds the static grass in place permenantly when dry.

B
"I was worse scared than I was at Shiloh" - Sam Watkins
Perryville, KY - October 8, 1862

6mmwargaming
E5
Posts: 347
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 9:30 am
Location: New Zealand
Contact:

Post by 6mmwargaming »

Wow lovely terrain there ACWBill. Very nice muted colours.

Cheers
Kieran

Mk 1
E5
Posts: 2383
Joined: Fri Dec 24, 2004 3:21 am
Location: Silicon Valley, CA

Post by Mk 1 »

BUMP!

I enjoy this thread so much that I don't want it to wander too far off of the first page.
-Mark 1
Difficile est, saturam non scribere.
"It is hard NOT to write satire." - Decimus Iunius Juvenalis, 1st Century AD

voltigeur
E5
Posts: 814
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 3:26 am
Location: Dallas Texas

Post by voltigeur »

A few weeks ago I ran a game of Check your Six Jet Age. This was a battle with 4 MIG 15’s and 4 F86 fighters. The scenario was set up to give the Russian player the first kill. The Russian player decided to not shoot down the rookie pilot but to go after his element lead. This left the Americans at a disadvantage. The first element turned hard and tried to rush to the rescue.

I screwed up and forgot to roll for 2 collisions but I think in the end it made for a better game. I don’t think an American kamikaze move would have been enjoyed.

Image

Image

Image

[/img]http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/7803 ... 01.jpg[img][/img]
I pray for Peace on Earth Good will toward men. Till then one round HE fire for Effect!

RedLeif
E5
Posts: 784
Joined: Sat May 21, 2011 3:11 am
Location: Boise, ID
Contact:

AAR June 27th 2011

Post by RedLeif »

Sorry no Pics, but here is a write up

June 27, 2011 3rd play of “Engagement Near Syrtsevoâ€￾ for WWII MicroArmour: The Game:

Last night I played my “Engagement Near Syrtsevoâ€￾ scenario for the third time. I was joined by a nice guy named Travis at the shop and taught him the basics of the game with this scenario. He is a FOW player and has a keen interest in the Hungarian forces of WWII. This is a nation that I am curious about and will have to ask him more about in the future.

This scenario pits a German tank battalion (from the 3rd Pz Division at Kursk) against the armor of the Soviet 112th tank brigade (6th Tank Corps at Kursk) in a meeting engagement. It is a purely tank on tank, basic scenario. The German battalion consists mostly of Panzer IIIs and only one company of Panzer IV’s, it is pretty weak. In the past the Soviets had a cohesion of 15 while the Germans had a 16. Since the German side had lost in the first two plays of this game I decided to give the soviets a 14 for this game yet not altering the forces employed, and see how it went.

The game got off to a good start with Travis playing the Soviets and me the Germans. For about 2 or 3 turns we simply moved to engagement ranges. He formed his two battalions into a large inverted V while I kept the pz IV’s and IIIn’s to the front and trailed the IIIj’s behind, in a bit of a line abreast formation. Previous games have taught me to be careful with the III’s as the T34’s can shoot them up quite easily at medium ranges.

When the shooting really started I had moved my formation to engage the southern arm of Travis’ V. I turned some of my IV’s and a couple of IIIn’s to protect my northern flank while the rest of the IV’s engaged the T-34’s in front of them. The III j’s prepared to drive around the end of the southern soviet arm and enfilade the soviet formation.

The enfilade maneuver largely worked, it broke up the southern arm of the Soviet formation with close in fighting (1 to 2â€￾ ranges from the sides and rears). This did cost me some III’j and it took several turns to finish up this aspect of the encounter.

Meanwhile to the north things were going my way. The Soviets did not close with the German armor there but instead stood off at medium to long range (around 10â€￾) and traded fire with my ‘flank protection’. I was glad of this as the greater deal of my firepower was busy to the south. The soviets managed to Disrupt one my IV’s to the north while remaining largely immune to my fire over the course of a couple of turns.

With my IV’s from the south freed up, I moved them north to help deal with that force. Again I was lucky as the Soviets let me effectively pinch off about 3 platoons of T-34’s in close in fighting while withdrawing his remaining units further north.

At this point in the game, I think it was turn 9 or 10, one third of the Soviet armor was sitting line abreast, facing south about 8 to 10 inches away from the Germans. The Germans had many disrupted platoons and were strung out across the field. At this point I offered to stop the game and should have called it over. Travis wanted to play on to the bitter end however. So after about 5 more turns it was over. I seem to recall only 1 or 2 German stands were not ‘disrupted’ by the end of the game and over half the German armor had been eliminated.

Travis could have won this if he had been more aggressive and concentrated more of his fire on my III’s. Travis did a masterful job extracting his T-34’s into a regrouped fighting force at what should have been the stopping point. The lower cohesion did not hinder him much. Compared to previous plays the lower cohesion was noticeable to me but as I said it wasn’t the deciding factor. I think this scenario is pretty good now. The Germans can win it if they are careful about exposing their weaker tanks to the more powerful Soviets. The Soviets can win it if they’re aggressive.

The scenario is cleaned up and ready for distribution and I had a great time and Travis really liked the game and rules. So it was a very good evening.

RedLeif

pmskaar
E5
Posts: 2207
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2005 5:45 am

Show Us Your Games

Post by pmskaar »

Hi Leif

It sounds like a great game and that everyone had a good time. Thanks for posting the AAR and of course pictures are always welcome. I played a game several years back run by 8ball as he is known here on this forum. It was called the "Debut of the Honey" and took place in North Africa during Operation Crusader. It was a fun little game with tanks only but a good way to learn the basic mechanics of Micro Armor the Game.

Pete - Binpicker, Out!

pmskaar
E5
Posts: 2207
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2005 5:45 am

Show Us Your Games

Post by pmskaar »

Hi Leif

It sounds like a great game and that everyone had a good time. Thanks for posting the AAR and of course pictures are always welcome. I played a game several years back run by 8ball as he is known here on this forum. It was called the "Debut of the Honey" and took place in North Africa during Operation Crusader. It was a fun little game with tanks only but a good way to learn the basic mechanics of Micro Armor the Game.

Pete - Binpicker, Out!

todd.jayhawk
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 9:21 am
Location: Missouri
Contact:

BKC Bulge game

Post by todd.jayhawk »

Played solo (learning the rules) Blitzkrieg Commander game of a fictional Bulge scenario.

All minis are GHQ.

http://itineranthobbyist.blogspot.com/2 ... -game.html

ACWBill
E5
Posts: 667
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 10:33 pm
Location: Buford, GA
Contact:

How the West was Lost Book II - The Chattanooga Campaign

Post by ACWBill »

Here are a few photos for your viewing pleasure. I ran my Chattanooga Campaign over the weekend. I have completely re-built this terrain since I ran it for an HMGS South con a few years ago. Many thanks to Rob Hall who assisted me in my GM duties. We hosted over 40 players during the weekend including two simultaneous scenarios on Friday.

We ran:

Wauhatchie (2P Thursday) Regimental F & F which had 10 players
Lookout Mountain (2P Friday) Reg. F & F which I ran with 6 players
Tunnel Hill (2P Friday) Brigade F & F which Rob ran with 6 players
Missionary Ridge (2P Sat) Brigade F & F which we both ran with 18 players

Here are some pics

Image
Lookout Mountain

Image
Orchard Knob

Image
Tunnel Hill from the CS Side

Image
Missionary Ridge looking west. I had already removed the Wauhatchie terrain which was sitting north of Lookout Mountain, which you can see in the distance.

Image
Tunnel Hill from the US side.

Image
A close up of the Craven House on Lookout Mountain, which I had built for this game several years ago by my friend Paul Bernardino.

The Yanks won the campaign 83-56 VPs.
The Game won Best of Show at Historicon 2011.
We were sponsored by GHQ, Fire & Fury Games and my own company Good Ground LLC

I hope you enjoy the pics. I will submit a full AAR some time in the near future.
"I was worse scared than I was at Shiloh" - Sam Watkins
Perryville, KY - October 8, 1862

Post Reply