Print Page - martin v Stewart 1945 fall of Berlin

Title: martin v Stewart 1945 fall of Berlin
Post by: martin goddard on October 04, 2020, 08:16:38 AM

(https://i.imgur.com/ArSK9xn.jpg)
Picture 1 =martin's veteran Germans. 3 Veteran platoons. 2 raw stug Gs.

(https://i.imgur.com/knJ4bEX.jpg)
Picture 2= Stewarts's Volksturm. 2 average Tigers. 5 platoons of raw infantry (1 platoon is those bases stacked up)

(https://i.imgur.com/Vf6UZy8.jpg)
Picture 3=Initial deployment. Veteran martin in the foreground. Objectives far left on road entrance, central dug out and far left just off picture. Veteans have 1 platoon on table. Raw have 3 platoons and tigers beyond the woods

(https://i.imgur.com/OZq1oCd.jpg)
Picture 4=- Volksturm take left hand objective in massive assault. Tigers have destroyed 1 stug and immobilised the other.

(https://i.imgur.com/WgOnPrz.jpg)
Picture 5= veteran infantry all gone

(https://i.imgur.com/Ie6ZPo7.jpg)
Picture 6= Some more veteran infantry to arrive shortly on base edge,

.

This was a game of PBI 20/20.
Stewart with raw Volksturn. Last ditch Berlin defenders.
martin with veteran SS Germans. Changed sides, trying to get to the allied lines.
30th April 1945

Title: Re: martin v Stewart 1945 fall of Berlin
Post by: Colonel Kilgore on October 04, 2020, 09:12:00 AM

Thanks for the commentary and nice pictures, Martin.

It's very noticeable how small a Veteran company is (although taking 2 Tigers probably didn't help much) and how big a Raw one is!

This was presumably PBI 20/20? Were there any interesting/different rules issues or results?

Simon

Title: Re: martin v Stewart 1945 fall of Berlin
Post by: Leslie BT on October 04, 2020, 01:40:53 PM

So what is the crescent shaped item by Martins casualties?

Is that something we need that's in the new version of the rules?

Title: Re: martin v Stewart 1945 fall of Berlin
Post by: Colonel Kilgore on October 04, 2020, 01:55:20 PM

It looks to me like a Jaffa objective. Well worthy of fighting for.

I suspect this will be a mandatory item (Asset?) in PBI 20/20. Perhaps Martin might allow a Dodger or Hobnob (dark version, obviously) as stand-ins though?

Simon

Title: Re: martin v Stewart 1945 fall of Berlin
Post by: martin goddard on October 04, 2020, 05:47:50 PM

The Jaffa cake makes a good dug out when needed.
The Tigers were part of Stewart's raw company and were average quality.
Because veterans are very expensive the Stugs i bought were raw. Cheap but not that effective.
Rules used were PBI 20/20.

martin :)

Title: Re: martin v Stewart 1945 fall of Berlin
Post by: Leslie BT on October 04, 2020, 06:00:15 PM

Is the dug out part of the new assets?

Title: Re: martin v Stewart 1945 fall of Berlin
Post by: martin goddard on October 04, 2020, 06:11:27 PM

Difficult to know what value to give to what biscuits.
Will do plenty more reaserch and get back to you.

martin :)

Title: Re: martin v Stewart 1945 fall of Berlin
Post by: Colonel Kilgore on October 04, 2020, 06:26:33 PM

Come on Martin - don't give Les a half-baked answer!

And no need to sugar-coat your response (chocolate is generally better, in my experience). A Jaffa is good (and enough of them may count towards your 5 a day?) but I think this topic merits further research. Maybe bonus points for an M&S selection box and a -1 for a pack of plain old Rich Tea? I think the playtesters may be able to help out here.

I just want to know which one of you got stuck in before the game even started. Maybe a negative victory point for such caddish behaviour?

RFCM

RFCM discussion => After Action Reports => Topic started by: martin goddard on October 04, 2020, 08:16:38 AM