Game: Combat Commander: Battle Pack #1 -- Paratroopers

Thread: Re: Scenario # 33 We Go!

chicklewis — 2008-10-12T14:57:17+00:00

This new idea caused me to check which map hexes do not have a corresponding random number card. They are A1, H1, O1, A10, H10, and O10. Nice to know.

And in the checking, I find I have a duplicate American card, while still having a full set, so I guess it is an extra American card. Now I need to check my opponents' games and see if they are missing this card.

Chick

Thread: Re: Scenario # 33 We Go!

DaviddesJ — 2008-09-19T16:56:41+00:00

Lagduf wrote:
I suppose there are more hexes on a map then there are fate cards in a nationality deck.

There are 150 hexes on the map, and 72 cards in each deck. The Allies have (most of) the even-numbered hexes, and the Axis have (most of) the odd-numbered hexes.

Thread: Re: Scenario # 33 We Go!

Lagduf — 2008-09-19T07:30:49+00:00

DaviddesJ wrote:
Lagduf wrote:
My understanding of the Hedgerow hexside terrain is that Sgt. Divine would have been able to see the German unit and vice versa. Assuming starting positions he should set up broken. Can anyone confer?

This can't be the starting position. There isn't even a card in the US deck that has F3 as its random hex.

You know, I never had given that any thought - that every hex wasn't available as a random hex on the fate cards.

I suppose there are more hexes on a map then there are fate cards in a nationality deck.

Thanks!

Thread: Re: Scenario # 33 We Go!

DaviddesJ — 2008-09-19T05:10:07+00:00

Lagduf wrote:
My understanding of the Hedgerow hexside terrain is that Sgt. Divine would have been able to see the German unit and vice versa. Assuming starting positions he should set up broken. Can anyone confer?

This can't be the starting position. There isn't even a card in the US deck that has F3 as its random hex.

Thread: Re: Scenario # 33 We Go!

Lagduf — 2008-09-19T04:50:51+00:00

kinga1965 wrote:
Hey Tony, was the first picture the actual starting positions? Because if so, I believe Sgt. Devine should have been broken also. I don't have the scenario in front of me, so correct me if I'm wrong.

Okay, I know this thread is quite old, but I just setup this scenario. Looks quite fun, and was looking for any tips on it.

My understanding of the Hedgerow hexside terrain is that Sgt. Divine would have been able to see the German unit and vice versa. Assuming starting positions he should set up broken. Can anyone confer?

On a related note:

I setup a couple different german defences on this one. One time when simulating the american drop (i did this about 4 or 5 times) I think all my American paratroopers ending up broken except 1 leader and 2 regular squads. It was good times (for the Germans at least).

Thread: Re: Fields of Fiery Blood

HuckmanT — 2008-08-22T16:32:50+00:00

As the Germans, you kind of need to have a bit of luck on your side with the Americans lacking "Order/Action Fire" cards on a few of your turns. If you can send out a "scout" unit and determine that there is little likelihood of OpFire (due to no Allied fire cards), then that's a turn you really want to lay smoke and move out.

I really like the back-to-back scenario design for this one, and I'm looking forward to more mini-campaigns in the Stalingrad expansion.

Thread: Re: Why No British Paratroopers

LibertyToad — 2008-06-04T23:49:24+00:00

Thanks for the info. I'll take a look.

Naturally, I'm interested in the maps and scenarios, so the $21 pre-order price may or may not be worth it to me--it depends on how much of it is targeted for CC:M.

I'm a software developer and was considering making my own map designer so the maps may not be as important to me.

I've been buying from GMT for a long time--back around the time they were having financial troubles and started the P500. I like supporting them and I'd like a bunch of Stalingrad scenarios, but we'll see.

Thanks again.

Thread: Re: Why No British Paratroopers

RPardoe — 2008-06-04T23:03:04+00:00

Tom, you might want to check out various posts about the Stalingrad Battlepack. Even though it does assume CC:M ownership, it will have some items that you can use with just CC:E.

Specifically, in the thread Any idea how much of CC:Med will be needed for this expansion??, I had posted my thoughts of what you will get that could be used with just CC:M.

While you won't be able to use all of the Stalingrad goodies, there are still some you can use with just CC:E. I will leave it up to you to decide if what you gain is worth the purchase price.

Thread: Re: Why No British Paratroopers

LibertyToad — 2008-06-04T22:48:18+00:00

RPardoe wrote:
Bish has it in one.

The Paratroopers battle pack was designed to be used with CC:E only - so was designed with German/Russian/US countermixes. All future battle packs will assume ownership of CC:E and CC:M - so have a more diverse mix of scenarios.

Drat--that's a shame. I only have CC:E and won't be buying CC:M. Sounds like I'll get left out. I guess I'll have to rely on the scenario generator.

Thread: Re: Why No British Paratroopers

Chimaera — 2008-06-03T22:16:48+00:00

I wouldn't mind a battle pack about the 101st at Bastogne!

Another superb scenario involving airborne troops & a desperate situation.

NUTS!

Chim

Thread: Re: Why No British Paratroopers

JackFlash — 2008-06-02T20:43:28+00:00

I wouldn't mind a battle pack about the 101st at Bastogne!

Thread: Re: Why No British Paratroopers

Chimaera — 2008-06-02T17:46:17+00:00

Thanks for all the responses guys.

But, rumor has it that there are a few in the works. Pegasus Bridge being one of them...

Thats nailed it for me. Off I go to buy CC-E & CC-M tomorrow LOL. Bring on Lovat's commando's. Hopefully we will see more D-day material & maps. Maybe we will even see a commando expansion at some stage or even LRDG/SAS.

I love the Bridge to Far material. Everyone is in the mix & it also would make great material fo a linked camapign. I especially would like to see the Arnhem battle. So hopeless for the Para's yet so heroic in their defiance.

Thread: Re: Why No British Paratroopers

JackFlash — 2008-06-02T04:07:13+00:00

I will definitely buy Pegasus Bridge!

Thread: Re: Why No British Paratroopers

colinkun — 2008-06-02T03:59:44+00:00

But, rumor has it that there are a few in the works. Pegasus Bridge being one of them...

Thread: Re: Why No British Paratroopers

JackFlash — 2008-06-02T03:17:49+00:00

Yea, what he said! (points to above poster)

Thread: Re: Why No British Paratroopers

RPardoe — 2008-06-02T01:28:15+00:00

Bish has it in one.

The Paratroopers battle pack was designed to be used with CC:E only - so was designed with German/Russian/US countermixes. All future battle packs will assume ownership of CC:E and CC:M - so have a more diverse mix of scenarios.

Thread: Re: Why No British Paratroopers

bishuk — 2008-06-02T00:50:25+00:00

Hi Chim,

the paras expansion pack was an extension to CC:E and CC:E only had the German, Russian and US nationalities.

CC:M introduces (amongst others) the British, including paras; i'm sure subsequent battle packs will make use of the new nationalities and troop types.

Thread: Why No British Paratroopers

Chimaera — 2008-06-01T23:21:56+00:00

I am in the throws of deciding wether to purchase CCE & was wondering why there are no British paratroopers in this expansion. Are GMT looking to release another expansion maybe Arnhem featuring them. Does anyone know.

Thanks

Chim

Thread: Re: Recommended?

RPardoe — 2008-05-30T03:22:16+00:00

Magnus Maximus wrote:
Of course, now that I'm a certified CC addict, I'm totally digging the the maps over terrain tiles and the like...

And after you have played Fat Lipki several times, it is fun to play Scenario 103 Varsity Blues (C3i Scenario) that uses Map 1 - but on the narrow access. Suddenly the familiar map doesn't look so familiar as you have to move in different ways across different fire lanes now. It is an interesting thing to try. Of course, you can just get out Map 1 - and use the RSG to get your forces also....

(say, do you work for GMT?
No, I don't. Just love the game

Thread: Re: Recommended?

JackFlash — 2008-05-30T00:59:32+00:00

Magnus Maximus wrote:
I'm gonna go ahead and pick it up....

It is fun! I highly recommend getting it!

Thread: Re: Recommended?

Magnus Maximus — 2008-05-29T01:34:53+00:00
And I'm not done yet! I get to replay all the scenarios from the other side... and then I get to use the maps to generate random scenarios!
I am a happy trooper.

I haven't tried the RSG yet, but I've read how it works and it sounds great. A very ingenious idea from the replayability standpoint. When I was still on the fence about CC:E, the fixed maps put me off a little. Once I found out about the RSG, my fears were allayed.

Of course, now that I'm a certified CC addict, I'm totally digging the the maps over terrain tiles and the like...

Thread: Re: Recommended?

weishaupt — 2008-05-29T01:27:18+00:00
I agree with everything Richard has said.
I've played through the whole thing (as one side) and the number of hours of sheer fun the package has given me is well worth the entry price.
And I'm not done yet! I get to replay all the scenarios from the other side... and then I get to use the maps to generate random scenarios!
I am a happy trooper.

Thread: Re: Recommended?

Magnus Maximus — 2008-05-29T01:26:41+00:00
Okay, you sold me (that wasn't very hard.) Your descriptions made the scenarios sound pretty neat (say, do you work for GMT?

I actually just got my copy of CC:M, though I haven't punched it yet. I still have many, many hours of fun to come with CC:E, which I haven't even scratched the surface of. I did peruse the maps, and the one that's all town (can't recall the #) looks really fun.

Thanks for the info about the paratroopers pack. I'm gonna go ahead and pick it up....

Thread: Re: Recommended?

RPardoe — 2008-05-29T01:20:17+00:00
Don't forget that in addition to the 10 new scenarios, you also get 4 new maps as well.

Personally, I think some of the scenarios have some interesting scenario rules to add just a bit of spice to them.

How about 4 American Weapons Teams, 4 Machine Guns, and 3 Leaders trying to hold off against an attack by 9 German Squads? And if they survive the first wave - can they hold off against the second wave when another 6 squads arrive? (Scenarios 25a and 25b)

How about 5 Gliders that have landed between the German and American lines. Can you advance to recover the supplies (VPs) while preventing your opponent from doing the same? (Scenario 29)

How about setting up via a paradrop (random hexes) after the German player has set-up and then trying to regroup your forces? (Scenario 33).

The scenarios are rather nice, but it is the maps that add enough to make this an automatic purchase. Another nice feature - this one only needs CC:E to play. Future battlepacks will assume ownership of both CC:E and CC:Med.

Thread: Recommended?

Magnus Maximus — 2008-05-29T00:32:00+00:00
What's the verdict on this product? I see the ratings are high, but are these scenarios cool enough to justify giving Thoughthammer $20?

Thread: Re: This plays solo?

MerricB — 2008-05-21T23:29:42+00:00
michaeldavidcox wrote:
MerricB wrote:
I've played C&C:E solo, and it's as bad as you might expect a card-based wargame to be when not 2-player.Did you mean "...not as bad as you might expect..."?

Yes.

Cheers!

Thread: Re: This plays solo?

Chad Jensen — 2008-05-21T22:19:21+00:00
What I was wondering about is why is this expansion listed as 1-2 players while the base game is not?
A simple mistake?

Is there something about this expansion that makes it more suitable for solo play?
No. All CC games have approximately the same level of solitaire-friendliness (i.e. very little, but doable).

Or maybe its just a typo in the listing for this expansion.
Yep.

Thread: Re: This plays solo?

ZyronEnder — 2008-05-21T21:29:49+00:00
What I was wondering about is why is this expansion listed as 1-2 players while the base game is not? Is there something about this expansion that makes it more suitable for solo play? Or maybe its just a typo in the listing for this expansion.

Thread: Re: This plays solo?

chicklewis — 2008-05-21T20:57:18+00:00
I've played three games to completion solo, and they were all enjoyable. However, the nail-biting, butt-puckering tension which I always experience when playing against a live opponent was missing from the solo games.

Having no idea which cards (capabilities) your opponent is holding can be terrifying. Having a pretty darned good idea of what he will be capable of doing in his turn, much less so.

Chick

Thread: Re: This plays solo?

michaeldavidcox — 2008-05-21T11:03:23+00:00
MerricB wrote:
I've played C&C:E solo, and it's as bad as you might expect a card-based wargame to be when not 2-player.Did you mean "...not as bad as you might expect..."?

Thread: Re: This plays solo?

MerricB — 2008-05-21T04:37:59+00:00
No solitare rules are included. I've played C&C:E solo, and it's as bad as you might expect a card-based wargame to be when not 2-player. Indeed, it is quite enjoyable. However, it really is much, much better with 2 players.

Cheers,
Merric

Thread: This plays solo?

ZyronEnder — 2008-05-21T01:12:33+00:00
The # players listed for this game shows 1-2... does this expansion contain solo rules? Or what is it that makes it better suited for solitaire play?

Thread: Re: Fields of Fiery Blood

chicklewis — 2008-05-12T19:31:20+00:00
In Fields of Blood I was Americans and set up as posited above. It was merely a shooting gallery. Every American fire order resulted in one or two eliminated German units, since each order can deliver TWO 13 or 14 firepower attacks.

Chick

Thread: Re: Fields of Fiery Blood

chicklewis — 2008-05-12T19:24:21+00:00
I won as Germans in Fields of Fire. I moved up the 'woodsier' side of the board and used LOTS of smoke to cross around behind that little copse and get into melee from the woods behind the central American position. But it cost me plenty of casualties. I was very near my surrender level for the last couple of time triggers, and well behind on points when I finally killed enough Amis to cause them to surrender.

My opponent set up foolishly, with a team on either far flank instead of putting everybody in the center of the board, and this was key to my success. If he had stacked two teams, the .50 and mmg, and both leaders in the bunker and a team and mmg on either side in trenches, my casualties would have been even greater, and my cardbord Deutsch soldiers would have given up the attack long before getting to grips with the Yanks.

Chick

Thread: Re: Fields of Fiery Blood

harzal — 2008-05-12T09:19:46+00:00
You bet!!

Thread: Re: Fields of Fiery Blood

JackFlash — 2008-05-11T01:38:47+00:00
In my ASL experience, smoke is necessary to cross open areas! 'nuff said!

Thread: Fields of Fiery Blood

Joe Casadonte — 2008-05-11T00:50:31+00:00
So a friend of mine and I played back-to-back games, he ther Germans and I the Americans. I chewed him up and spat him out. Has anyone won with the Germans on either of these? I told him he had to lay down smoke to cross the open areas, but he forgot how smoke worked and ignored my advice, thinking it ineffective. Any thoughts from others who have played these two scenarios?

Thread: Re: Excuse me?

RKFade — 2008-05-09T20:21:39+00:00
And thus you've been holding your breath for 3 months hoping the thread would continue. Seeing it would not, you broke down and posted yourself.

Thread: Re: Excuse me?

monkeyrobot — 2008-05-09T12:14:25+00:00
dcorban wrote:
Can we forget about the stranglehold international banking has on the general public and get back to being outraged about paying a few dollars too much for sheets of paper???

Actually I thought that this thread was getting even more hilarious thanks to that.

Thread: Re: Scenario # 33 We Go!

kinga1965 — 2008-05-02T18:43:55+00:00
Hey Tony, was the first picture the actual starting positions? Because if so, I believe Sgt. Devine should have been broken also. I don't have the scenario in front of me, so correct me if I'm wrong.

Thread: More Red Skies - Scenario 30

kinga1965 — 2008-05-02T18:29:52+00:00
Another session of CC was in order last evening with my friend Keith. I pre-selected and set up scenario 30 before Keith arrived. When he got to my place we drew for sides. He got Russia. I got Germany.

Keith's set up was limited to one row deep in columns A through H. To further restrict his set up, all of his units had to be in separate hexes. Since the bulk of Keith's forces were to the left of my center, and my secret objective was right of center near Keith's edge of the map, I figured I would set up on the left with my heavy machine guns. I would try to get up on the hill between us for a clear line of fire to the bulk of Keith's units. I figured I had a pretty good chance of getting there ahead of him, since he had some gullies to navigate in front of him. Once on the hill I could concentrate some heavy MG fire down on his strongest weapon a light mortar.

As it turned out, I was able to get some early move cards and get my squads up on the hill in a position to fire. Keith didn't have any luck with move cards early on and had to discard a few times to bring his hand up to par. Unfortunately for him, I was able to start peppering his positions with HMG fire before he could get moving and broke a few of his units in the process. Keith then had a hard time finding recover cards and this left his units broken for several turns and I took advantage eliminating a couple of his units.

The time track started slow, but eventually picked up speed. I had some reinforcements coming in on time marker 3. When the time marker hit the 2 spot, Keith finally found some mobility and began sliding his squads away from my HMG's toward the center. He was successful in getting a unit up on the hill in the center of the map and was threatening two of my objectives. I sent one of my squads to intercept his movement while buying some time to re-position my HMG's. It worked, but not without price as Keith was able to break and then eliminate my squad. His satchel charge worked quite nicely as he hurled it from the hill down on top of my panicked squad.

At this point Keith had organized a team with a light machine gun, squad and leader into a small fire group. With these guys he unknowingly took my secret objective (#5). Fortunately, this didn't hurt me too much as I had already gone ahead on points. By this time I also had obtained the services of my reinforcements. I had set them up in the center and charged up the center hill to immediately stop any notion Keith had of advancing into my remaining objectives. With the reinfocements securing the center and a fire group badgering Keith's Russians from the left, Keith had nowhere to run to. He did an excellent job of playing cat and mouse though, and managed to survive until the second sudden death roll. I only needed to kill one more unit for the forced surrender, but that Keith is a wiley fellow and he wouldn't give up, even with the writing seemingly on the wall.

All in all this was a tough scenario for the Russians. With the low range of their units they are forced to move in tight to do any damage and this can be a death warrant with the German HMG's running around. Keith has had the upper hand in the majority of our CC matches, so it was nice to exact some revenge.

Thread: Re: Weird, random stuff in the Ardennes...

JackFlash — 2008-04-15T16:10:38+00:00
weishaupt wrote:
JackFlash wrote:
Sounds like a couple of typical CC scenarios! How do you like the Battle Pack and are you ordering BP #2-Stalingrad?
I've played all the scenarii in the first Battle Pack (some of them more than once), and I loved them all. No scenario in there is "ordinary": they all have special rules that force you to use the system in new ways. Great stuff.

And you bet I ordered BP2!! Have you?

Absolutely! can't wait!

Thread: Re: Weird, random stuff in the Ardennes...

chicklewis — 2008-04-15T14:39:19+00:00
Yowee, Weishaupt, that string of bad equipment luck DOES take the cake.

I played those two scenarios this week, and in this situation your 50 cal is TOO important to EVER use a sustained fire while it is firing. Gotta keep that barrel cool! Go ahead and use the SF with one of the mmg, but never with the 50 cal.

My American setup which seemed to work puts the bunker TWO hexes in front of the center objective, outside the woods and brush, with a trench adjacent on either side and foxholes behind. Spread the teams out at first to maximize the number of mines which are placed. Then first turn collect the "2" leader, 50 cal, and two of the mmg all in the bunker with the "1" leader and mmg in an adjacent trench. Your fields of fire are good, and for a single fire order you can always get a MASSIVE firegroup, or, more often two GOOD fire groups of about 11 or 12 FP each. Really makes the Germans in the open unhappy, and has the ability to shoot through just about any German smoke.

I sympathize with the jamming luck, though, and wish you correspondingly GOOD fortune in your next game.

Chick

Thread: Re: Weird, random stuff in the Ardennes...

faqtotum — 2008-04-15T12:52:30+00:00
This is in keeping with weishaupt's tradition of blowing out at the right moment. While most of us mortal are careful to spread our bad rolls over a smooth bell curve, he insists on bunching up all the worst possible luck all together. I think he does it purposefully so as to gather a maximum amount of sympathy from onlookers. If he only knew...

Thread: Re: Weird, random stuff in the Ardennes...

weishaupt — 2008-04-15T12:39:15+00:00
JackFlash wrote:
Sounds like a couple of typical CC scenarios! How do you like the Battle Pack and are you ordering BP #2-Stalingrad?
I've played all the scenarii in the first Battle Pack (some of them more than once), and I loved them all. No scenario in there is "ordinary": they all have special rules that force you to use the system in new ways. Great stuff.

And you bet I ordered BP2!! Have you?

Thread: Re: Weird, random stuff in the Ardennes...

weishaupt — 2008-04-15T12:37:18+00:00
GeneSteeler wrote:
Terrible Luck, but...

I open fire with my .50, addind a Crossfire and a Sustained Fire.
I roll a 6-6-TIME! Damn. The attack is good, but breaking that unit is not vital at this point, and I'd rather not have my main gun break (because of the double).

...if this is true, then you should've held on to the Sustained Fire and not played it.

There is a lot of luck/randomness that happens on the battlefield. So you have to weigh the risk (1 in 6 my gun jams) against the payoff (breaking the enemy squad), if you decide that your gun jamming is worth breaking the enemy, play the "sustained fire". If the squad is not worth jamming your gun, make the tactical choice just to attack with "crossfire". ("sustained fire" is playing Russian Roulette with your own gun!)

If you are at the advantage, you need to decrease the 'variance' that luck can throw into your plans. You need to weigh the risk you're taking against the result.

Just my 2 cents to try to help you geekbuddy!
Thanks for the advice, dude. I think you're right in some instances, but I believe this one was definitely NOT a case of "wait and see."
I really had to try and break every unit I could while they were advancing. There were so many of them, and so few of us...

Also, the Americans are limited to two orders per turn. And pretty much all you really want are Fire cards. So if you expend one of your precious Fire cards and find yourself all out of Fires, it makes sense to use Actions that'll make you draw up more cards at the end of your turn.

And when you stop to think about it, 1 chance in 6 is really low. And remember I had the initiative in case something like that happened. Now the fact that I happened to get a JAMMED trigger as well as *another* double on my reroll, that's pushing it.
And it happened twice in a row!

Thread: Re: Weird, random stuff in the Ardennes...

JackFlash — 2008-04-15T03:28:07+00:00
Sounds like a couple of typical CC scenarios! How do you like the Battle Pack and are you ordering BP #2-Stalingrad?

Thread: Re: Weird, random stuff in the Ardennes...

GeneSteeler — 2008-04-14T23:53:08+00:00
Terrible Luck, but...

I open fire with my .50, addind a Crossfire and a Sustained Fire.
I roll a 6-6-TIME! Damn. The attack is good, but breaking that unit is not vital at this point, and I'd rather not have my main gun break (because of the double).

...if this is true, then you should've held on to the Sustained Fire and not played it.

There is a lot of luck/randomness that happens on the battlefield. So you have to weigh the risk (1 in 6 my gun jams) against the payoff (breaking the enemy squad), if you decide that your gun jamming is worth breaking the enemy, play the "sustained fire". If the squad is not worth jamming your gun, make the tactical choice just to attack with "crossfire". ("sustained fire" is playing Russian Roulette with your own gun!)

If you are at the advantage, you need to decrease the 'variance' that luck can throw into your plans. You need to weigh the risk you're taking against the result.

Just my 2 cents to try to help you geekbuddy!

Thread: Weird, random stuff in the Ardennes...

weishaupt — 2008-04-14T15:02:35+00:00
I've encoutered my share of badluck (in CC as well as in other games) -- heck, I even wrote a thread about it during the Dark Days I usually refer to as "The Curse." (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/234955)

Overall, I've had way more "normal" games of CC than horribly unbalanced ones, but yesterday's game takes the cake as far as nigh impossible happenings go. I mean this was beyond frustration: my opponent and I were just staring at the board, wondering how that stuff could happen.

So Jaels and I sat down to play scenario 25a. I'm playing the Americans and I make a nice, sweet looking setup with my big .50 right smack in the middle, just one hex in front of objective 5, inside a bunker, with as wide a field of fire as I could reasonably get.
I have two other guns on the right (because that's the most likely path for the Germans), and one gun on the left (sitting atop objective 3).

First, I start the game with no Fire order in hand. Not one. So I discard everything and draw up. Still no Fire order. I discard everything again and draw up. STILL no fire order. Draw: I finally get a few of those coveted cards.
Meanwhile, the Germans have moved forward a good chunk. One of them moves through an opening and I open fire with my .50, addind a Crossfire and a Sustained Fire.
I roll a 6-6-TIME! Damn. The attack is good, but breaking that unit is not vital at this point, and I'd rather not have my main gun break (because of the double). So I give the initiative to my opponent and roll again.
1-1-JAMMED. I just can't believe it. My .50 gun is destroyed instantly.

The following turn, one German unit moves closer to my position and I open fire with one of my Med MG. I add a Sustained Fire and roll.
1-1-JAMMED. Another gun goes bust. I am not making this up.

So now I've got one gun on the left (all the way on objective 3) and one gun on the right. But the team holding the gun on my right gets broken by a sniper. I spend a couple turns fishing for a Recover and finally draw one. But before I get to use it, Jaels triggers an event that turns out to be Air Support. And wouldn't you know it, the bombs fall right next to my guy. So he's dead, and another of my guns is lost.

And all this in the first 30 minutes!
Pretty soon, all I had left was the gun on the left, with the rest of the map wide open for German exit points. So I conceded the game.

Then we turned to scenario 25b... which wasn't all bad, but pretty much along the same lines as 25a.

At some point I got my "good" leader (Commande Range 2) eliminated, but brought it back through a Walking Wounded. Fate gave me a break, allowing me to put the guy on the map at the far edge, (row 10), and in a shellhole! True, the guy was broken, but with his 10 morale and the foxhole, there was no way anyone in the area could have shot him to death (I was fearing a sniper, though).
I had a Move in hand: all I need was to survive until the end of the German turn and then I could move the guy out, score three points, and bring him back on the next Time advance.

Jaels played his whole turn (six long, damn orders...) and on the very last order (he fired at some other unit of mine), he rolled and event: Replacements! Said replacement were deployed right on top of my leader, and the ensuing melee resulted in the death of yet another American officer.

Again, I eventually conceded the game, once I found myself in the same situation: only holding on to objective 3, with the rest of the map wide open.

Argh! And now I want revenge. And it'll be bloody!!

Thread: Re: It could not have been any closer - one addl card in my fate deck => I lose.

weishaupt — 2008-03-31T13:45:11+00:00
Cool match!
Next time, "tune" your deck by removing a few cards. That way you'll have more chances of triggering an early Sudden Death!

Image

Chad Jensen — 2007-10-15T22:27:51+00:00
the back cover

Image

Chad Jensen — 2007-10-15T22:26:32+00:00
the front cover

Image

lmyrick — 2007-08-28T04:12:33+00:00
map 28 final art

Image

lmyrick — 2007-08-28T04:12:05+00:00
map 25 final art

Image

pitferret — 2007-05-24T02:10:34+00:00
Logo for the first Battle Pack

Image

Chad Jensen — 2007-05-23T23:00:39+00:00
a partial image of one of the scenarios