Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Historical Scenarios / Re: Operation BattleAxe-Day 2-June 1941
« Last post by ggouveia on Today at 09:22:31 PM »
My thoughts would be deploy as Artillery as listed or option to remove 88mm artillery and deploy as a 2 PAK front supports.
2
Historical Scenarios / Re: Operation BattleAxe-Day 2-June 1941
« Last post by Kontos on Today at 07:06:36 PM »
Armor become vulnerable when attacking in non-open terrain.

Attacking or defending.
3
Blücher: Other / Re: UK Blucher Convention/Conference
« Last post by chuckhamack on Today at 07:56:25 AM »
Are you using Ross's the OOB for Wagram?
4
Historical Scenarios / Re: Operation BattleAxe-Day 2-June 1941
« Last post by chuckhamack on Today at 07:54:07 AM »
Armor become vulnerable when attacking in non-open terrain.
5
Thanks Mike, I have no problems with rules tinkering but I have only played one game so far so I am a little reluctant to adjust things yet. I am sure it will come.

John
6
Historical Scenarios / Re: Operation BattleAxe-Day 2-June 1941
« Last post by Mike Lillie on Today at 04:26:28 AM »
Perhaps just modify the 88 defensive tactic (or add another) would be the best solution. Ideally find a Commonwealth player who is unaware of the 88 tactic for a realistic result and accusal of unfair German tactics. You have quite a toolkit with many options at your disposal.
7
Quote
I  think this is where the optional anti tank rule is effective.  In battles where 88s were effectively combined with infantry or tanks you show them as AT attachments.   They will then win any tank battle regardless of the armour class of the attacking tanks [assuming the units they are with cause hits] thus causing a further tank casualty.   This is a significant factor in a game on the scale of Rommel, and makes attacking units with the AT ability a pretty daunting prospect.

OK, I have had another look and I will try the optional AT rule. A couple of questions. Since I do not like markers, I will create some special AT bases. I was just painting some 88's but had not based them yet, I was going to field them as Artillery units but will make a combined infantry/AT gun base. I think it will look OK and it will be obvious that they have the AT trait.

From reading the optional rule, it would appear that the AT benefit only applies in open terrain but in this historical battle they were deployed I believe hidden along a ridge line (Hafya Ridge). If I put a couple of AT bases (I think there were at least 500 Axis defenders) in mountainous terrain will it break the optional rule? Applying the shift down on the combat result would nullify the AT advantage.

Thanks again,

John
8
Historical Scenarios / Re: Operation BattleAxe-Day 2-June 1941
« Last post by armstp on December 11, 2017, 04:37:37 PM »
I  think this is where the optional anti tank rule is effective.  In battles where 88s were effectively combined with infantry or tanks you show them as AT attachments.   They will then win any tank battle regardless of the armour class of the attacking tanks [assuming the units they are with cause hits] thus causing a further tank casualty.   This is a significant factor in a game on the scale of Rommel, and makes attacking units with the AT ability a pretty daunting prospect.
9
General Discussion and Announcements / Anyone playing Rommel in Phoenix?
« Last post by Robcarna on December 11, 2017, 03:59:55 PM »
I'll be visiting over the holidays and would love to try it out.

Thanks,

Rob
10
General Discussion and Announcements / Re: making bases for Rommel in 6mm
« Last post by Osmoses on December 11, 2017, 12:21:08 PM »
It depends really what you want to do with your basing. If you want to put a lot of detail on them as mini-dioramas then you probably want 50 x 30mm to fit in 10cm squares. We represent tipping by turning 90 degrees rather than 45, so troops normally only face one of two ways across the table. This saves on space and means that you can consistently fit any terrain you have in the square.

I would re-iterate Fred's point about cutting out some card bases and seeing how they'd fit in your squares. Also think about how big you want any terrain bases to fit in as well. It's definitely worth taking the time to plan your base sizes before you start.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10