Tide of Iron | BoardGameGeek

Reply: Tide of Iron: Normandy:: General:: Re: Do you need the base ToI to play this?

TRDG — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:42:22 +0000

Thanks Devon, I saw the base ToI game but not this one so I had to order it in from the hobby store. At least I have a start now to get into the rules and such.

Cheers, thanks for the speedy reply, time to head back to the hobby shop I think!!

Tom

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Most used Light/Med/Heavy tanks of WWII

philmcd — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:29:05 +0000

by philmcd

Ahhhhh

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Variants:: Re: Adding Aircraft to ToI

philmcd — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:27:28 +0000

by philmcd

It's your idea. test it and let us know how it goes :)

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Most used Light/Med/Heavy tanks of WWII

ibn_ul_khattab — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:25:15 +0000

by ibn_ul_khattab

philmcd wrote:
DonMegel wrote:
Lets assume I go with the PII for the German light infantry, what do I do with the PIII? Have one A&A tank equal 2 PIIIs and 1 PIV? That would make them very underpowered against US and Soviet armor of the same class.

And what to do with the StuG?

PzIII was NOT underpowered against Shermans, but it WAS against Russian Medium tanks. Thems the facts. I don't see any point in a fantasy scenario using real weaponry.

From 1942 to the end of the war the Sherman, though often upgraded, was virtually the only front line tank for both Brit and US forces.

Lee's, Grant's, Crusaders, Matildas Crusaders were mainly support tanks. The Churchill did not comprise a large part of the Brit armoured forces. The Firefly and Pershing arrived too late to be of consequence.

I think he is talking about in ToI, I'm not sure though.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Most used Light/Med/Heavy tanks of WWII

philmcd — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:13:52 +0000

by philmcd

DonMegel wrote:
Lets assume I go with the PII for the German light infantry, what do I do with the PIII? Have one A&A tank equal 2 PIIIs and 1 PIV? That would make them very underpowered against US and Soviet armor of the same class.

And what to do with the StuG?

PzIII was NOT underpowered against Shermans, but it WAS against Russian Medium tanks. Thems the facts. I don't see any point in a fantasy scenario using real weaponry.

Reply: Tide of Iron: Normandy:: General:: Re: Do you need the base ToI to play this?

Devon Harmon — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:11:45 +0000

by Devon Harmon

You need the base TOI game to make use of this expansion.

Thread: Tide of Iron: Normandy:: General:: Do you need the base ToI to play this?

TRDG — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:01:59 +0000

by TRDG

Hey gamers, do you need the basic Tide of Iron box set to play this Normandy expansion? I've been thinking of getting into this system, but I want to try out the King Tigers and Panthers, as well as the M-10. Also is there any Firefly units, and I take it there are no AT guns, only in DF from what I read.......?

Thanks

Tom

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Most used Light/Med/Heavy tanks of WWII

ibn_ul_khattab — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:00:15 +0000

by ibn_ul_khattab

We are only offering advice on the history. I suspect none of us think it is a particularly good idea to do what you are doing. If you are really determined, go have a look at this game Frontline General, it is basically designed for what you have in mind already, except it is operational/tactical not strategic/tactical.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Most used Light/Med/Heavy tanks of WWII

DonMegel — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 20:44:53 +0000

by DonMegel

Lets assume I go with the PII for the German light infantry, what do I do with the PIII? Have one A&A tank equal 2 PIIIs and 1 PIV? That would make them very underpowered against US and Soviet armor of the same class.

And what to do with the StuG?

Thread: Tide of Iron:: Variants:: Adding Aircraft to ToI

DonMegel — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 20:41:52 +0000

by DonMegel

I have returned to my quest to play every battle from Axis and Allies on the ToI board. I have struggled with how to move aircraft into ToI. My first inclination was to use cards but they just dont seem worth it for the 10IPC they cost in A&A.

Then I remembered that the Axis and Allies Miniatures introduced little aircraft models.

What if, for every A&A plane, you get one Miniature plane on the ToI board? You would move your planes in during the Action phase and conduct attacks. They could move anywhere on the board but must stop after the attack is made and become fatigued. A plane can be set to "patrol" by placing it in OpFire and would attack other aircraft. Planes shot down in ToI are removed from the A&A board.

What do you think?

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Most used Light/Med/Heavy tanks of WWII

philmcd — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 20:02:08 +0000

by philmcd

For most of the war, PzIII in it's various incarnations, comprised most of the German MEDIUM tanks. It was never considered a light tank, even at the end of the war, in it's H and J formats.
In the latter part of the war, they also had the PzIVC and PzIVD as infantry support tanks and the PzIVF and then the PzIVF2 as heavier medium tanks, but never in the same quantities as the PzIII.

The PzIIa was their main light tank.

The Sherman Firefly for the British and Pershing for the Americans were introduced too late in the war to have any real impact. Most of them never fired a shot in anger.
The M10 had a significant impact in the late war due to it's speed and gun size, but it wasn't a tank due to it's open cockpit and relatively thin armour. It had to be kept on the move or in fortified positions.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Most used Light/Med/Heavy tanks of WWII

DonMegel — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 19:48:44 +0000

by DonMegel

Basicly I want to play out A&A battles on the ToI board instead of rolling dice. I am altering A&A rules to accomplish this.

I want to stick to history as much as possible without sacrificing simplicity.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Most used Light/Med/Heavy tanks of WWII

wargamer55 — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 19:00:51 +0000

by wargamer55

The decision not to field a heavy tank by the US wasn't so much of a flaw, but a high-level strategic decision to favor mobility (including strategic mobility). This worked pretty well until the last phases of the war, when the US started running into Panthers and Tigers a lot and decided they needed something heavier, hence the Pershing. As it turned out, these tanks and their British contemporary, the Centurion, arrived too late to affect the war and the Allies won without having a heavy tank.

I'm not sure what you are trying to do. Create TOI scenarios using A&A to determine forces? Crete an alternative combat resolution system using TOI for your A&A games?

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Variants:: Re: I need Japan tanks

DonMegel — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 17:58:53 +0000

by DonMegel

These metal ones are perfect. I'm going to make a mold and cast my own plastic replicas.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Most used Light/Med/Heavy tanks of WWII

DonMegel — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 17:47:42 +0000

by DonMegel

Oh wow, I never expected such a big responce.

Let me explain some of my goals first, that might help.

I decided to make one A&A tank equal three ToI tanks for simplicity sake. We tried a point system and it was complex and always left some tanks out. Halftracks and AT guns will fall under mechnized infantry.

I also wanted to include all of the ToI armor either in the early game (1942) or researched for later in the war. This required me to fold the Stug, which is an assault gun, into the armor fold. Perhaps I could put it with the mechnized infantry (One half track, one AT gun, one truck and three squads). But that is one of the reasons for this discussion.

I placed the Panzer III as a light tank because it is so much smaller than the other Axis armor and I wanted it to be used.

I read that the American armor philosophy was flawed, that they really didnt make heavy tanks till the very end of the war. Instead, they used the M-10s in thier place for an anti armor role.

The Panther is a medium tank because the Germs classified it as a medium tank. It has to be to compete with Russian armor.

Your right about the King Tiger but it will be a "researched" tank and not availilbe at the begining.

So, you think the Matilda should be the UK heavy and the Crusader its light? With the Sherman as its Med?

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Rules:: Re: draw strategy cards ... HQ or play area

Emil 109 — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 15:23:28 +0000

by Emil 109

Not 100% sure:

You draw card(s) and put them on your HQ Area.

If it is an action card you can play it any time starting from the next turn, as part of one of your Orders (one from the three you usually have).

If it is a Command with lasting effects like artillery, you pay it's cost and you get it in front of you, in your playing area. From there you can use it in a future turn.

If it's a Command with no lasting effects you just discard it after using it.

Note that the "Activate Strategy Cards" happens in phase 3 "Spend Command" of the Command Phase, before the "Draw new Strategy Cards" of phase 2 of the Status Phase. So only actions can be played in the coming turn.

Thread: Tide of Iron:: Rules:: draw strategy cards ... HQ or play area

bartc — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 14:50:30 +0000

by bartc

in the rules on page 16 under
1. Draw strategy cards:

"the drawn card is placed faceup in his HQ area"

on the player reference sheet it is stated:
1) Draw Strategy cards:

"placing the card faceup in its play area"

which one is correct?
or am I missing something here?

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Most used Light/Med/Heavy tanks of WWII

philmcd — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 12:28:44 +0000

by philmcd

You are right :)

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Most used Light/Med/Heavy tanks of WWII

dude163 — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 11:37:20 +0000

by dude163

The IS 2 is a tank, I think you are thinking of the Su122 TD

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Most used Light/Med/Heavy tanks of WWII

ibn_ul_khattab — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 10:54:17 +0000

by ibn_ul_khattab

Yeah, the Firefly wasn't a heavy tank really, big gun of course, but no real armour to speak of. Also more than the actual gun/armour thing is how the tanks were used. I'm not sure how that fits in, but I'm sure it probably should.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Most used Light/Med/Heavy tanks of WWII

panzer-attack — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 10:50:19 +0000

by panzer-attack

Do you guys think the sherman firefly would be a good candidate for a heavy UK tank? It's probably easier to model using the Tide of Iron rules. Then again, I suppose it's really just a medium tank with a big gun.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Solitaire Variant

neo.colpaert — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 08:31:39 +0000

by neo.colpaert

Thx. I'll need it. ;)

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Most used Light/Med/Heavy tanks of WWII

philmcd — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 07:16:02 +0000

by philmcd

German

Light tank: PzIIa
Medium tank: PzIII (various), later PzIVF2
Heavy tank: Tiger/Panther

King Tiger was never available in large quantities.

The most used medium tank by both US and GB was the Sherman.

US heavy tank Sherman Jumbo/Pershing (late war only)
GB heavy tank Sherman Jumbo (late war only)

Both the M10 AND the IS2 were tank destroyers rather than tanks

The Matilda I and II had almost impenetrable armour, but had pea shooter guns and were very slow. Therefore they were best used as infantry support tanks.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Most used Light/Med/Heavy tanks of WWII

ibn_ul_khattab — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 05:59:17 +0000

by ibn_ul_khattab

wargamer55 wrote:
DonMegel wrote:
I am working on a rather complex intergration between Axis and Allies and Tide of Iron. I plan on allowing the production of Light, Medium and Heavy armor on the Axis and Allies map that would then translate into tanks on the Tide of Iron map.

Any way, I have been trying to figure out what were the most popular tanks in use by USA, Germany, Japan, Russia, and UK around 1942. Later models will be needed for researched upgrades.

This is what I have so far.

a.Light:
i. Germany: Panzer III, StuG III G
ii. Japan: Type 95
iii. Russia: T-70
iv. USA: M3 Lee
v. UK

b.Medium:
i. Germany: Panzer IV (later Panther)
ii. Japan: Type 97 Cha-He (Later the Chi-Nu)
iii. Russia: T-34 (later T-34/85)
iv. USA: M-4 Sherman
v. UK: Matilda, Crusader

c.Heavy:
i. Germany: Tiger (Later King Tiger and Jagdpanzer)
ii. Japan: No heavy tanks.
iii. Russia: KV-1 (later, IS-2)
iv. USA: M-10 tank destroyer
v. UK: M-4 Sherman

Please, comments/suggestions.

I'm not sure I agree with your premise. Axis & Allies tanks represent a lot more than just tanks, but a whole mechanized fighting force.

But if you are determined, you can find production data for all these vehicles online. Generally speaking you are more or less correct. Some errors though.

Panzer III was not a light tank but was considered a medium tank while in service. STG III was an assault gun and not a light tank. The US light tank was the M3 Stuart. The M3 Lee was an entirely different medium tank.The UK light tank would probably be the Crusader cruiser tank.

Panzer IV was the most common German medium tank for most of the war. The Panther was considerd by the Germans to be a medium tank, but was really a heavy tank by the standards of everyone else. British infantry and cruiser tanks don't fit well into the light-medium-heavy paradigm. The Matilda, for example, was a heavy tank in protection, but a light tank in firepower.

The M-10 tank destroyer was not a heavy tank in any way. The US didn't really field a heavy tank in significant numbers, but they did have the M-26 Pershing. You could consider the "Jumbo" version of the Sherman a heavy tank. The UK heavy would be the Churchill.

Hmmm great minds think a like ;)

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Most used Light/Med/Heavy tanks of WWII

wargamer55 — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 05:49:56 +0000

by wargamer55

DonMegel wrote:
I am working on a rather complex intergration between Axis and Allies and Tide of Iron. I plan on allowing the production of Light, Medium and Heavy armor on the Axis and Allies map that would then translate into tanks on the Tide of Iron map.

Any way, I have been trying to figure out what were the most popular tanks in use by USA, Germany, Japan, Russia, and UK around 1942. Later models will be needed for researched upgrades.

This is what I have so far.

a.Light:
i. Germany: Panzer III, StuG III G
ii. Japan: Type 95
iii. Russia: T-70
iv. USA: M3 Lee
v. UK

b.Medium:
i. Germany: Panzer IV (later Panther)
ii. Japan: Type 97 Cha-He (Later the Chi-Nu)
iii. Russia: T-34 (later T-34/85)
iv. USA: M-4 Sherman
v. UK: Matilda, Crusader

c.Heavy:
i. Germany: Tiger (Later King Tiger and Jagdpanzer)
ii. Japan: No heavy tanks.
iii. Russia: KV-1 (later, IS-2)
iv. USA: M-10 tank destroyer
v. UK: M-4 Sherman

Please, comments/suggestions.

I'm not sure I agree with your premise. Axis & Allies tanks represent a lot more than just tanks, but a whole mechanized fighting force.

But if you are determined, you can find production data for all these vehicles online. Generally speaking you are more or less correct. Some errors though.

Panzer III was not a light tank but was considered a medium tank while in service. STG III was an assault gun and not a light tank. The US light tank was the M3 Stuart. The M3 Lee was an entirely different medium tank.The UK light tank would probably be the Crusader cruiser tank.

Panzer IV was the most common German medium tank for most of the war. The Panther was considerd by the Germans to be a medium tank, but was really a heavy tank by the standards of everyone else. British infantry and cruiser tanks don't fit well into the light-medium-heavy paradigm. The Matilda, for example, was a heavy tank in protection, but a light tank in firepower.

The M-10 tank destroyer was not a heavy tank in any way. The US didn't really field a heavy tank in significant numbers, but they did have the M-26 Pershing. You could consider the "Jumbo" version of the Sherman a heavy tank. The UK heavy would be the Churchill.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Most used Light/Med/Heavy tanks of WWII

ibn_ul_khattab — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 05:48:52 +0000

by ibn_ul_khattab

Light tanks
M3 Lee/Grant was not a light tank, Try the M2 stuart.
German Light tanks should maybe be PzII or 38T

UK - used the Stuart, but you should also think about the crusader

Medium

UK - sherman or Grant/Lee later cromwell, maybe the crusader depending on your perspective. The matilda was an early war heavy tank, later it lacked the firepower and speed to be much more than a tank to back up infantry.

Heavy
US never fielded heavy tanks until maybe the Pershing or those up armoured shermans at the end of the war.

UK - Churchill easy...

Thread: Tide of Iron:: General:: Most used Light/Med/Heavy tanks of WWII

DonMegel — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 05:37:26 +0000

by DonMegel

I am working on a rather complex intergration between Axis and Allies and Tide of Iron. I plan on allowing the production of Light, Medium and Heavy armor on the Axis and Allies map that would then translate into tanks on the Tide of Iron map.

Any way, I have been trying to figure out what were the most popular tanks in use by USA, Germany, Japan, Russia, and UK around 1942. Later models will be needed for researched upgrades.

This is what I have so far.

a.Light:
i. Germany: Panzer III, StuG III G
ii. Japan: Type 95
iii. Russia: T-70
iv. USA: M3 Lee
v. UK

b.Medium:
i. Germany: Panzer IV (later Panther)
ii. Japan: Type 97 Cha-He (Later the Chi-Nu)
iii. Russia: T-34 (later T-34/85)
iv. USA: M-4 Sherman
v. UK: Matilda, Crusader

c.Heavy:
i. Germany: Tiger (Later King Tiger and Jagdpanzer)
ii. Japan: No heavy tanks.
iii. Russia: KV-1 (later, IS-2)
iv. USA: M-10 tank destroyer
v. UK: M-4 Sherman

Please, comments/suggestions.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Solitaire Variant

bassman211 — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 23:46:16 +0000

by bassman211

I wish you good luck on your solitaire variant.

Thread: Tide of Iron:: General:: Seeking opponents in Chicago

BuddhaBob74 — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 20:22:40 +0000

by BuddhaBob74

Hi all,

If anyone is seeking opponents in Chicago, I'm game. I'm home a lot of nights and have trouble traveling, but if you can come to Berwyn, I can game, and if I need to come to you, I can try to find a way.

I have the base game and all expansions except Days of the Fox, which I'll pick up sometime. I have a regular opponent but could use more.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Solitaire Variant

neo.colpaert — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 16:57:03 +0000

by neo.colpaert

I'm actually working on the Solitaire Tide of Iron (STOI)-version, based on the S(olitaire)ASL-version. A lot of work, but if it works out I'll keep you informed.
Maybe some other BGGeeker has worked out ideas as well?

Jan Colpaert

:ninja:

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Solitaire Variant

bassman211 — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 16:50:39 +0000

by bassman211

i guess i will try playing both sides equally, any advice?

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Solitaire Variant

philmcd — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 07:09:25 +0000

by philmcd

bassman211 wrote:
isn't that kind of hard to play fairly?

Not at all. I play both sides to win, and don't treat either side as MINE. For me it's all about fun rather than winning. If you enjoy yourself, you win :)

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Newbie questions....!

Slotracer — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 06:43:05 +0000

by Slotracer

Okay, thanks alot to everyone who helped out here.
Guess I just have to go for the lot!!!
My wife won't be pleased!

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Solitaire Variant

Slotracer — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 06:39:09 +0000

by Slotracer

You would only be cheating yourself! :shake:

File: Tide of Iron: Days of the Fox:: Additonal Operations Cards for Scenario Designers

iansc — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 05:48:06 +0000

by iansc

Additonal Operations Cards for Scenario Designers for Board Game: Tide of Iron: Days of the Fox ]]>

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Solitaire Variant

bassman211 — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 02:37:35 +0000

by bassman211

isn't that kind of hard to play fairly?

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Newbie questions....!

TeufelHund — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 02:29:47 +0000

by TeufelHund

As others have said, you don't need DotF to play Normandy, however it *is* an excellent expansion with generally more balanced scenarios than the base game and it includes elements that aren't in vanilla ToI or Normandy (AT guns, British tanks, some operational cards and strategy decks etc).

If you ever buy the Designer Series scenario book, about 1/3 of the scenarios there require DotF to play.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Solitaire Variant

Ceej — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 23:16:34 +0000

by Ceej

There's really not much of a need for one - just play both sides to the best of your ability. ToI has basically no hidden information except for the occasional hidden units in some scenarios.

Thread: Tide of Iron:: General:: Solitaire Variant

bassman211 — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 22:29:17 +0000

by bassman211

Does anyone know of a good solitaire variant?

Thread: Tide of Iron: Normandy:: Rules:: Operation Goodwood

beresford — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 22:07:30 +0000

by beresford

I queried the set-up for this scenario. These are the responses from Rob Kouba:

1. Division 1 Tiger I starts in 'the hex with the grey border on map 7B'. In fact there are three such hexes. The rest of the Division start on the opposite side of the (complete) map for no obvious reason.

1) Tiger should be in any of the grey hexes on the specified board (it is indeed correct that the other members of the division are on the other side of the board.

2. Division 2 start in building hexes, including their Tiger I. TOI basic rules say that vehicles may never enter buildings

2) Their Tiger should also be on any hex with a grey border on 30B.

3. One of the two British entry hexes is adjacent to a German set-up area (on board 29B). Meanwhile the British Command Objective marker on map 26B, where you would expect to find a British entry hex, is well away from the action. The consequence is that the British cannot avoid losing the Initiative at the end of Turn 1.

3) You are correct. Although after the reinforcements from turn 1, the British can take it back by capturing the neutral building location if they choose to (along with the objective on 22A).

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Newbie questions....!

Marasaurio — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 16:38:30 +0000

by Marasaurio

Slotracer wrote:
Thanks for a very quick answer.
Only reason I asked is because my wife wants to buy it for me for my birthday and the battles of Africa never really meant anything to me like the battle of Normandy does!

So I better ask in another way - can I play ToI with Normandy, but without Days of the Fox?

Yes, you can. There are brits in Normandy, too.
I guess just the ones you need.
I wasn't very excited with Africa, but finally I love DotF, too.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Newbie questions....!

princemousey — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 07:26:48 +0000

by princemousey

It's been my pleasure.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Newbie questions....!

Slotracer — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 07:25:16 +0000

by Slotracer

Thanks. :p

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Newbie questions....!

princemousey — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 07:15:53 +0000

by princemousey

Yes.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Newbie questions....!

Slotracer — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 07:08:59 +0000

by Slotracer

Thanks for a very quick answer.
Only reason I asked is because my wife wants to buy it for me for my birthday and the battles of Africa never really meant anything to me like the battle of Normandy does!

So I better ask in another way - can I play ToI with Normandy, but without Days of the Fox?

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Newbie questions....!

princemousey — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 06:52:13 +0000

by princemousey

I think you should actually play the base game first, before getting any expansions. If you don't like it, that's less of a financial loss. If you do like it, on the other hand, you can save on shipping by ordering all the expansions at once!

To answer your question on whether you need DoTF to play Normandy expansion, look here: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/38275.

Lastly, FFG which publishes ToI does have it's own game forums over here: http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_temas.asp?efid=....

Thread: Tide of Iron:: General:: Newbie questions....!

Slotracer — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 06:40:43 +0000

by Slotracer

Hi, I'm thinking of buying Tide of Iron and the "Normandy" expansion, but do I need to buy the "Days of the Fox" expansion first/too?

And does Tide of Iron has the same community/website/forum like Memoir '44?

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Corrected cards?

boersma8 — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 09:18:05 +0000

by boersma8

Afraid not. You'll still have to make do with the corrected text at the back of the first rulebook. I do hope they'll publish the corrected cards in the next game expansion, though ( hopefully " Fury of the Bear" )

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Overlay cards.

keighleyrob — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 05:16:55 +0000

by keighleyrob

24 it is then, phew. Thanks for that .

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Reviews:: Re: Comparing the Incomparable: Tide of Iron and Conflict of Heroes: Awakening the Bear!

kaufschtick — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 04:23:42 +0000

by kaufschtick

cmontgo2 wrote:
I must say that I simply love both games, and they are both worth owning, if you can afford it. But the games are completely different. At the end of the day, the only common ground they really have is their theme.

I couldn't agree more. :)

luckyme2 wrote:
I have CoH and M44(ok nearly ToI ;) ) and they both simply play differently.

I have all three (ToI, CoH & M44), and they are all worth owning, IMHO. M44 is great when time is at a premium, CoH for those times when you really want to crank up the "realism factor" (which does not go hand in hand with the "complexity factor" :) ), and Tide of Iron when you're looking for a game with all the bells and whistles.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Overlay cards.

LargeMike — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 23:51:54 +0000

by LargeMike

From the FAQ & Errata version 1.5.2 their are 23 overlay pieces in the earlier edditions, 24 in the latest edition.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Overlay cards.

WhiteKnight85 — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 22:58:17 +0000

by WhiteKnight85

I don't have the rulebook in front of me, but I do remember that there's a typo in the rulebook. Chances are excellent that you have the proper number of tiles in your game.

There's been several threads which discuss this, and give the exact number of tiles in the game, but good luck in locating them due to the large amount of threads pertaining to ToI.

The main point is that the number given in the rulebook is definitely wrong, and states a number higher than the actual number.

Thread: Tide of Iron:: General:: Overlay cards.

keighleyrob — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 22:17:37 +0000

by keighleyrob

In the rule book it says that there are 28 overlay map pieces. I have less than that, Am I supposed to count the 3 section pieces as 1 piece or 3 pieces, same for the 4 piece and the 2 piece cards?

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Variants:: Re: Tide of Iron Campaign

hillep — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 20:59:22 +0000

by hillep

I managed to put together some kind of rules for campaign play that regulate the usage uf strategy decks, mustering soldiers, building vehicles, limiting army size and number of armies, constructing defensive structures and army movement...

In couple of weeks (depending how much stuff do I have to do) I try to put them into English and share them with You (if there's anyone interested...).

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Reviews:: Re: Comparing the Incomparable: Tide of Iron and Conflict of Heroes: Awakening the Bear!

luckyme2 — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 17:50:05 +0000

by luckyme2

Good review Chris:thumbsup:

I have CoH and M44(ok nearly ToI ;) ) and they both simply play differently.

Thread: Tide of Iron: Normandy:: Rules:: Some rules answers from FFG

beresford — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 16:39:23 +0000

by beresford

I sent some questions and Rob Kouba replied within a couple of days. Some answers aren't what I expected, but here goes......

'Picking Up The Pieces' 'After a successful Naval Bombardment, place
a crater token in that hex'.

1. What is a 'successful' Bombardment?
2. Are craters placed on Bunkers?

1. An attack that causes damage.
2. If it breaks through its defenses, yes.

Outfitted Bunkers Ops card

Does use of the Bunker MG fatigue the squad? Can the squad add its
own firepower to the Bunker MG?

Yes the squad is fatigued. No, they do not add their own firepower.

Beach Defenses Ops card

Can squads in bunkers ASSAULT units that are not in a beach hex?

No.

M10 Tank Destroyer 'their armor value is -1'.

This means you SUBTRACT one, not that the target's armor value is
literally -1 (just checking).

Yes. Subtract one.

Forest Stream hex

Is the Movement Cost the same as a Stream hex?

Yes. Depending on the stream depth.

Reply: Tide of Iron: Days of the Fox:: General:: Re: Can the Brits win Hellfire pass?

Drax Kramer — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 19:33:08 +0000

by Drax Kramer

I played this scenario last night and lost. However, the winner was decided by the outcome of the last assault against the German AT hex.

The scenario started as usual by the destruction of the Crusader and light damage on Matilda. I decided to use the infantry as the tool to fight it out. I tried to suppress German MG squads and/or to fatigue them. The only way for British to do something was to combine artillery cards to damage German squads and desert tactics cards to fatigue MG squads who are usually put in OP mode. In the last turn I played the card that fatigues two of mine as well as two of German squads.

I guess, the way for British player to win is to get lucky with the cards as well as to think "Russian". Use your infantry or lose them.

Reply: Tide of Iron: Normandy:: General:: Re: Piercing the Siegfried line

boersma8 — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 05:54:47 +0000

by boersma8

Mosier wrote:
I don't have this expansion so I might be talking out of my butt here, but please bear with me.

I think the question isn't whether or not this particular scenario is balanced so much as whether or not the campaign is balanced. Correct me if I am wrong, but I assume that no matter how the campaign progresses the Germans will be pushed back to Germany by the Americans, just like in history. It sounds like you determine who "wins" the campaign not by Germany being conquered/defended but by scoring more points than the opponent. Is this correct?

If that is so, I would think the German strategy is to score enough on the Americans in previous battles that they can hold out enough in this scenario to still win the campaign. That would seem to be the most logical structure because with the allied manpower/industrial advantage I don't see Germany winning outright post D-Day. The best they could do was inflict maximum damage. Looked at from that perspective, I would accept an unbalanced scenario here and there if they all balanced out over the course of the campaign.

I completely agree with you. Again, my problem isn't that this particular scenario may or may not be imbalanced, the problem is that the feel to this scenario is completely wrong: Whatever you do, don't go and seek cover in pillboxes and by all means stay out of LOS. Again, one would expect the Americans to have to break through the defenses first and then possibly have enough units left to win this particular scenario ( it's possible to win the campaign while losing this particular scenario).

Reply: Tide of Iron: Normandy:: General:: Re: Piercing the Siegfried line

Mosier — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 01:02:19 +0000

by Mosier

I don't have this expansion so I might be talking out of my butt here, but please bear with me.

I think the question isn't whether or not this particular scenario is balanced so much as whether or not the campaign is balanced. Correct me if I am wrong, but I assume that no matter how the campaign progresses the Germans will be pushed back to Germany by the Americans, just like in history. It sounds like you determine who "wins" the campaign not by Germany being conquered/defended but by scoring more points than the opponent. Is this correct?

If that is so, I would think the German strategy is to score enough on the Americans in previous battles that they can hold out enough in this scenario to still win the campaign. That would seem to be the most logical structure because with the allied manpower/industrial advantage I don't see Germany winning outright post D-Day. The best they could do was inflict maximum damage. Looked at from that perspective, I would accept an unbalanced scenario here and there if they all balanced out over the course of the campaign.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Strategy:: Re: Where do you deploy your officers?

LeeMiester — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 01:41:11 +0000

by LeeMiester

Stephen has some great points above . Medics get a bonus 'kill cover' die roll and with an officer they get the ' suppression cover' roll too . We all know medics arent offered in all scenarios but this is a good combo if you get the chance .

Reply: Tide of Iron: Days of the Fox:: Sessions:: Re: Matilda's nightmare (Scenario 2: Rescue Mission)

wookie78 — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 15:33:47 +0000

by wookie78

Recently played this scenario. The German player drew from the shared Desert tactics deck the "hidden minefield" card.

The earliest the Birtish player can activate the American unit is by the end of turn 2. This gives the unit three turns to get off board. The hidden minefield card however in effect when placed on the exit hex forces an extra move (if they survive enemy fire!). In the event the German player draws this card I cannot see how the British player can ever win the scenario - it is a sudden death card.

I would suggest that maybe as a house rule for this scenario the hidden minefield card,(like the sniper card from the same deck), should be removed.

Have others had this experience? And if so do you have a house rule to deal with it?

I posted this exact same observation on the FFG forums the other day:
http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?e...

I agree with you that the Hidden Minefield card should really be removed from the Desert Tactics I deck to prevent this from happening. Another option would be to increase the length of the game to 6 rounds but this would be tough for the Americans to escape as they would be sitting ducks once they have had to stop for the minefield (assuming they survive the minefield that is!)

Still probably my favourite TOI scenario however!

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Rules:: Re: Supply Priority

Emil 109 — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 08:44:34 +0000

by Emil 109

LeeMiester wrote:
we've tried to explore all sorts of different approaches with Germany to this one and the last game saw them surviving the longest so far but in all seriousness , I don't see much going Germany's way in this one ..

I agree. Try to play a short version of 6 or even 5 game turns ;).

Anyway, you can play this scenario twice. Each of you must play once as the Germans and then you compare the turns to find the victor.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Rules:: Re: Supply Priority

Emil 109 — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 08:41:10 +0000

by Emil 109

LeeMiester wrote:
Wow . Thats huge for the Americans , escpecially if its drawn early game .

Exactly. You have to search for this card early on to maximize its potential.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Rules:: Re: Supply Priority

LeeMiester — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 23:21:41 +0000

by LeeMiester

Thanks Yiannis for confirming . My friend and I have played Liberation a few times and I forgot to mention its the Liberation scenario Im talking about above :shake:

but we've tried to explore all sorts of different approaches with Germany to this one and the last game saw them surviving the longest so far but in all seriousness , I don't see much going Germany's way in this one ..

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Rules:: Re: Supply Priority

LeeMiester — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 23:16:29 +0000

by LeeMiester

Wow . Thats huge for the Americans , escpecially if its drawn early game . In the game with my freind it showed up just as round 6 was starting , and with reinforcements from the 4th the card seemed kinda moot at that point ( game ended in the 6th anyways . One lone German mortar left ). But early game this is a gem .

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Rules:: Re: Supply Priority

Emil 109 — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 08:31:58 +0000

by Emil 109

For the entire game :).

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Rules:: Re: AT squads moving with +3 bonus .

LeeMiester — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 06:45:00 +0000

by LeeMiester

Cheers!!

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Rules:: Re: Sniper cards and multiple squad pins.

LeeMiester — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 06:44:24 +0000

by LeeMiester

Cheers!!

Thread: Tide of Iron:: General:: Corrected cards?

Paolo Robino — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 06:05:05 +0000

by Paolo Robino

Distracted by Conflict of Heroes: Awakening the Bear! - Russia 1941-1942 and Memoir '44, I forgot how I liked this game. Now, I want to play it again! However...

I bought ToI when it was fresh out. Some cards were misprinted, and errata were provided at the end of the rulebook. Is it still so, or later printings (if any) had corrected cards? Are corrected cards available somewhere?

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Rules:: Re: AT squads moving with +3 bonus .

toku42 — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 02:22:59 +0000

by toku42

Always divide their total power, so add +3 and then divide

Thread: Tide of Iron:: Rules:: Supply Priority

LeeMiester — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 02:15:05 +0000

by LeeMiester

When the card ' Supply Priority ' is played from Supply Deck I , is it then up for the entire game giving the player -1 command cost or is it a one shot deal ?

Reply: Tide of Iron: Normandy:: General:: Re: Piercing the Siegfried line

rabmallet — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 01:42:43 +0000

by rabmallet

I am in the middle (starting turn 4). I'm the Americans and I've been thrashed for the last couple of scenarios in the campaign but love the campaign mechanic. So, I only have about 4 bronze star units on the board, which means I'm way behind to win the campaign.

That said, here's what's happened: My opponent did not set up AT units in the pillboxes, knowing they'd draw my tank fire. Instead he put MGs, but they were quickly dispatched. To an earlier point about the pillboxes, yes, you get +3 dice to hit, and 6 cover dice is excellent, but with all those Shermans who can fire from just outside defensive AT range, it's only a matter of movement points before the pillboxes are shelled into oblivion. In considering what I would do (again, this is only turn 4) when we swap sides and he does the campaign as Americans, I thought about taking cover behind the fortifications, where I couldn't be shelled from afar. That seems completely silly when there are all those trenches and pillboxes, but the Germans are sitting ducks until the Shermans can be taken out. There also seems to be nothing that would slow the advance, since no German tanks start on the board, and German artillery is slow to wind up since there are no Command points to start with on turn one.

Well, on turn 3 I've taken the entire line north of the barracks with Division 2 and the pillbox south of the barracks with an AT unit of the 29th. There are Shermans adjacent to the barracks and the entire 29th is arrayed in the houses to the south. An MG unit an several squads are in/around the barracks (including a double mortar squad) and I've eliminated 3 squads. I have taken nearly 2 squads casualties, but no tanks, and the M10s are arriving.

But wait – there are THREE CARDS' WORTH of German artillery waiting in the HQ area. Already bought, but no contact. So I could have at least 3 FFEs landing on my guys next turn. I got them all into buildings, thank goodness. But that's still a bit ominous.

So I think that there may be a balance problem. The Americans not only outnumber the Germans to start with (which they should, in order to have a chance at winning), especially with armor, but they also get artillery and a reinforcement deck. The Germans get no reinforcement deck, some 4 squads and 2 tanks reinforcements, and the barracks (die roll randomness). In previous scenarios of the campaign, that German reinforcement deck got used completely up, and it saved their ass.

But I've been wrong before. The 2nd and 3rd scenarios were a mess for me, and they initially looked like walkovers. The thing is, if the Panzer IV and Panther came on the board but there were no M10s, it might even out, it seems. But the German tanks will have to contend with the M10s and then the Shermans, so they won't have a chance to harass the infantry, where they would be a powerful and devastating force for the second half of the game.

We'll see. I think that a German reinforcement deck could make a big difference. I'm not picky about the history in ToI, but I keep thinking something's missing from this scenario. Do I really get SIX Shermans? AND M10s? And an artillery deck? And a reinforcements deck?

Good luck.

Thread: Tide of Iron:: Rules:: AT squads moving with +3 bonus .

LeeMiester — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 01:36:02 +0000

by LeeMiester

I had a question about an infantry squad with an AT specialization using a fire and move . Do you take squads attack power and halve it (rounded up ) then add the +3 bonus or take the attack power and +3 and then halve it ( rounded up ) ? Could anyone clarify the sequence ?

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Looking for ToI opponent in the Washington DC metro area

malloc — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 20:50:52 +0000

by malloc

I live near Towson MD, and work in Columbia. I would be happy to play sometime.

-M

Session: Tide of Iron: Designer Series Vol. 1:: Sessions:: Chain of Command

wargamer55 — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 02:46:08 +0000

by wargamer55

Mark and I continued our mini-TOI marathon with a match of Chain of Command, the second "bonus" scenario from the Tide of Iron Designer's Series Vol. 1.

Like its twin, Breaking the Line, Chain of Command turned to to be a well-balanced, taut scenario that could go either way, although this time I happened to win both times.

An American infantry force with three half tracks is attempting to fight its way through a smaller German force and off the board, but faces a choke point at a bridge and limited time. Adding to the time pressure, the Germans have a reinforcement deck and can look forward to getting some help right at the end of the scenario, when it will do the most good.

I had thought we might play this game first, so I had a German set-up already in place. Perhaps unduly influenced by my set up, Mark left what may have been its most controversial aspect in place, two elite-heavy anti-tank squads ready to occupy the command-point providing building on the German left. He did adjust some other aspects of the setup, though, but to his detriment. He moved up one machine gun squad to a position that proved exposed and only covered the bridge with one squad, which meant the Germans had to choose between getting a victory point for occupying the bridge and occupying a second command point source.

Given the concentration of officer-led, anti-tank equipped elite guys on the German left I decided it would be prudent to go the other way. I pushed through a few squads into the woods to provide interdicting fire to keep the elites in place. With some fortunate shooting that detachment also chased away the exposed machine gun squad. Meanwhile the half tracks and a couple of squads attacked along the narrow avenue of approach leading to the German right, eliminating the other machine gun squad,

The half tracks and squads continued their sweep, closing on the bridge. A heartbreakingly successful suppressive fire attack from the Germans routed an elite squad of Americans, but generally the firefights tended to favor the US side due to the concentrated fire of the half tracks.

The US troops based in the woods were able to hinder the attempts by the elites to react to the threat and eventually the US troops overwhelmed the bridge garrison and its erstwhile saviors. A couple of half tracks took light damage but two half tracks were able to exit for four VPs, which was enough to guarantee a win as the Germans had also lost the bridge.

Switching sides, I decided that my original notion of making a stand at the exposed command-point generating building was a poor idea and this time I committed just one squad of regular troops to make a stab at grabbing the site for a few quick command points, with little expectation of staying long. As it turned out they never made it, being pinned by the US mortar early and often and eventually succumbing to repeated attacks.

Instead I concentrated on the low-hanging fruit and occupied the bridge and the adjacent command site, as well as the other command site with the anti-tank elites and friends. The Germans right was covered by both machine guns.

The US attack seemed to develop a little too slowly, partly because Mark's firers missed a few times around turn 2, which meant that the bridge position didn't really come under heavy attack until around turn 4. A long-range anti-tank attack on a half-track, while missing, made the US wary of closing too quickly. By the time the US was seriously threatening the bridge three squads of Germans reinforcements had appeared and it became evident the US wouldn't have sufficient movement available to exit any of the half tracks before the end of the game, so the 4 VP already earned by the Germans ensured victory.

Overall an interesting contest. I think the US should use the half tracks primarily as fire support and only secondarily as a source of VPs. If just one manages to exit the US can win, because exiting implies gaining control of the bridge by turn 4 or 5 and getting 2 or 3 VPs for that.

From http://pawnderings.blogspot.com

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Variants:: Re: Tide of Iron Campaign

hillep — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 19:29:33 +0000

by hillep

TeufelHund wrote:
There's a campaign option in the Normandy expansion which features 4 linked scenarios and the opportunity for the US forces (only) to "level-up" and improve from scenario to scenario.

No wonder I couldn't find it from the rulebook - it's in the scenario book that's not in the public reading section...
Can someone describe shortly how it's done in there?

BuddhaBob74 wrote:
There's certainly no plans to integrate A&A with ToI. They're owned by rival companies. Not sure what you're thinking of. Except that some people have used A&A miniatures as ToI pieces.

Actually I didn't mean any kind of official release - I'm aware that they're from different companies... I was referring to Pierre Tremblay's creations (topic and file section).
He has done a lot of work but I'm looking for something different.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Variants:: Re: Tide of Iron Campaign

BuddhaBob74 — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 18:52:33 +0000

by BuddhaBob74

There's certainly no plans to integrate A&A with ToI. They're owned by rival companies. Not sure what you're thinking of. Except that some people have used A&A miniatures as ToI pieces.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: ToI vs Memoir '44 vs Squad Leader

AnglePark — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 13:39:11 +0000

by AnglePark

Slotracer wrote:
So what I really want to know is this - is ToI like Memoir '44 with a twist of Squad Leader?

I know I'm a little late to the party, but...

In short, yes.

Years ago I kept wishing for someone to do an "Axis and Allies Squad Leader" (tactical level with figures), and ToI finally filled the need. I had high hopes for M'44 when it was announced, and I love the game, but it just didn't hit the spot. ToI fits perfectly -- I highly recommend it.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Variants:: Re: Tide of Iron Campaign

TeufelHund — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 05:29:26 +0000

by TeufelHund

There's a campaign option in the Normandy expansion which features 4 linked scenarios and the opportunity for the US forces (only) to "level-up" and improve from scenario to scenario.

Session: Tide of Iron: Designer Series Vol. 1:: Sessions:: Couldn't catch a break at Breaking the Line

wargamer55 — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 02:33:21 +0000

by wargamer55

The Tide of Iron Designer's book includes a couple of bonus scenarios that were previously unpublished "demo" scenarios used during the prepublication marketing. They were designed to be simultaneously playable using one base set of the game, which made them attractive choices when I invited the redoubtable Mark K. over for a game day because it allowed me to have two games all set up before he arrived.

We played "Breaking the Line" first, in which a large American force attempts to seize a defended point atop a fortified hill from a smaller German force. Neither side receives any reinforcements and there are no vehicles involved.

I played the Americans first. My initial plan was to use Division 2 as a base of fire to cover Division 1 moving onto the flank. Division 1 would then become the base of fire and cover the final assault by Division 2.

This neat plan broke down under fire and my advance degenerated into a series of "Indian rushes" instead. I was able to get several squads into position for the final rush onto the objective, but all were cut down before they could launch actual assaults.

In retrospect I think I overindulged in "suppressive" attacks. While useful in covering maneuvering, it left too many live enemies for the end game. Failed or moderately successful suppression leaves most of the enemy in place. In contrast, Mark's Germans generally used "normal" (or as we took to calling them, "killing" ) attacks, so the American forces were taking heavy casualties -- helped by some good die rolls. Particularly annoying was a German double-mortar squad, which did a lot of damage until I got a lucky shot at it which killed off one crew. The survivors pulled back into deep cover. They played a lesser role after that, but they'd already done a lot of damage. Even "suppressive fire" can be deadly when there's 8 dice of it.

Still, despite everything, I felt that I had a shot at winning and it went to the last turn with the issue still in doubt, although a betting man would have probably laid in odds against me by turn 4 of the 6.

The switch game wasn't as close. Mark again concentrated on normal attacks. I made a stab on the right flank at threatening to deny him the 3 command points he'd normally get for occupying the "3" marker but a suppressive fire that could have pinned his unit tasked with capturing that key point missed. The two German squads on that side slowed his advance a bit, but ultimately vainly, as his barrage of fire gunned down all the hill's defenders despite their entrenchments. With the hill empty of defenders and none of the surviving Germans able to prevent it, Mark scooted a squad up onto the hill using the "Critical Objective" card (and its 2 movement point bonus) on Turn 5, for a clear and decisive win.

As we were both still getting used to the game (he'd only played it solitaire, and I had played it a couple of times) it took a long time to play, especially the first game, but as the evening wore on we sped up a lot. Mark was definitely the TOI Master after two games, but I was about to have my revenge in our next set "Chain of Command," which I'll report on tomorrow.

From my game blog: http://pawnderings.blogspot.com

File: Tide of Iron:: Additional Operations Cards for Scenario Designers

iansc — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 01:02:57 +0000

by iansc

Additional Operations Cards for Scenario Designers for Board Game: Tide of Iron ]]>

Thread: Tide of Iron:: Variants:: Tide of Iron Campaign

hillep — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 19:54:07 +0000

by hillep

As a beginner wargamer I thought to make rules for the ToI campaign game. I'm thinking of something more than just linked scenarios...
A strategic level system where every single conflict is solved in ToI combat system. I read the there has been plans for Axis & Allies integration with ToI but I couldn't find any further reference to it...

The base map is divided into several areas that may contain factories or cities (supply equipment and vehicles or soldiers respectively). If the player controls any of those he/she can use these structures to muster units.

Every area are built before the game begins to add more strategy (it may be easier to advance on one side of the map) or created just before the combat occurs (that would guarantee that every map is unique). I'm not sure but I think we'll go with the pre-built areas...

Also I've thought about research system (similar to A&A) that could improve weapons and would also enable non-military victory...

I've managed to put on paper a rather decent (at least I think so) system but there are some complications:
The problem is that I can't seem to find a way how to determine the decks that could be used. The artillery is easy - if You got mine throwers in an adjacent area it can support fighting units...
But how to use command, moral or supply deck?

Have anyone thought about ToI in such manner? I know that there's probably many games that meet exactly my demands but it's rather fun to try do something by myself. And games aren't that available in this part of the World

If someone has an idea or knows a game where I could find some help I'd be very glad...

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Variants:: Re: Tide of Undead

hillep — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 17:28:02 +0000

by hillep

Just :b::r::i::l::l::i::a::n::t:

I'm just making campaign rules for ToI that also includes the scientific research and I think this version just hit the spot as the last desperate way to stop the enemy advance at the cost of it's own soldiers...

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Increasingly Disheartened by this Game

hillep — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 16:49:51 +0000

by hillep

grahamj wrote:
I believe it would take more than just one or two scenarios to convince players in my group to play the Germans in Tide of Iron.This is too bad because it seems like a game with a lot of potential. Oh well, there are a lot of other war games out there.

I have completely different problem amongst my friends - no-body wants to play the Americans.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Rules:: Re: Sniper cards and multiple squad pins.

Emil 109 — Sun, 14 Jun 2009 05:50:32 +0000

by Emil 109

1. Just one Sniper card.

2. Yes the overstacking squad returns pined in the last hex it was in.

(you have to do something about this MG before it stops your whole army :D ).

Thread: Tide of Iron:: Rules:: Sniper cards and multiple squad pins.

LeeMiester — Sun, 14 Jun 2009 05:01:28 +0000

by LeeMiester

I had a couple of questions about a couple of things.

1. In scenario 2 " Liberation " , it states " In addition, the Germans start with the "sniper Attack" card...." Does this mean it they start with 'a sniper card' or 'the sniper cards' as there are two of them ( or atleast that is what my set came with ).

2. Lets suppose a German machine gun unit in Op-fire manages to pin 3 advancing American squads all in the same hex during a turn . Should another American squad during a later turn try to get through the same hex but also gets pinned does he just return to the last hex he was in with the pinned status as pinning in the target hex would exceed stack limit ?

My freind and I have been really getting into the game system . Memoir 44 was just becoming a bit blah for us so I'm sure some more questions may arrise !!

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: ToI vs Memoir '44 vs Squad Leader

michaelwmcfall — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 17:32:37 +0000

by michaelwmcfall

Thank you Bob.

I will definately check "Crossfire" out.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: ToI vs Memoir '44 vs Squad Leader

badinfo — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 16:18:06 +0000

by badinfo

Michael, curious if you've played Crossfire?
It's come the closest to the right feel for me, while remaining remarkably playable as a game.
The system is very simple, you will not need the rule book after a few games, but the decisions you have to make each turn are tough. It makes my brain hurt at times. Not from complexity but from tactical decision making, and that is how it should be.

Great posts btw, I'd have given you more thumbs up if I could :D

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: ToI vs Memoir '44 vs Squad Leader

Sagrilarus — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 01:30:00 +0000

by Sagrilarus

I think Squad Leader is a great choice and still available used. It's a solid game with enough options to make it feel more real. I don't think Tide of Iron is going to fulfill that part of your interest. If you want little guys, go to the dollar store and buy some for your board. They come in lots of sizes and poses. One color.

Sag.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: ToI vs Memoir '44 vs Squad Leader

michaelwmcfall — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 23:44:37 +0000

by michaelwmcfall

Seth

That is an excellent point about "Up Front". If I can ever sit down long enough to learn "Fields of Fire" I think it has the right idea and direction of Infantry Combat.

I have been looking at "Conflict of Heroes" too. I really like the whole concept of card play to bring in uncertain situations you didn't plan for.

I have found since I was age 14 getting into this hobby that there is no one answer in a game system. I find now that if the game is fun without being stupid, it accomplishes it's goal. I'm now fine tuning my collection to that goal with a couple of exceptions (War in the Pacific, etc). Ya gotta have a couple of unplayable monsters here and there.

Sorry about using my career as a defense weapon here, but I know if you bash ASL or War of the Ring even a little on here, "you better watch out"!!!!

In Squad Leader's full defense on my behalf, I will say this:

It inspired me to join the Army and go into the Infantry. I learned things from Squad Leader and applied them to my job in the Army and I learned "a lot" from the Army and applied them to my Squad Leader sessions. So thank you John Hill! I had a great career.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: ToI vs Memoir '44 vs Squad Leader

badinfo — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 22:11:54 +0000

by badinfo

May I suggest Squad Leader In Miniature?
http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/slminiatures/

Of course, if you get into miniatures there are many good rules sets out there for WWII tactical level.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: ToI vs Memoir '44 vs Squad Leader

Slotracer — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 21:11:05 +0000

by Slotracer

Wouw, that was a lot of answers in short time!
Thanks a lot, guys!

I love Squad Leader, but miss the little figures!!!
So when I saw ToI, I thought it might be close to Squad Leader. I never tried Adv. Squad Leader, someone told me it was too complex!
I might check Conflict of Heroes.

Speaking of background - I was in the Navy for 9 months, stationed at a radar station, so all I did of sailing was in a rubber lifeboat in a swimming pool!!!

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: ToI vs Memoir '44 vs Squad Leader

wargamer55 — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 20:53:55 +0000

by wargamer55

michaelwmcfall wrote:
I have TOI, SL, ASL,SK and I have owned Memoir 44 and ASL.

I was also an Infantryman for 22 years with 27 months of combat experience. So for all you ASL fans that are going to knock me, I'll take the first shot here and say "I probably know more about combat than you"!

I'd get TOI. ASL with everything that goes with it is seriouly flawed (yes I said it). It tries to be too realistic, way too controlling and something gets lost in translation. Too bad "Squad Leader" is out of print. While still flawed, it was a good game none the less.

I'm NOT going to get into all the reasons of why I think this because if I did, I'd be writing a small book.

TOI stays on topic and it is "a game". More detail does not make a game more realistic. TOI uses cards to take away some of the control over your forces and the situation. Guess what? No one on the battlefield has total control. Too many wargames (especially ASL) gives you far too much control and they are unrealistic.

Now before anyone shoots off about TOI being unrealistic, I will say, Yeah, it has its flaws. But the thing is, the game is fun, has the right look and feel and you are fighting your oppenent NOT a rulesbook that is too damned huge.

If you want absolute realism, you won't get it with any one single game. On my quest to find that "one game", I now have over 200 and still counting.

As for Memoir '44; it is the same exact system (just upgraded) that is used in Battlecry (an American Civil War game). That system was kinda weak for the Civil War and it is (for me) just a weak Civil War game with a WW2 mask on. I sold off my Memoir'44 collection because it was on the other extreme of ASL. Where ASL is too detailed, Memoir'44 doesn't have enough and the detail it does have just misses the mark.

As far as cost goes; look at it this way. TOI is more expensive how much more? Is 20 or 30 USD that much more?

I play wargames because I want to have fun and feel a little bit of history, not to mention it's fun killing things that won't end your life (for real) when the game is over. The point I'm making is, I'll spend 30 dollars more for something that looks good, plays well and brings me enjoyment. Maybe I'll learn a couple of things about history along the way. That's worth it.

Excellent points.

While I didn't spend any time in infantry combat, I did spend almost as much time as you in the Army and reserve components and I have to agree with you. Too many detailed wargames substitute a faux realism that focuses on minute details instead of focusing on the actual key elements of combat.

I've had many "discussions" with ASL fans about how I think Up Front is actually considerably more realistic than ASL.

I think TOI has an acceptbale level of realism for what it tries to do.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: ToI vs Memoir '44 vs Squad Leader

ramkitty — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 20:29:31 +0000

by ramkitty

I found TOI to be to fiddly. It got hard to add/remove chits when the defensive line got full. The chits would get stuck in the figures, etc. I also found that it got really cluttered and hard to keep track of who is who and where resulting in missed actions because this chit was for that unit but it was not. The game play was fun but I enjoy conflict of heroes more. I have yet to want to play toi again since I purchased COH.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: ToI vs Memoir '44 vs Squad Leader

michaelwmcfall — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 20:16:59 +0000

by michaelwmcfall

I have TOI, SL, ASL,SK and I have owned Memoir 44 and ASL.

I was also an Infantryman for 22 years with 27 months of combat experience. So for all you ASL fans that are going to knock me, I'll take the first shot here and say "I probably know more about combat than you"!

I'd get TOI. ASL with everything that goes with it is seriouly flawed (yes I said it). It tries to be too realistic, way too controlling and something gets lost in translation. Too bad "Squad Leader" is out of print. While still flawed, it was a good game none the less.

I'm NOT going to get into all the reasons of why I think this because if I did, I'd be writing a small book.

TOI stays on topic and it is "a game". More detail does not make a game more realistic. TOI uses cards to take away some of the control over your forces and the situation. Guess what? No one on the battlefield has total control. Too many wargames (especially ASL) gives you far too much control and they are unrealistic.

Now before anyone shoots off about TOI being unrealistic, I will say, Yeah, it has its flaws. But the thing is, the game is fun, has the right look and feel and you are fighting your oppenent NOT a rulesbook that is too damned huge.

If you want absolute realism, you won't get it with any one single game. On my quest to find that "one game", I now have over 200 and still counting.

As for Memoir '44; it is the same exact system (just upgraded) that is used in Battlecry (an American Civil War game). That system was kinda weak for the Civil War and it is (for me) just a weak Civil War game with a WW2 mask on. I sold off my Memoir'44 collection because it was on the other extreme of ASL. Where ASL is too detailed, Memoir'44 doesn't have enough and the detail it does have just misses the mark.

As far as cost goes; look at it this way. TOI is more expensive how much more? Is 20 or 30 USD that much more?

I play wargames because I want to have fun and feel a little bit of history, not to mention it's fun killing things that won't end your life (for real) when the game is over. The point I'm making is, I'll spend 30 dollars more for something that looks good, plays well and brings me enjoyment. Maybe I'll learn a couple of things about history along the way. That's worth it.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: ToI vs Memoir '44 vs Squad Leader

JohnnyD — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 20:10:59 +0000

by JohnnyD

TOI is its own monster. It plays with more options than M44 but is not close to SL or ASL depending on what you play. I like Conflict of Heroes: Awakening the Bear! - Russia 1941-1942 for a nice in between game and the formentioned Lock and Load series fills the gap quite well. I am not saying that TOI is not a good game.....it's a great game for me and that is from a person who LOVES ASL and Mem44! I own the original TOI and Desert Fox expansion and love to get it to the table when I can. It does accompany team play which I find a lot of fun. I look forward to investing/trading for the other expansions I lack at this time.
Whatever you decide you will be happy!

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: ToI vs Memoir '44 vs Squad Leader

willco — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 19:56:56 +0000

by willco

You might consider looking at other offerings that might bridge that gap between M44/ToI and ASL/ATS a little better, like Lock N Load and Conflict of Heroes offerings. They don't have miniatures, though, in the box, if that's what you are primarily after. If that's the case, well, I guess you could figure out a way to use M44 miniatures and specialty unit chits as proxies.

Good luck!

[edit] I just realized that you are probably referring to Squad Leader and not ASL. I think that most of my opine still rings true.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: ToI vs Memoir '44 vs Squad Leader

dlminsac — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 19:48:31 +0000

by dlminsac

If M44 is a 1 for complexity and ASL is a 10 ToI would be a 3.Think of it as a fun boardgame like M44. ASL is more a simulation. It then really depends on what you are looking for. As far as tactics it plays closer to M44 so you might not be getting any closer to ASL.

It has been 10 or so years since I played ASL and am enjoying the lighter type games being offered now. If you are looking for something lighter but still more wargamerish you might look for a game like Firepower.

while I like M44 and ASL I prefer ToI. It plays just right for me, allows teams and looks great.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: ToI vs Memoir '44 vs Squad Leader

Sagrilarus — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 19:23:36 +0000

by Sagrilarus

Play Squad Leader. Tide of Iron is a much blunter game.

Sag.

Thread: Tide of Iron:: General:: ToI vs Memoir '44 vs Squad Leader

Slotracer — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 17:43:07 +0000

by Slotracer

Hi, I've been looking at ToI for a long time now and I think it looks great, but a little too expensive to my taste.
So before I start to ask my wife for money for the game, I would like to know some more about it.
For about 10-15 years ago I played Squad Leader and today I play Memoir '44, but I feel I'm missing some things from a game like Squad Leader. And ToI looks like Squad Leader - just with miniature figures - at first glance, even the boards looks like it was taken from Squad Leader, but please correct me if I'm wrong!

So what I really want to know is this - is ToI like Memoir '44 with a twist of Squad Leader?

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Increasingly Disheartened by this Game

Emil 109 — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 16:09:07 +0000

by Emil 109

grahamj wrote:
Oh well, there are a lot of other war games out there.

Listen to scottandkimr advice and give it a second shot. You will find good scenarios.

:meeple:

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Increasingly Disheartened by this Game

BradyLS — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 15:48:59 +0000

by BradyLS

bigfomlof wrote:
As for strategy, I suspect I'm overly agressive as the Germans but I don't want to sit and put my guys in Op Fire and wait for the Americans...

I like action for both sides in a game, too. However, for some scenarios, going on op-fire and waiting for the Americans is what you do. Don't let the Amis draw you out if the scenario notes say they are the ones who are supposed to be attacking.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Increasingly Disheartened by this Game

scottandkimr — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 15:34:52 +0000

by scottandkimr

Just play the fan made scenarios. I listed some balanced ones. The official scenarios are a big weak point in the game, especially since this is a scenario-based game. Also, you could try the TOI Designer series.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Increasingly Disheartened by this Game

grahamj — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 14:28:27 +0000

by grahamj

I believe it would take more than just one or two scenarios to convince players in my group to play the Germans in Tide of Iron.This is too bad because it seems like a game with a lot of potential. Oh well, there are a lot of other war games out there.

Reply: Tide of Iron: Designer Series Vol. 1:: Sessions:: Re: Nice battle of Bloody Lindern

boersma8 — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 07:06:20 +0000

by boersma8

bentenrai wrote:
Malvictis wrote:
bentenrai wrote:
I think the reviewer did quite well considering that English is most likely a second language to him.

Besides not being a review, but a poorly written session report, thumbing his own thread and post is also lame.

It's a review of a gaming session. You can split hairs all day long and any way you like. What is lame is this was this members FIRST Session Report and instead of giving him constructive criticism you belittle him. Class, real class.

I have to agree with the last comment. Really don't understand why anyone felt the need to discourage Bert Claessen from posting again. Hope he's above this!Keep up the good work and thanks!

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Increasingly Disheartened by this Game

wargamer55 — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 04:12:00 +0000

by wargamer55

It would be interesting to see actaul W/L stats for the scenarios. The poll cited earlier seems to show that most opinion believes the first coupleof scenarios are tough for the Germans. Opinons are more split on the others. The Designers book seemed to be aimed at providing more balanced fights.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Increasingly Disheartened by this Game

scottandkimr — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 03:12:59 +0000

by scottandkimr

grahamj wrote:
I realize you only use the decks included for the scenario, but that doesn't make it any easier for the Germans. But like I said, how many scenarios have been won with the Germans? From all the forums I've read on Tide of Iron, not many if any at all.

Try Stavelot Express. Germans have the advantage there, even though it is winnable by the Americans.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Increasingly Disheartened by this Game

grahamj — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 01:27:14 +0000

by grahamj

I realize you only use the decks included for the scenario, but that doesn't make it any easier for the Germans. But like I said, how many scenarios have been won with the Germans? From all the forums I've read on Tide of Iron, not many if any at all.

New Image for Tide of Iron

jsper — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:40:20 +0000

by jsper

Sheet from Fantasy Flight Games

]]>

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Increasingly Disheartened by this Game

wargamer55 — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 23:31:51 +0000

by wargamer55

grahamj wrote:
I enjoy playing a game where both sides have a chance of winning. I have yet to read any comments on how well players fared with the Germans or how many scenarios were won with the Germans. Why bother to play a game if you already have a fairly good idea what the outcome is going to be?
I don't necessarily think it's the scenarios that are unbalanced or that they are boring, but I think the problem lies more in the Strategy decks that are available to each side. I don't recall too many battles that took place during WW2 where one side had an endless stream of reinforcements available. Many battles were won and fought by tactics and sometimes luck and conditions beyond anyone's control (for instance weather or during the battle of Stalingrad when Hitler refused to pull back his troops during the winter months at the recommendation of one of his generals). Even the battle of the Bulge was a touch and go for awhile but fuel shortage became one of the major downfalls for the Germans.
Perhaps what this game needs is a refinement to the rules to make them more realistic and fair in the sense that both sides have a chance of victory.
I have played the first scenario and almost won with the Germans, but only because of aggressive play and a rule that forbade any small arms fire against the tank. You needed an anti-tank weapon (Bazooka)
to have any chance of destroying it. Lets face it, the Americans are dug in and have wire all around the place, and on top of all that they have reinforcements to boot; not to mention a time limit for the Germans to capture at least 3 victory hexes.
I have all the expansions for this game and I really want to enjoy this game, but it's difficult when you have to get use to losing all the time as the Germans.

?
You don't use all the Strategy decks in every scenrio, just the ones that apply. A Reinforcement deck will only appear in a battle where one side gets a many new forces. So sayding "I don't recall too many battles that took place during WW2 where one side had an endless stream of reinforcements available" doesn;t make sense. There were some battles where one side got many new troops. Those battles may see a Reinforcement deck for one side.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Increasingly Disheartened by this Game

Sagrilarus — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 23:16:39 +0000

by Sagrilarus

grahamj wrote:

Why bother to play a game if you already have a fairly good idea what the outcome is going to be?

    If you know what the generally expected outcome should be for your position you can judge the level of your success by that standard. Wargames are more likely to be lopsided when the designer attempts to bind the results to an actual historical event, but that doesn't mean they don't present a challenge. You just have to use a different benchmark to judge the result.

    It's not uncommon for wargames to have no clear victory conditions at all -- you just look at how things turned out and decide for yourself if you held up your end of the deal. That's often frighteningly simple to determine.

             Sag.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Increasingly Disheartened by this Game

grahamj — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 23:05:24 +0000

by grahamj

I enjoy playing a game where both sides have a chance of winning. I have yet to read any comments on how well players fared with the Germans or how many scenarios were won with the Germans. Why bother to play a game if you already have a fairly good idea what the outcome is going to be?
I don't necessarily think it's the scenarios that are unbalanced or that they are boring, but I think the problem lies more in the Strategy decks that are available to each side. I don't recall too many battles that took place during WW2 where one side had an endless stream of reinforcements available. Many battles were won and fought by tactics and sometimes luck and conditions beyond anyone's control (for instance weather or during the battle of Stalingrad when Hitler refused to pull back his troops during the winter months at the recommendation of one of his generals). Even the battle of the Bulge was a touch and go for awhile but fuel shortage became one of the major downfalls for the Germans.
Perhaps what this game needs is a refinement to the rules to make them more realistic and fair in the sense that both sides have a chance of victory.
I have played the first scenario and almost won with the Germans, but only because of aggressive play and a rule that forbade any small arms fire against the tank. You needed an anti-tank weapon (Bazooka)
to have any chance of destroying it. Lets face it, the Americans are dug in and have wire all around the place, and on top of all that they have reinforcements to boot; not to mention a time limit for the Germans to capture at least 3 victory hexes.
I have all the expansions for this game and I really want to enjoy this game, but it's difficult when you have to get use to losing all the time as the Germans.

Reply: Tide of Iron: Designer Series Vol. 1:: Sessions:: Re: Rat Patrol!!! a ToI Designer Series scenario by Richard Berg

boersma8 — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 20:22:16 +0000

by boersma8

I've played this scenario twice this week -with two different opponents-and here's what we think of it:

Pros:

What's really great about this scenario is that it plays very differently from a "standard" TOI assault scenario.Usually you have one player doing all the playing, maneuvering and thinking, if you know what I mean and the other one (defender) just puts many units in op fire and patiently awaits the other players' moves. What's really fun in this one is that both players can-and have to- do a lot of maneuvering.

Cons:

We feel the scenario is very unbalanced in favour of the British IF they choose the strategy of going all out for the German position where the trucks have to leave the map. With just 3 German units there (not even an officer or elite to provide some extra cover against suppressive attacks), it's a piece of cake for the British to overrun the German defenders there (Combine fire from halftracks and Bren gun carriers on turn two and/ or unload transported "bazooka" squads with a fire and move action: halftrack moves 7, squad offloads for two movement points, walks one or two more hexes depending on whether there's an officer in it or not and fires. Repeat this a couple of times and then possibly follow up with an assault and the " village" is yours. Then block the exit hex and there's no way the Germans can possibly retake it!

As for the Panzer III: The scenario author advises you in the book to use it to hunt down the British, but with a mere 3 dice when using a fire and move action this is not something the British need to be extremely worried about. It's also easily countered by putting the anti-tank halftrack with mounted 6 pounder in Op fire. It throws 9 dice and has a range of seven. The Panzer III's defense of 3 is nothing to be too secure about. I even had two take cover cards adding yet another four dice, but even then the Halftrack throws nine dice against just 7 defense and that's WITHOUT combining it with a couple of halftracks and/or AT squads or a take down the beast card!

The British also have a larger number of halftracks at their disposal than the Germans do and their squads also have a lot of firepower. So, not only can't the Germans prevent the British from blocking the exit, there's no way the inferior and smaller number of German troops can retake it.

Well, since this is really a very original scenario it does have its merits. I suppose it could also be easily fixed by adding a Panzer IV (and possibly yet another Panzer III and/or halftrack + squad to German division 2-Convoy-), but when the British pursue this strategy we honestly don't see how they can be beaten. We do consider ourselves " veteran" TOI players, but perhaps there's a counter we haven't thought of since the author explicitly mentions this British strategy in the introduction to the scenario. Anyway, I'd really appreciate a reply....

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Increasingly Disheartened by this Game

scottandkimr — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 15:23:36 +0000

by scottandkimr

BuddhaBob74 wrote:
Play "Stavelot Express" as the Germans, then. It's comically unbalanced in their favor. If you lose that, quit.

Or get downloadable scenarios. Or get "Normandy"; the scenarios therein are much better balanced.

Stavelot Express is not comically unbalanced in favor of the Germans. It is a scenario for experienced players and requires fair amount of thought as the Americans, especially with respect to scoring and choosing terrain defense points. I have won as the Americans against an experieced player. Here are strategy thoughts for this scenario:
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/311819

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Increasingly Disheartened by this Game

scottandkimr — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 14:51:38 +0000

by scottandkimr

Daniel,

The scenarios in the book are next to worthless, with the exception of Stavelot Express. They are so unbalanced that they are boring. I would recommend the following fan-made scenarios that are available on the FFG web site:

> Tiger Hunt
> Pavlov's House
> Tank Hunters

Also, the FFG official Early Bird scenario called Chain of Command (don't confuse it with other scenarios with simialr names) is excellent.

I created both Tank Hunters and Pavlov's House and they have both been through extensive playtesting and playing. Tank Hunters is for more experienced players and the better or more experienced player should play the Germans. The Allies have the advantage in that scenario but it is winnable for the Germans.

Both Tiger Hunt and Pavlov's House require aggressive action on the part of the assaulting parties. Delaying will certainly lead to ruin.

There are other scenarios to look at too. Unfortunately most scenarios do not have a lot of ratings and so quality can be hit or miss. Each of the above scenarios, though, is worth playing several times over. I probably played Tiger Hunt 10 times. I put of a strategy guide to it on BGG as well.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Increasingly Disheartened by this Game

BuddhaBob74 — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 14:35:32 +0000

by BuddhaBob74

Play "Stavelot Express" as the Germans, then. It's comically unbalanced in their favor. If you lose that, quit.

Or get downloadable scenarios. Or get "Normandy"; the scenarios therein are much better balanced.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Increasingly Disheartened by this Game

bigfomlof — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 11:47:10 +0000

by bigfomlof

Sagrilarus wrote:

I find Tide of Iron awards aggressive play -- you may ne playing too conservative a position. How do you fare as the Americans?

Sag.

I have not played as the Americans, admittedly. I keep refusing to, actually. I want to beat this thing!

D

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Increasingly Disheartened by this Game

Sagrilarus — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 05:52:06 +0000

by Sagrilarus

I find Tide of Iron awards aggressive play -- you may ne playing too conservative a position. How do you fare as the Americans?

Sag.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Increasingly Disheartened by this Game

SJBenoist — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 05:25:28 +0000

by SJBenoist

Many of the scenarios from the scenario book (included with the game) are extremely lopsided. It isn't just you, and was a major complaint when the game was released. Scroll back through the early threads and you'll see the same issues & answers repeatedly.
There has been a campaign book released since, so it is necessary to specify which you are referring to.

Tweaking them isn't difficult, though it does take a few tries to get things "right". I'd suggest starting by trying the first scenario again using "2" command for the house and giving the Panzer full capabilities. See how that plays for you.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Increasingly Disheartened by this Game

wargamer55 — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 03:35:11 +0000

by wargamer55

One solution is to play each scenario twice, so if there's a balance problem, at least you're not always on the short end of it.

The fact that a scenario is unbalanced should be taken into account when selecting scenarios. It's a good way to balance unequal experience or player skill. In the Breaking Point the new guy should play the US side, for example.

If you want a challenge, you can deliberately seek out the disfavored side and crow about your victory or excuse your defeats!

It's also possible to tweak the scenarios to match your perception of the balance. Reducing the favored side by a few stands or adding some to the weaker side can work well.

The first set of scenarios reportedly had some balance problems, a very common problem in scenario-based games. Its hard to have each scenario get the kind of thorough playtesting that a single-scenario game gets. Every single scenario is, in effect, a different game. Playtesting usually concentrates on systemic issues, not the play balance of particular scenarios.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Increasingly Disheartened by this Game

bigfomlof — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 02:40:38 +0000

by bigfomlof

jpat wrote:
Which scenarios? The original scenario book has notoriously unbalanced scenarios.

See this poll thread:
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/323709

The originals from the rulebook.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Increasingly Disheartened by this Game

bigfomlof — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 02:27:30 +0000

by bigfomlof

"I think we can discount any bias against the Germans side as being responsible, however."

And this makes me think I'm not explaining myself well...

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Increasingly Disheartened by this Game

jpat — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 02:27:06 +0000

by jpat

Which scenarios? The original scenario book has notoriously unbalanced scenarios.

See this poll thread:
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/323709

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Increasingly Disheartened by this Game

bigfomlof — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 02:26:40 +0000

by bigfomlof

I see what you're saying, but I'm speaking specifically about how each scenario begins--on paper the Germans are down, it seems.

As for strategy, I suspect I'm overly agressive as the Germans but I don't want to sit and put my guys in Op Fire and wait for the Americans...

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Increasingly Disheartened by this Game

wargamer55 — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 02:19:39 +0000

by wargamer55

I've been playing wargames for 40 years and generally do better than average, yet I don't find it unsual to string together 4 losses in a row, particularly when playing a new game.

You don;t say anything about the experience level of you opponents nor the strategies you followed, so it's hard to pin down what might be the problem.

I think we can discount any bias against the Germans side as being responsible, however.

Thread: Tide of Iron:: General:: Increasingly Disheartened by this Game

bigfomlof — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 02:08:44 +0000

by bigfomlof

Hi All--

I love the idea of this game and want to love playing it, but I have been the Germans now 4 in a row (from the original scenario book) and am getting trounced every time. What's getting me down the most is that, looking through the scenarios and understanding the game pretty well, I just can't see how the Germans can ever win.

In every scenario, the Americans seem to outnumber the Germans by a sizable margin. On top of that, they often get their reinforcements deck. So, I have 8 stands of soldiers against 15 and I'm left to wither and die as the Americans get fresh troops...

So, the Americans seem to have it all: Card strength, numbers, better operations cards, you name it. Now, if the answer is only that the Germans need to hole up and always be totally defensive and wait for the Americans, then that's no fun.

I guess I'm frustrated, not by losing (b/c that never matters to me) but by what I see as the inherent unfairness in the scenarios. My opponent and I always talk after the games, thinking about alternative strategies and such, and it generally comes down to the thing I could've done differently was to simply delay the inevitable.

I'm happy to an idiot in this, and have someone point out to me how it's all really balanced and I just missed something. So, please, give me some ideas, or at least prove to me that this game can be fun for the German player.

Thanks, all.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Size of included dice? Please help

Devon Harmon — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 01:48:47 +0000

by Devon Harmon

9mm

Thread: Tide of Iron:: General:: Size of included dice? Please help

Wrath_Of_Picasso — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 01:40:42 +0000

by Wrath_Of_Picasso

Was just wondering if anyone knows the size (mm) of the dice included in ToI? its to use them in another project. Any help appreciated, thanks!

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Rules:: Re: Opportunity Fire - Fatigue Active Unit or not

Emil 109 — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 17:30:54 +0000

by Emil 109

BuddhaBob74 wrote:
Exception: If there's an officer in the same hex, the squad can also be activated for a non-combined half-power attack.

Or if you have the card Desperate Defenders in play :cool:.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Rules:: Re: Opportunity Fire - Fatigue Active Unit or not

BuddhaBob74 — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 16:02:00 +0000

by BuddhaBob74

One more thing that's easy to miss:
- If a squad gets pinned/disrupted while active, it IS fatigued
- If a squad gets pinned/disrupted while set for OP fire, it IS fatigued
- If a non-active, non-op fire squad gets pinned/disrupted, it IS NOT fatigued.

In the third instance, the squad can still be activated, although only to fatigue it. This can be useful for forcing one's enemy to move first.

Exception: If there's an officer in the same hex, the squad can also be activated for a non-combined half-power attack.

Reply: Tide of Iron: Normandy:: General:: Re: Piercing the Siegfried line

BuddhaBob74 — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 15:52:52 +0000

by BuddhaBob74

Hi,

I haven't played it yet, but looking at it on paper I can see how it could be a disappointment. I will play hit before the end of the month and add my voice afterward. I'll be playing as the Germans and expect to lose...

Reply: Tide of Iron: Normandy:: General:: Re: Naval Bombardment...once a TURN?

BuddhaBob74 — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 15:50:38 +0000

by BuddhaBob74

Hi,

Bill Jaffe (the scenario designer) told me in an email "It's supposed to be once a round." He didn't elaborate beyond that.

Although the "Establish Contact" rules (pg 41) specifically say to wait for a subsequent round, the card says "Once per turn" and cards take precendence over rules. On the other hand, I think this is just a misprint and that it was supposed to be per round. FWIW.

Regarding the flamethrower up a cliff, the rules as written allow it, no doubt. It's a pretty reasonable house rule to disallow it, though.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Rules:: Re: Opportunity Fire - Fatigue Active Unit or not

Emil 109 — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 09:17:13 +0000

by Emil 109

coldark wrote:
it was the word "damaged" that was causing my issue,

I had had the same problem with this word when I was first reading the rules and so I imagined that I wasn't the only one who misunderstood it.

:)

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Rules:: Re: Opportunity Fire - Fatigue Active Unit or not

coldark — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 08:54:38 +0000

by coldark

Excellent stuff - thanks Yiannis. BTW you are correct, it was the word "damaged" that was causing my issue, as soon as you pointed out that it was referring to vehicles it is all clear.

:)

Thanks again

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Rules:: Re: Opportunity Fire - Fatigue Active Unit or not

Emil 109 — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 08:30:25 +0000

by Emil 109

The sidebar on page 29 refers, as the title says, to squads only.
Look the opposite page 28 for what happens on vehicles only from OP fire (damaged)

:)

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Rules:: Re: Opportunity Fire - Fatigue Active Unit or not

Emil 109 — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 08:25:27 +0000

by Emil 109

[q="coldark]"My question really arises because of the apparent conflict in ruling on page 19, and my search for good reasons why one would use suppressive rather than normal fire

There is no conflict. The word "damaged" on page 19 -if this caused you trouble- is referring to armored units. Squads don't stop moving by kills.

In other words: squads get casualties but tanks get lightheavy damage.

So on page 19: if the active unit becomes pinned, disrupted or damaged
the first two options are for squads and the third (damaged) for armor!

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Rules:: Re: Opportunity Fire - Fatigue Active Unit or not

Emil 109 — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 08:16:27 +0000

by Emil 109

Normal fire only kills.
Suppressive fire results in pins and disruptions (or kill if too big).

Example: an enemy unit is moving and going to grab your objective and win the game. This is a 4 man unit. You OP fire with a unit that has only 2 men. Even if you get 2 successkills they will grab the objective. BUT if you supress fire and get 1 pin then your job is done.

Thread: Tide of Iron:: Rules:: Opportunity Fire - Fatigue Active Unit or not

coldark — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 08:00:56 +0000

by coldark

I need some clarification on which conditions fatigue an active unit after being fired on with "Opportunity Fire"

I am currently under the impression that.

1. Inflicting a "Pinned" or "Disrupted" result in "Suppresive Fire" will fatigue the active unit ("Rout" result is obviously irrelevent in this case, as the unit is eliminated).

2. Inflicting casualties with "Normal Fire" does NOT fatigue the active unit.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

The reason I have come to these conclusions is based on my reading of the following rule extracts.

From the "Squad Conditions" side bar on page 29 (this specifically mentions the Suppressive Fire condition)

"Opportunity Fire
If a squad becomes pinned or disrupted during its activation (normally as a result of opportunity fire), it is immediately fatigued: It may not attack and must remain in the hex in which it was attacked.

From the Moving and Opportunity Fire" section on page 19 (this has contradicting information regarding Normal Fire)

If the active unit becomes pinned, disrupted, or damaged as a result of the Op Fire attack, it is immediately fatigued: The unit’s activation ends and the unit must remain in the hex in which it incurred the attack, regardless of how many movement points it had remaining (it may not attack after being fatigued). Exception: Being only lightly damaged by enemy Op Fire does not cause a heavy vehicle to become fatigued.
• If the attack scores no hits, or if a squad takes casualties as the result of a normal attack, the active unit may continue moving.

My question really arises because of the apparent conflict in ruling on page 19, and my search for good reasons why one would use suppressive rather than normal fire (yes I know cover conditions is one good reason).

I would value any input.

Thread: Tide of Iron: Days of the Fox:: General:: Geeklist Added: Days of the Fox Scenarios Player Comments on Balance

cmontgo2 — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 20:41:31 +0000

by cmontgo2

A list for posting about balance issues and thoughts on each scenario. Go to the geeklist and post your comments about the Days of the Fox Scenarios....

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/43255

Cheers.

Chris

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Looking for ToI opponent in the Washington DC metro area

saxguy007 — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 20:31:26 +0000

by saxguy007

Hi folks,

I'm seeing a lot of potential for a game here!

I'll send you my contact info via private message.

Will be keen!

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Looking for ToI opponent in the Washington DC metro area

aschvey — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 19:02:08 +0000

by aschvey

I own ToI and live in downtown DC (I've played ToI about 6 times, but haven't played in a while). I'm always looking for new folks to play with, along with other similar weight games like Hannibal: Rome vs. Carthage, Hammer of the Scots, or (on the lighter side) Memoir '44.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Looking for ToI opponent in the Washington DC metro area

hoop — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 00:23:25 +0000

by hoop

Well, I live in Dickerson, MD which is sort of between Germantown and Frederick. I've only played TOI once, but am interested in trying it out some more....

John

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: New Geeklist

cmontgo2 — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 18:35:04 +0000

by cmontgo2

Updated the Geeklist to add the on-line scenarios. Added links to the FFG Support page in the header.

Enjoy.

Thread: Tide of Iron:: General:: New Geeklist

cmontgo2 — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 17:09:26 +0000

by cmontgo2

Hello, all. I've put up a geeklist of the base game scenarios, and welcome any input from experienced players of the game as to the balance of those scenarios. Hopefully, the list will be a good resource for players trying to figure out which scenarios have the best fit for their particular group, and which scenarios are the most balanced.

The Tide of Iron Base Game Scenarios Geeklist

Cheers.

Chris

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Looking for ToI opponent in the Washington DC metro area

bosk — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 12:38:10 +0000

by bosk

I live in Frederick, MD.

But I am in the same boat as you, looking for someone with experience in the game.

Reply: Tide of Iron: Days of the Fox:: Strategy:: Re: Kidney Ridge - Germany

boersma8 — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 09:14:34 +0000

by boersma8

We also played this scenario a couple of days ago. The Germans won, because the British tanks didn't have enough move,ent points remaining to make it off the map. Even if they had, the Germans still had two panzer IIIs and a squad (sticky bombs card!) blocking the entrance. However, I (the British player) might still have made it them using some fire and move actions and some artillery and/ or air power cards.

You WILL lose the VP point location sonner or later, but I agree you should make the British fight for it!
However, I feel the real clue lies in knocking out and/or heavily damaging the enemy tanks. Though they may have a great many of them they need to exit no fewer than 4 of them off the map! If they are heavily damaged they won't be going anywhere anymore....

Reply: Tide of Iron: Normandy:: General:: Re: Piercing the Siegfried line

boersma8 — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 08:58:34 +0000

by boersma8

BuddhaBob74 wrote:
We're soon to play this scenario. The lopsidedness on paper isn't the only confusing thing. Of course the Germans do get a wide area to hang back in, plus the barracks and ammo depot. Perhaps they can do something with that. Plus the Panzer and Panther are as good as 2 Shermans, and have concussive. And the M10's don't have concussive. And the pillboxes are still much better than being in open ground vs. Shermans.

The whole concussive firepower thing always seemed crazy to me. "Quick, men, the tanks are coming! Everybody run into the open!"

I think it'd be a good option to add an operation card to the game cancelling out " Concussive forepower" for certain scenarios. On the whole I have to say I quite like it. I'd like to see another operations card: " Fortified buildings": entrenchments may be placed in building hexes ( didn't they put sandabags etc. in there all the time?!). This would go a long way too. Also, in this particluar scenario the pillboxes might have been placed in woods terrain rather than in the clear. That would have meant an additional 2 cover as well.

You don't get the Panther and panzer IV at the same time, so first you'll have to keep the Panzer IV alive. Perhaps the game is " balanced" (we didn't finish it because we disliked it so much). What we really couldn't bear is that the way it played felt so wrong. One would expect the Americans to have to make a major effort to pierce the line and then struggle to satisfy the victory conditions./ What really happens is the Germans take off as soon as the Americans arrive or they stay in their positions and die....

Reply: Tide of Iron: Normandy:: General:: Re: Piercing the Siegfried line

boersma8 — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 08:51:41 +0000

by boersma8

BuddhaBob74 wrote:
Hi,

You double-posted this over in the FFG forums, but (for whatever reason) I usually can't get it to recognize my login there, so I'm replying here.

- You state that in real life concussive firepower was apparently effective vs. pillboxes, but not bunkers. In fact that's exactly how the game works, so...

- You state that being in a pillbox is the least safe place for the Germans to be. Well, that's just not true...it's the safest. Even after factoring the +3 shot for the tanks, the Germans still get +6 cover.

I agree with you on the first point. As for the second: What I mean is the Germans are better off evacuating their pillboxes right away and then positioning themselves out of LOS (until reinforcements arrive). Naturally, I did NOT mean remaining in LOS but then in the open rather than in a pillbox....

Have you played this scenario? What did you think of it? (PS: Played the last scenario from the Days of the Fox booklet the other day (Assault on Kidney Ridge) I just loved that one!!

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Looking for ToI opponent in the Washington DC metro area

saxguy007 — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 03:45:49 +0000

by saxguy007

Indeed it does.

I live in Germantown, MD, but am willing to drive a ways, even to Chantilly and other points in northern Virginia, or Columbia, MD, for example.

I realize that Tide of Iron players may not be that common, so I'm casting a wide net.

Richmond or Front Royal VA or Aberdeen MD, would be a stretch.

I'm really hoping I could find a game within an hour's drive.

Jim

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Looking for ToI opponent in the Washington DC metro area

Sagrilarus — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 02:33:56 +0000

by Sagrilarus

"DC Metro area" covers more than a bit of ground. Can you be a bit more specific?

Sag.

Thread: Tide of Iron:: General:: Looking for ToI opponent in the Washington DC metro area

saxguy007 — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 21:10:52 +0000

by saxguy007

Hi Folks,

Last summer, I bought a copy of ToI in another state where I go once per summer on a cabin retreat with some guys for days of gaming and boating etc...

We tried playing it, but I messed up royally by not reading the rules carefully enough to realize that the move limit per side pertains to the pace of ALTERNATING moves until all pieces are spent. I thought it meant three moves per side PERIOD until the end phase. Ooops!

Before going out west again this year, I wanted to get a ToI game in with an experienced player! In addition, it would be great to find a local gamer to play with the rest of the year.

If any of you is in the DC Metro area, has a copy of the game, and would entertain showing me the ropes with it, I'd be thrilled. I could come to you.

Please contact me via the personal message mechanism.

Thanks!!

Jim

Reply: Tide of Iron: Normandy:: General:: Re: Piercing the Siegfried line

BuddhaBob74 — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 19:43:05 +0000

by BuddhaBob74

Hi,

You double-posted this over in the FFG forums, but (for whatever reason) I usually can't get it to recognize my login there, so I'm replying here.

- You state that in real life concussive firepower was apparently effective vs. pillboxes, but not bunkers. In fact that's exactly how the game works, so...

- You state that being in a pillbox is the least safe place for the Germans to be. Well, that's just not true...it's the safest. Even after factoring the +3 shot for the tanks, the Germans still get +6 cover.

Reply: Tide of Iron: Normandy:: General:: Re: Naval Bombardment...once a TURN?

reesy — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 16:27:40 +0000

by reesy

bu**er
I have just looked at the rules - always a good idea
TOI has action phases containing several action turns, so its pretty clear you get to do it a number of times in a phase without the debate
I've read too many rules and have turns, phases, steps and rounds completely mixed up in my head. I think a campaign to regulate the terminology used is necessary, so that a turn is a turn not a phase !

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Rules:: Re: Double Time Operations Card

Devon Harmon — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 03:12:39 +0000

by Devon Harmon

descolado1 wrote:

CARD ERRATA (Manual pag. 47): Operations Card “Double Time”: “Whenever one of your squads is activated with an Advance action, it receives +2 movement
points.”

Thanks! I had checked the FAQ and the forum threads, and read the pertinant parts of thr rules before posting, but I completely forgot about the errata in the back of the rulebook:D

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Rules:: Re: Double Time Operations Card

JonJacob — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 02:49:31 +0000

by JonJacob

Devon Harmon wrote:
Operations card #4, Double Time, states "Any of your squads that do not attack during their activation receive 2 bonus movement points (instead of the normal bonus of 1 movement point)."

I'm confused by the part in parenthesis at the end. Where in the rules does it talk about a normal bonus of 1 movement point? Is this just a reference to the fact that a squad that takes the Fore and Move action receives 1 fewer movement point? If Double Time is in effect, and I take an Advance action with a squad of regular infantry, do they get 5 or 6 movement points? If the latter is correct, then what is the part in parenthesis about then?

Remember that if you attack you lose one movement point (2 if it's a vehicle) so in effect you could say that not attacking gives you "1 movement point" and this card gives you 2. In effect moving 5 spaces if you don't attack (and don't have an officer, don't have a recon badge...) 4 normally and 3 if you attack.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Rules:: Re: Double Time Operations Card

descolado1 — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 02:31:09 +0000

by descolado1

CARD ERRATA (Manual pag. 47): Operations Card “Double Time”: “Whenever one of your squads is activated with an Advance action, it receives +2 movement
points.”

Reply: Tide of Iron: Normandy:: General:: Re: Naval Bombardment...once a TURN?

Devon Harmon — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 23:49:00 +0000

by Devon Harmon

BuddhaBob74 wrote:
Hi,

Does anyone else think Naval Bombardment is supposed to be once a ROUND? I was shocked the first time I played with this non-solo and my opponent started rolling for it every 3 activations.

I'm pretty sure it is once per turn (multiple times in a round). Here's the discussion on FFG's forums: http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?e...

Thread: Tide of Iron:: Rules:: Double Time Operations Card

Devon Harmon — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 23:38:30 +0000

by Devon Harmon

Operations card #4, Double Time, states "Any of your squads that do not attack during their activation receive 2 bonus movement points (instead of the normal bonus of 1 movement point)."

I'm confused by the part in parenthesis at the end. Where in the rules does it talk about a normal bonus of 1 movement point? Is this just a reference to the fact that a squad that takes the Fore and Move action receives 1 fewer movement point? If Double Time is in effect, and I take an Advance action with a squad of regular infantry, do they get 5 or 6 movement points? If the latter is correct, then what is the part in parenthesis about then?

Reply: Tide of Iron: Normandy:: General:: Re: Naval Bombardment...once a TURN?

reesy — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 20:50:33 +0000

by reesy

hello
We had the same issue and decided the terminology definitely meant once per turn, but it does say it is an artillery attack and therefore if contact fails it can be re rolled each subsequent action round. Do it at the beginning and then you can roll for it each round! So in the end we talked ourselves into it, on reflection it seems ok as its contact number is tough to get so it didn't happen much. Only once per turn and you may never see it. Don't know if that helps but it worked ok for us.

Did you have a situation where a flame thrower could make a close attack up from the beach to the level 2 terrain and use its bonus?
We thought it couldn't as it was not technically adjacent due to the prohibition on moving up a cliff. Damn these uncertainties of life. Great game though

Thread: Tide of Iron: Normandy:: General:: Naval Bombardment...once a TURN?

BuddhaBob74 — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 19:51:16 +0000

by BuddhaBob74

Hi,

Does anyone else think Naval Bombardment is supposed to be once a ROUND? I was shocked the first time I played with this non-solo and my opponent started rolling for it every 3 activations.

Reply: Tide of Iron: Normandy:: General:: Re: Piercing the Siegfried line

BuddhaBob74 — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 19:49:41 +0000

by BuddhaBob74

We're soon to play this scenario. The lopsidedness on paper isn't the only confusing thing. Of course the Germans do get a wide area to hang back in, plus the barracks and ammo depot. Perhaps they can do something with that. Plus the Panzer and Panther are as good as 2 Shermans, and have concussive. And the M10's don't have concussive. And the pillboxes are still much better than being in open ground vs. Shermans.

The whole concussive firepower thing always seemed crazy to me. "Quick, men, the tanks are coming! Everybody run into the open!"

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Reviews:: Re: Comparing the Incomparable: Tide of Iron and Conflict of Heroes: Awakening the Bear!

sebik80 — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 14:31:40 +0000

by sebik80

Thank you for your review Chris!

I have been looking for a war game (my first one) and after doing some extensive reading on BGG I have now made up my mind - CoH is the winner! :D I hope that in a month or so I will be able to buy and play it with another WWII enthusiast friend of mine.

Good luck,

Sebastian

Thread: Tide of Iron: Normandy:: General:: Piercing the Siegfried line

boersma8 — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 16:01:20 +0000

by boersma8

Just tried to post a much more detailed post on this subject, but unfortunately somehow all the text suddenly disappeared from my screen...:angry:

Well, the drift of my post was: we feel this scenario is -contrary to the new trend since the Normandy expansion and designers' series- highly imbalanced in the Americans' favour. The reason is that the 6 Shermans can just blst away at the pillboxes and buildings using concussive firepower. Combine a couple of them and the germans are sitting ducks. So basically the only sensible thing for the Germans to do is to NOT set up and/or enter pillboxes and buildings, let alone ones that are supposed to form part of the formidable Siegfried line...:what:

The Germans do get some (armour) reinforcements later on, but that barely helps, because the Americans get 2 additional m10s as well.....

Possible solutions:

* Ignore concussive firepower SA for this scenario

* Place pillboxes mostly in woods hexes for an additional 2 cover

* Start with at least two and possibly 3 fewer Shermans.

Does anyone have the same experience with this particular scenario? ( last one in the 29th campaign booklet)

PS: This is NOT a rant, overall I'm very happy with the game and the quality of the scenarios of late. So perhaps we're just missing something...(although quite frankly I wouldn't know what....)

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Sessions:: Re: THE CROSSROADS

Ceej — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 06:25:28 +0000

by Ceej

BuddhaBob74 wrote:
DEFINITELY the German tanks need to be in the trees.

Clever, those Panzers. Just when you think you've snuck around them, they come diving down at you out of the forest canopy...

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Sessions:: Re: THE CROSSROADS

BuddhaBob74 — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 20:15:36 +0000

by BuddhaBob74

I've played this one twice, once solo and once as the Germans. Most people seem to think it's unwinnable for the Germans, but I think it can be done. I might have won my last game had I not made a critical mistake (I allowed a square to be assaulted when it could have been prevented, and lost a couple key squads).

DEFINITELY the German tanks need to be in the trees. However, you still need to defend all 3 fronts, because otherwise the US can just bum rush you and you won't be able to destroy everything fast enough (8 rounds is just way too many).

Both times I've played this, I've had the Germans split one tank on to each of the central boards, with the fourth staring down the "corridor" between the 6A and 10A woods. It acts as a reinforcement, moving into either woods as the first tank there gets destroyed.

File: Tide of Iron:: Manual do Tide of Iron em Português

descolado1 — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 06:06:10 +0000

by descolado1

Manual do Tide of Iron em Português for Board Game: Tide of Iron ]]>

Reply: Tide of Iron: Normandy:: General:: Re: Piercing The Siegfried Line : Missing Supply Depot?

boersma8 — Sun, 31 May 2009 07:21:16 +0000

by boersma8

Emil 109 wrote:
If a building consists of more than one hex and you occupy one of the hexes, you gain control of the building if there are no enemy squads in any of the adjoining building hexes.

According to Liberation Scenario, basic scenario guide p.6

So simply put, the building is yours as soon as there are no enemy units in it ( i.e. in any of the hexes making up the building...)

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Reviews:: Cenário "At the Breaking Point": Alguém já bateu os americanos?

descolado1 — Sun, 31 May 2009 01:13:14 +0000

by descolado1

Pessoal, alguém aqui já conseguiu vencer os Americanos no cenário "At the Breaking Point"? Eu sempre vejo a maioria dos jogadores malhando este cenário, dizendo se tratar de um grande desiquilibrio e que ele só serve para iniciar jogadores, porém li aqui no fórum um cara defendendo este cenário com UNHAS E DENTES.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Two New Scenarios for New Players

Howitzer_120mm — Sun, 31 May 2009 01:10:42 +0000

by Howitzer_120mm

404 Error. :(

Session: Tide of Iron:: Sessions:: THE CROSSROADS

pyramidlagota — Sat, 30 May 2009 09:51:58 +0000

by pyramidlagota

We recently got together and played The Crossroads Scnario from the main set.

A small force of germans face a wave of American Attackers including a mass of Shermans. After initial setup, positioning German troops in and around the buildings and cover providing terrain of the Crossroads in the german Startup area, The Americans trundled forward, their wave of tanks heading towards the rough terrains and hills on one flank while the main body of troops charged to take the central crossroad. German troops took to the trees near the crossroads as a smaller contingent from both sides met on the other flank, bottlenecked into a single channel between the Stream and Tank traps. The initial attacks were hard fought, but the Americans seized the first crossroads while the large american body of tanks was stalled by German panzer and Tiger Tanks near the hill flank. As German forces faced a barrage of strikes from overwhelming American numbers the germans forces dwindled. The german Tanks in particular the Tiger shattered American tanks trying to advance but the numbers were too much. As Shot after shot rained down, Panzers and finally the mighty Tiger fell by the way side. American Artillery support only worsened the hell the Germans were feeling as it rained down on the second crossroads depleting desperate defenders in the buildings etc. With the combination of tank, artillery and troops signifigantly on the American side, the by now vastly depleted Germans silenced their weapons and flew the white flag at the prospect of inevitable loss and further bloodshed....

Wow. Such a tough battle for Germany. I held out pretty well till the 4th round but as the hits struck again and again there was no hope i could survive against this kind of american force till the 8th...My main hope lied in the tanks and here, on reflection with my fellow commander after, we both thought the odds might have swayed more by moving the tanks as one unit into the treeline near first crossroad, affording them cover and a LOS shooting position in all sections of the board. Still...with Artillery and American reinforcemnts on hand to the US, any chance of German victory would require some serious amount of good luck...(my dice rolls during this session were pretty miserable too, lol...except for some phenomenal Tiger Armour saves...on one point, 5 hits were replied with 5 saves plus the Tigers automatic 6 save.) we are going to try replay it and see if moving the German tanks to the Trees is the best option...But even still, holding out against America for 8 turns? Wow....

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Reviews:: Re: Comparing the Incomparable: Tide of Iron and Conflict of Heroes: Awakening the Bear!

cmontgo2 — Fri, 29 May 2009 23:07:00 +0000

by cmontgo2

Thanks for all the kind words and encouragement, fellow geeks. I will keep writing, if you keep reading.

As a minor update, after having played both systems extensively now, I find myself even more convinced of my statements in the review. ToI is a really fun tactical beer and pretzels game while CoH feels more like a "real" tactical simulation without the 6-hour-plus time investment.

Cheers.

Chris

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Reviews:: Re: Comparing the Incomparable: Tide of Iron and Conflict of Heroes: Awakening the Bear!

broadsword — Fri, 29 May 2009 22:04:53 +0000

by broadsword

Don't pay too much attention to people like Andy - he appears to be having personal issues around what is and isn't a review of a game. Person plays two different wargames. Compares them and reports his impressions. Sounds kinda like a review-y sort of thing to me?

People constantly misunderstand what close skirmish firefights are really like. Kinda random and goofy, with some really ugly wounds followed by delayed-onset screaming and writhing thrown in. Very definitely unscripted. Haven't been in all that many firefights, but have yet to ever see one go down like a typical ASL scenario. And I used to play ASL all the time, because I thought at the time that was the best we as a gaming community could do.

Nowadays I am so encouraged by the incredible innovations being explored in game design mechanics. These are great times to be a wargamer, but methinks Mr Daglish prefers the good old days? You know, the old "move all, some or none of your units" while your omniscient majesty-ness sees and hears and rolls dice for all...

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Reviews:: Re: Fidelidade ao extremo

descolado1 — Fri, 29 May 2009 17:02:09 +0000

by descolado1

Nunca joguei MEMOIR 44 mas tenho muito apreço por este jogo. Troco muitas ideias com amigos que tem esse jogo no site da ilhadotabuleiro, já li o manual e pude notar que se trata de um jogo muito divertido, porém como disseram aqui, são jogos diferentes.

Trocando ideias mais detalhas com um amigo que estava querendo colocar muitas coisas do TOI dentro do MEMOIR concluimos que há uma relação de ESCALA entre os dois jogos que o tornam diferentes.

No Memoir, pelo que pude notar, a escala do jogo é MAIOR, ou seja, esquadrões e tanques são tratados como PELOTÕES e COMBOIOS. Isso explica, por exemplo, porque os esquadrões do MEMOIR sofrem baixas mas mantém praticamente o mesmo poder de fogo, e explica também uma coisa que faz os jogadores de Memoir ficarem com o "pé atrás" em relação ao TOI, que é a AUSÊNCIA DE PEÇAS DE ARTILHARIA. Como muitos sabem o Memoir possui artilharia e o TOI não.

Concluímos que o motivo disso se deve ao fato justamente do TOI se focar em combates mais fechados, mais "corpor a corpo". Não há espaço para inserir ARTILHARIA quando estamos nos "esgueirando" atrás de árvores e construções.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Variants:: Re: Free PnP 'Battle Royale' Boardgame on its way to you...

Wrath_Of_Picasso — Thu, 28 May 2009 22:12:27 +0000

by Wrath_Of_Picasso

I shall check it out indeed, cheers! :D

Reply: Tide of Iron: Normandy:: General:: Re: Piercing The Siegfried Line : Missing Supply Depot?

Emil 109 — Thu, 28 May 2009 15:24:24 +0000

by Emil 109

If a building consists of more than one hex and you occupy one of the hexes, you gain control of the building if there are no enemy squads in any of the adjoining building hexes.

According to Liberation Scenario, basic scenario guide p.6

Reply: Tide of Iron: Normandy:: General:: Re: Piercing The Siegfried Line : Missing Supply Depot?

boersma8 — Thu, 28 May 2009 14:41:24 +0000

by boersma8

Another question about this scenario: To control the five- hex building, does one need to control all five hexes or do 3 suffice?

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Rules:: Re: Official ToI FAQ & Errata 1.2 at FFG

PirateJock — Thu, 28 May 2009 11:49:08 +0000

by PirateJock

Try here

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Rules:: Re: Official ToI FAQ & Errata 1.2 at FFG

Howitzer_120mm — Wed, 27 May 2009 03:33:19 +0000

by Howitzer_120mm

404 Error.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Variants:: Re: Free PnP 'Battle Royale' Boardgame on its way to you...

unixrevolution — Tue, 26 May 2009 15:02:43 +0000

by unixrevolution

There's another "Battle Royale" board game designed by

[username=hamsteroffury]

You may want to check out.

Thread: Tide of Iron: Designer Series Vol. 1:: Variants:: Free PnP 'Battle Royale' Game using ToI on its way...

Wrath_Of_Picasso — Tue, 26 May 2009 14:08:46 +0000

by Wrath_Of_Picasso

My flatmate and I are currently designing a boardgame based on the movie 'Battle Royale' using just four A4 printed reference sheets, to be uploaded as a PnP game which people can play as long as they own either the map pack expansion or ToI itself (which they will i suppose). It utilises a fog of war system where no player knows where each other's characters are until they run into them, variable weapons, items, player abilities, and of course the deadly 'danger zones' from the movie. We've finished the rules apart from the flow of combat, yet the maths behind the combat has been sorted.

Just needs a few playtests and then the files will be up to download and print, should only take a couple of weeks!

Actually I'll post this in the ToI map pack forum too and see if anyone's interested.

Thread: Tide of Iron: Normandy:: Variants:: Free PnP 'Battle Royale' Game using ToI on its way...

Wrath_Of_Picasso — Tue, 26 May 2009 14:08:19 +0000

by Wrath_Of_Picasso

Thread: Tide of Iron: Days of the Fox:: Variants:: Free PnP 'Battle Royale' Game using ToI on its way...

Wrath_Of_Picasso — Tue, 26 May 2009 14:07:53 +0000

by Wrath_Of_Picasso

Reply: Tide of Iron: Map Expansion Pack One:: General:: Re: Update or cash cow

SMEEHAN — Tue, 26 May 2009 09:35:37 +0000

by SMEEHAN

FFG is not a wargame company. So I guess I shouldnt be frustrated when I see stuff like this but I just cant help it. Selling you maps that you already own and call it an expansion pack? Wow thats false advertising. Nothing is expanded. Someone decided to change the art on a 2 year old game and another someone thinks they can make money off that? As an ex hardcore TOI fan there are many, many different expansions that would be great for this game. For instance, a big box eastern front, a terrain pack, a vehicle pack, heavy weapons pack, air expansion, etc. The Normandy expansion was interesting but a bit out of place. The original game starts with scenarios in France, then the first expansion takes us back in time to Africa, then we flash forward in time back to France again for the third expansion at a point prior to the first scenarios? Im so confused. So is FFG it seems.

Reply: Tide of Iron: Map Expansion Pack One:: Variants:: Re: Free PnP 'Battle Royale' Boardgame on its way to you...

Memphis Mike — Sun, 24 May 2009 23:37:25 +0000

by Memphis Mike

I would love to see a game based on Battle Royale. I'm huge fan of the movie. Looking forward to this when it comes out. :)

Reply: Tide of Iron: Map Expansion Pack One:: General:: Re: Update or cash cow

AbraxiS — Sun, 24 May 2009 22:37:53 +0000

by AbraxiS

It would be nice if they do a miniature expansion pack instead. With different poses and such...ok...im asking for too much.

Thread: Tide of Iron:: Variants:: Free PnP 'Battle Royale' Boardgame on its way to you...

Wrath_Of_Picasso — Sun, 24 May 2009 21:45:35 +0000

by Wrath_Of_Picasso

Reply: Tide of Iron:: General:: Re: Props to FFG Customer Service

Wrath_Of_Picasso — Sun, 24 May 2009 21:43:41 +0000

by Wrath_Of_Picasso

Same here with FFG, my Startcraft was missing 3 different units of different factions and 2 depletion tokens, replaced them all within about 3 days for no charge, and asked for no proof! fantastic :D

Thread: Tide of Iron: Map Expansion Pack One:: Variants:: Free PnP 'Battle Royale' Boardgame on its way to you...

Wrath_Of_Picasso — Sun, 24 May 2009 21:35:26 +0000

by Wrath_Of_Picasso

My flatmate and I are currently designing a boardgame based on the movie 'Battle Royale' using just this map pack and four A4 printed reference sheets, to be uploaded as a PnP game which people can play as long as they own either the map pack or ToI itself (which they will i suppose). It utilises a fog of war system where no player knows where each other's characters are until they run into them, variable weapons, items, player abilities, and of course the deadly 'danger zones' from the movie. We've finished the rules apart from the flow of combat, yet the maths behind the combat has been sorted.

Just needs a few playtests and then the files will be up to download and print, should only take a couple of weeks!

Actually I'll post this in the ToI basegame forum too and see if anyone's interested.

Thread: Tide of Iron: Map Expansion Pack One:: Variants:: Other uses for the Map Pack--oh, the possibliities...

jhenke — Sun, 24 May 2009 19:57:58 +0000

by jhenke

I've been waiting for this map pack for the possibilities it gives me...

oh sure, I can expand my terrain for Tide of Iron and it's campaigns (and I will do so with glee)...but, the other possibilities in my head are why I'd been truly waiting for this.

ASL minis (using chapter J the TOI figures and the bases can even hold the ASL unit markers in the specialty "tray" slot), large hex scenarios (perhaps ASL deluxe scenarios from archives) with no stacks and room to breath...

Battletech terrains...yeah...

Modular terrain, good amounts of it...map boards...why limit it to just Tide of Iron? It can be much more than that.

Having multiple use maps and terrains for multiple games...I'm thinking that makes $30 look like a good buy for my intents...

So, share your plans: What else are you using the maps and terrains for? How else can we think out of the box and push the limits?

P.S. I'm already planning for the Battlelore packs as well...

Thread: Tide of Iron:: General:: Selling ToI + 2 Expansions Auction Starts at $1

Tygo — Sun, 24 May 2009 15:27:32 +0000

by Tygo

The two expansions are Days of the Fox and Normandy. Both expansions are unplayed and the base game is pristine and played twice at most.

Enjoy

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/42742/item/948784#item...

New Image for Tide of Iron: Normandy

RayGuns — Sun, 24 May 2009 04:47:17 +0000

by RayGuns

Operation Goodwood (Pg.16) - an action packed moment in our game.

]]>

Reply: Tide of Iron: Normandy:: General:: Re: King Tiger Operations Card

RayGuns — Sun, 24 May 2009 04:33:25 +0000

by RayGuns

You're thinking about the Operation Goodwood scenario I bet :)

Yep, it's very risky to move your King Tiger. To date, I played the scenario twice. First time the King Tiger didn't move and it just sat there being a "Nasty Bunker" for the British player and his Shermans on their way to the exit. A second game it moved! A roll of "1" prevented it from being useless. By the way, it moved to a good spot and it was a major piece in the game.

New Image for Tide of Iron

BuddhaBob74 — Fri, 22 May 2009 13:52:29 +0000

by BuddhaBob74

General Ren rolls her first attack

]]>

New Image for Tide of Iron

BuddhaBob74 — Fri, 22 May 2009 13:51:28 +0000

by BuddhaBob74

General Ren surveys her troops

]]>

New Image for Tide of Iron

BuddhaBob74 — Fri, 22 May 2009 13:44:23 +0000

by BuddhaBob74

General Ren prepares for "Crossroads"

]]>

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Rules:: Re: Clarification on Assaults.

Emil 109 — Tue, 19 May 2009 17:35:26 +0000

by Emil 109

Since C started adjacent to the target hex and wasn't fatigued it can advance with B, if victorious.
That's the only way.

Note: you can do that with up to 3 units total!

Imagine the assault as a 3 step movement with each unit acting separately before the assault and then all of them making the final try to entry the enemy hex.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Rules:: Re: Clarification on Assaults.

GregThomson — Tue, 19 May 2009 15:58:20 +0000

by GregThomson

Thanks James that clears it up.
I do have a follow up question though:
What if C was adjacent to A i.e. http://i39.tinypic.com/awrg43.jpg

If B then moves to the hex above A and begins an Assault, can C join the assault and then BOTH units can advance into providing the assault is a success?

Or is this the same case as above?

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Rules:: Re: Clarification on Assaults.

BuddhaBob74 — Tue, 19 May 2009 13:56:16 +0000

by BuddhaBob74

All page references refer to the base game rulebook, which is available online.

You can't move multiple units as part of any action. All actions allow for only activating a single unit (pg. 10); the only exception is Combined Fire (pg 12).

You need to Advance one unit, which results in it being fatigued, and then Assault with the other. As part of the Assault by "C", the "B" unit gets to add its (halved) firepower (pg. 33).

After the Assault, if the space is vacated, "C" could advance into it, but not "B", as it is fatigued (pg. 34).

Thread: Tide of Iron:: Rules:: Clarification on Assaults.

GregThomson — Tue, 19 May 2009 13:22:56 +0000

by GregThomson

Say I've got the following situation
http://i42.tinypic.com/f1h843.jpg

[A] contains an enemy unit
[B] and [C] are friendly's about to Assault A.

If I move the [B] unit to the hex above A, do I need to fatigue it in order to then move the [C] unit to the other hex adjacent to [A] in order to Assault together?

OR can I move both units into the assault positions without fatiguing them and then carry out the assault?

The difference being, is that if the assault is won, then both units can advance into [A] (providing a success) rather than just one if one is already fatigued.

Many thanks.

Reply: Tide of Iron:: Rules:: Re: Building Squads

Emil 109 — Mon, 18 May 2009 16:00:51 +0000

by Emil 109

Ok man you are right.

:meeple: