A Legend is Born?

Jim von Krieg · 12-13-2010, 06:13 AM,

I'm playing the Don Fox scenario, "A Legend is Born". What are some strategies for the Allied forces to be successful? I'm playing it as both sides, but as my Germans wreck elements of the 4th AD I'm wondering if there is a chance for the Amis. With all the Panthers on the German side, I look at the comments and results of those who've played the scenario previously with much interest.

It is a tough fight with the two hex range due to heavy fog; however, the massed firepower of the panzers and the panzergrenadiers is pretty impressive. Only thing the US side seems to have is the abundance of artillery which even when fired blind inflicts damage on the Germans. They also seem to have a nice array of light forces for scouting.

Anyone have some thoughts they are willing to share about this scenario?

Regards,

Jim

Huib Versloot · 12-13-2010, 07:05 AM,

I won this one recently as Allied against Bernd (Peiper). We did play without AF. (as Don Fox' scns should be played) and with EA on.

From my perspective I think Bernd could have won had he known the (bad) state of some of my troops. It was also obvious that I was more familiar and effective with playing with EA "on".

A great advantage for the Allies that they only have to care about a single objective. There are not enough Allied forces to defend 2 objectives and thus a larger area. Had there been 2 objectives spread over a reasonable distance, the Germans would have had the option to carry out a major attack (and a phoney one as diguise) at one of the objectives and create local superiority.

Huib

Von Earlmann · 12-13-2010, 09:45 AM,

I played it a long time ago against Don himself............thot it was a great scenario and as usual my dice were slightly better than my luck(which is non existant)..........tough fight for the Amis but great fun to play anyway...........I know......I know......you wanted strategy....best strategy I have here is have fun :-)

VE

**Scud** · (This post was last modified: 12-13-2010, 12:28 PM by Scud.)

I played it recently as the Germans and found it pretty easy. 40 turns is plenty of time to creep up with infantry and bring up the armor when they bump into something (literally). I headed for the exits, but branched south to pick up an objective and put pressure on the allied artillery. Once he started moving it I just ran it down. My opponent conceded fairly early and I didn't blame him. Not sure what I'd have done as the allies. I'd already reached the western exits, secured them and was moving out everything I didn't need, trucks, half-tracks, etc. by around the 30th turn.

We played with all optinal rules except EA and VV. Therefore, he might have tried some ambushes to get rear shots on my PzV's, but I didn't give him much opportunity. I rarely had them out front and only when I was relatively certain of their safety.

The weakest aspect as a playable scenario is the 40 turns. Cut it down to 20 or 25 and the allies have a chance, but with 40 the Germans can take their sweet time. My opponent also stayed back (for the most part) and let me bring the battle to him. I suppose he could have challenged me a little more aggressively, but I suspect the result would have been the same.

Dave

Huib Versloot · 12-13-2010, 07:23 PM,

(12-13-2010, 12:27 PM)Scud Wrote: The weakest aspect as a playable scenario is the 40 turns. Cut it down to 20 or 25 and the allies have a chance, but with 40 the Germans can take their sweet time. My opponent also stayed back (for the most part) and let me bring the battle to him. I suppose he could have challenged me a little more aggressively, but I suspect the result would have been the same.

Dave

The win /loss statistics don't back up your experience, that it is biased in favour of the Germans. I could say the same but then for the Allies.

In such cases it is a bit strange to point at "weak aspects" of the scenario, because what you suggest as improvement would do the opposite for those who feel that this scenario is biased in favor of the Allies. You might have found it easy for the Germans because you played with AF on, which gives the Panthers an unrealistic advantage with their über frontal armor rating, that is even enhanced by the low visibility where you have a very good chance they'll retreat out of LOS.

Huib

Von Earlmann · 12-13-2010, 10:58 PM,

(12-13-2010, 07:23 PM)Huib Versloot Wrote: You might have found it easy for the Germans because you played with AF on, which gives the Panthers an unrealistic advantage with their über frontal armor rating, that is even enhanced by the low visibility where you have a very good chance they'll retreat out of LOS.

Huib

I suspect you will find that Don usually suggests not using the armor facing rule in his scenarios. We played with it off and altho I eventually lost it was by no means a walk over.

Earl

**Scud** · 12-13-2010, 11:18 PM,

Huib,

Point taken. I can only sum up my experience with the scenario, played one time and against one opponent. Had Don Fox been testing this I'm sure he would have taken my suggestions with a grain of salt.

I've always played with AF on. Only had one opponent who wanted it off. I like it on, since it makes the allied player treat his armor a little more cautiously than he might otherwise, but I never care too much what optional rules my opponent wants. All's good. I'm playing an EA on/AF off game at the moment, per the designer's suggestions. I'm still trying to get a handle on it.

Dave

Chuck10mtn · 12-14-2010, 02:02 AM,

(12-13-2010, 11:18 PM)Scud Wrote: Huib,

Point taken. I can only sum up my experience with the scenario, played one time and against one opponent. Had Don Fox been testing this I'm sure he would have taken my suggestions with a grain of salt.

I've always played with AF on. Only had one opponent who wanted it off. I like it on, since it makes the allied player treat his armor a little more cautiously than he might otherwise, but I never care too much what optional rules my opponent wants. All's good. I'm playing an EA on/AF off game at the moment, per the designer's suggestions. I'm still trying to get a handle on it.

What I find interesting is how the scenarios change when the options rules change. As Scud said With AF off the allies can be a little more aggressive, with EA off holding VP hexes becomes more of a challange, and with VV your defense and go to hell when visability goes to 5 hexes instead of 10.

Hey Jim just have fun " win if you can, lose if you must, but always have fun !!!"

CHuck

Dave

**Jason Petho** · (This post was last modified: 12-14-2010, 02:22 AM by Jason Petho.)

Variable Visibility only works when the starting visibility is between 5 and 15.

Additionally, it will only change the visibility +/- 1 hex or no change in a turn.

This scenario has a visibility of 2, so VV has no effect whether checked on or off.

Jason Petho

Jim von Krieg · 12-14-2010, 01:30 PM,

Thanks guys,

It makes sense about the Armor facing off... I've been thinking about not using it, but it seems most of the guys I play want it on... We did EA, but I've learned that if you hammer away at point blank range and assault with enough power you can get results... some times D and step loss... OR a successful assault... OR a nothing... but it requires a lot of firepower at the point of attack to hammer the defenders... which Jason can attest to I used when I swamped him...

I'll find out the US strategy the hard way as I'm playing this one from the Amis point of view as well... with AF on, so it'll be a rough one... but the arty is hammering away and getting results... Still early and I'm going with an unusual strategy which may or may not work...

We tried the VV thing, but it didn't work as my implacable foe Jason has pointed out... I can see where this scenario would be very interesting with VV working...

It's all good and the matches are all about having fun...

Regards,

Jim