A large order, a second Cold War try

 

 Whew, heat finally broke.  Got a smallish GHQ micro armor order in. Delivery was quick and next few days saw  a Perry brothers' order  showed on the doorstop.  Great service. More of what was in it later. 

Attacking another scenario in 7 Days to the Rhine. Now  as  it needs to be reported with a few photos.

I apologize as it is only a few shots. once I get stuck in I cease to remember to pick up the phone.


A view of the operational area before the Warsaw Pact forces enter. A minimalist approach on the road net this time. The 'lichen lanes' are the roads, hills block line of sight and the field boundaries provide cover if the unit is next to and fire crosses the veggies. 

View from the Russian entry point. The idea is a slightly reinforced group from last time is facing the second echelon of the Russian force. The water glass was not involved.


Lined up in order of march, the pure recce is stripped off, advanced parties  (BRDM and BTR-60's) are the lead followed by a total of 20 tanks!  Look at all those missing hatches on my T-64's.

The defender's,  4 Leopard 1A7's  (slightly better stats) four Marders with infantry and the gruppe command vehicle.  Not a lot, but on turn 3 they get a 3 panzer reinforcement, all Leopards.

Left flank force of Pact vehicles , about to come under fire from the Bundeswehr tripwire. 

A scene of carnage as the left flank armor (T-54's) comes under fire. The red chips are activation markers, the white were morale hits. We went very old school, flipping dead vehicles over. 😄

The battle is interrupted, Greg is holding up his copy of the rules, although he may be using the book to cover tactical moves.  Astute observers may notice the NATO command is not having everything go their way.

Center of table, it is getting real for both forces.  I have a horrendous traffic jam and the NATO boys are not yet reinforced.  I did try to use red dice as available. Or black; Roger and Greg declared they would use white and blue as befitting them being the good guys.

 Showing a close up of  the advanced party, left flank, hugging some cover.

The butcher's bill, Greg's Gruppe was down two Marders, Roger's Gruppe two Leopards.  The  Warsaw Pact forces were down three BTR-60's, a BRDM, three T-54's and two T-64's. 

The NATO commanders felt they could not hold back the Soviets, even if they got all three Leopards as reinforcements.  5 to 1 odds are too great to stop, especially if the tech level is not massively in favor of the outnumbered defenders.

I think the WP commander deserves a sack for the horrendous traffic jam on turn 2.  Glad I did not take a picture of that debacle. ( Self serving archivist!)

Unfortunately, those are all the photos from the game. We actually called it after two turns....it was still considered a learning game.

  Lessons?  We had not used the break point rules yet. I think they will go a long way to fixing some of the balance. I agree the Pact forces ratio should be smaller than 5 to 1 to the defenders.  



Another resource from my archives...never throw anything away.

The rules state they are made with 15mm or 12 mm scale forces in mind. We've played in 20mm (actually 1/87) both of the first games.  Greg mentioned they (20mm scale) 'are more fun to look at.'
Guess that means I will need to paint some of the Pact vehicles more than dark green. Ah, and the NATO boys have so many cool schemes.





 

Comments

Lawrence H said…
That looked like a fun learning game, and quite a lot of action for just two turns.
Tony Adams said…
Hi...Great report, pity not more photos. I think the "traffic jam" was actually very realistic as is the 5 to 1 ratio. What happened to all the turret hatches ??? Regards
rross said…
5:1 odds in favour of the Wasaw Pact, that sounds about right from what I remember being told in 1984! The real question that was never answered (fortunately) is, would superior training and professionalism of many of the NATO armies above blunted the Soviet numerical advantage? My gut feeling is no. Like the very professional German army of WWII, I think the numbers disparity woukd have been too great. The Pact might have lost three for every one NATO element....that would have still left two over to drive to the Channel in three days!
daveb said…
Did you adjust distances at all for the larger minis? Or just roll with stock measurements?
Matt Crump said…
Good looking battle and very opportune as we are thinking about collecting some Cold War gaming 👍
pancerni said…
Lawrence, it was fun. By the end of the second turn, my head was spinning. Lots going on!
El Grego said…
Very interesting. I have a small stack of micro-armour and these same rules waiting for me, maybe sometime soon.
pancerni said…
Tony, ok, next time I will make myself take more photos!

Matt, ElGrego...I do like the rules, they allow for more informal 'groups' of vehicles in my mind.

Dave, We played with the stated measurements, Vehicles basically can range the table, movement runs 6 to 18 inches. With micro I'd be tempted to go smaller, maybe substitute centimeters for inches.

Keith, your experience sounds like mine...it just did not add up, unless the WP had bigger maintenance issues than we were told. The Bundeswehr always impressed with the professionalism. Just always seemed there would not be enough of us. This is the tail end of M-60's, Chieftains and Leopard 1 tanks.

Popular Posts