|
|
Post by sapper on Jun 3, 2008 13:20:01 GMT
Matt
Sorry, can't make Monday 9th June. Let me know when you've got a clear Monday, and what scenario you fancy. I quite the look of the river crossing, unless you think that's a bit complicated to start off with ?
Martyn
|
|
|
|
Post by Matt on Jun 3, 2008 14:20:35 GMT
No worries Martyn.
I'll check the scenarios and let you know.
The next Monay I'm free would be the 23rd I think. Ouch!
Matt
|
|
|
|
Post by sapper on Jun 6, 2008 20:38:17 GMT
I'll pencil you in for the 23d, then.
Martyn
|
|
|
|
Post by sapper on Jun 17, 2008 11:27:18 GMT
Matt
Are you still on for a Cold War Commander game next Monday (23rd June) ?
Had any thoughts on scenario / points ? As I said, I quite fancy a contested river crossing, but I don't have any bridging equipment and am open to being persuaded that we should start off with something a little less ambitious.
I intend to field a 1984 British force; Chieftains and FV432s.
Can't find my helicopters, though !!!
Martyn
|
|
|
|
Post by Matt on Jun 19, 2008 19:36:23 GMT
I'm easy although as you so rightly suggest we should go for something simple.
I haven't got my Hinds yet so lack of air support not a problem.
A simple game just to get the rules sorted. Most of the games revolve around the attacker having more points so if we opt for 3000 points and then we can decide whose attacker or defender on the night.
I've been away in Reading the last few days so off line. Ill have a read of the scenarios and let you know what I think.
|
|
|
|
Post by sapper on Jun 21, 2008 19:04:25 GMT
Matt
What about Diversionary Attack (scenario 10), British defending with 1,500 pts and Russians attacking with 3,000 pts ?
Martyn
|
|
|
|
Post by Matt on Jun 22, 2008 9:00:43 GMT
Yup up for that. 3000 Points of Soviets it is!
|
|
|
|
Post by sapper on Jun 23, 2008 12:24:41 GMT
Matt
Just finished writing my list for this evening. Don't get much for 1,500 points, do you ?!!
I don't think I'll be giving too much awy if I say that I won't be needing all 34 Chieftains I have available !!
Do you think a 4'x4' table will be big enough ?
Martyn
|
|
|
|
Post by Matt on Jun 23, 2008 14:29:35 GMT
To be honest with the range of the weapons I think 6 x 4 is still reasonable. We could play 4 x 4 but I think that would be carnage! mmm maybe we should  |
|
|
|
Post by Matt on Jun 24, 2008 8:48:05 GMT
Thanks for that Martyn, thoroughly enjoyable game. Well done on a suitably stubborn defence. Thinking last night, what you could have done with your chieftain was move and fire ala storm trooper move from FOW. That way you could have kept my t80's occupied with minimum risk to you. Meanwhile I could just do with some new commanders!!  All good fun though. Matt |
|
|
|
Post by sapper on Jun 24, 2008 11:15:41 GMT
Matt
Yes, excellent game all round.
You're right about the tank. I was too stuck in the don't move and fire mode, but with decent stabalisation I would only have been dropping 1 factor. Could have done with a second HQ on table too. Not sure the FV438 Swingfire at 215 was worth it compared with a Chieftain at 185. I could have exchanged the Swingfire for another Chieftain and still had enough left over for a second marked minefield and a dummy minefield. That would have helped funnel you and negated some of your numerical superiority.
There was certainly enough there to make me think I'd like to have another crack.
Martyn
|
|
|
|
Post by sapper on Jun 24, 2008 21:23:29 GMT
Matt
Something else we were doing wrong... your T80s have composite armour and so get a 5+ save against ATGW. See note 18 on the Soviet list.
Martyn
|
|
