More Rivers To Cross PSC

Moderators: Laffe, Vis Bellica

User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 6487
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: More Rivers To Cross PSC

Post by Truscott Trotter » Sat May 25, 2019 8:22 am

Hmm good point.
Time for the pint and pie sign to be shone skywards?

poiter50
Posts: 525
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 1:23 am

Re: More Rivers To Cross PSC

Post by poiter50 » Sat May 25, 2019 10:05 am

Da-da-dadda-da, Lardman!!

Agreed. Rich/Nick, we need your sage advice.
Truscott Trotter wrote:
Sat May 25, 2019 8:22 am
Hmm good point.
Time for the pint and pie sign to be shone skywards?

User avatar
john de terre neuve
Posts: 1774
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 11:37 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: More Rivers To Cross PSC

Post by john de terre neuve » Sat May 25, 2019 12:29 pm

I am not sure still about this. Let us look at it from the view of the defender.

If I was the attacker and decimated the defender in a turn, it is pretty likely that I would BK the next table, especially if my force was relatively intact.

Here is the relevant passage:
Blitzkrieg
When the Germans win a game they may elect to continue forward immediately to the next Map in the same Campaign Turn. To do this the Germans must use the remnants of the force from the game they have just played, including whatever support options they chose which survived that action. They may not rotate platoons, nor may they select any additional support. This represents a force attempting to push forwards as rapidly as possible. This may only happen once in a Campaign Turn.
I see nothing about the defending force in the passage but it would seem to me if the defender has already lost a lot of men and has little support, then the next table would almost certainly be lost as well with very little risk to the attacker. And the turn clock is not moving as it is the same turn.

I have a sense (although I am frequently wrong) that to BK, one has to take a risk. There is no risk if the defender has already been ground down to nothing.

I would think at least the defender would be able to call on the supports as indicated for that specific table if not a new platoon.

John

Archdukek
Posts: 4608
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 11:49 pm
Location: Linlithgow, West Lothian, UK

Re: More Rivers To Cross PSC

Post by Archdukek » Sat May 25, 2019 4:58 pm

I've yet to study this particular campaign so forgive me if this is nonsense, but is not the knowledge of that possibility a good reason for the defender to withdraw and thus give ground before the attacker wears him down too far to mount a viable defence.

John

batesmotel34
Posts: 399
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 12:14 pm

Re: More Rivers To Cross PSC

Post by batesmotel34 » Sat May 25, 2019 5:02 pm

My guess would be that the defender in the scenario would have whatever force would be available that they could use normally for that scenario. If using the same platoon as just lost in the battle that the German won in order to be able to blitz, then I assume the defender wouldn't get to recover any returning losses similarly to the German but would recover any units that had routed off the table in the previous battle.

Chris

User avatar
john de terre neuve
Posts: 1774
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 11:37 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: More Rivers To Cross PSC

Post by john de terre neuve » Sat May 25, 2019 5:38 pm

I've yet to study this particular campaign so forgive me if this is nonsense, but is not the knowledge of that possibility a good reason for the defender to withdraw and thus give ground before the attacker wears him down too far to mount a viable defence.

John
My guess would be that the defender in the scenario would have whatever force would be available that they could use normally for that scenario. If using the same platoon as just lost in the battle that the German won in order to be able to blitz, then I assume the defender wouldn't get to recover any returning losses similarly to the German but would recover any units that had routed off the table in the previous battle.

Chris
Fair enough. So you both seem to suggest that men lost and wounded (or is it figures lost as you would not do the post turn assessment as BK is the same turn) would not be available to the defender but would you allow the new set of supports that are supposedly available on the next table to the defender...essentially d6+n.


I just finished turn 2, with another German victory so on to table 4 with a BK?
German losses JL and 5 riflemen. 1JL down a CI
Belgian losses 19 riflemen. SL down to 1CI, 2JL's down to 1CI.

We did not have enough time today but I could consider a BK here especiallly if it is figures lost:
The Germans have a red dice, 2SL, 2JL (one with 1 CI), 2 full squads, Flamethrower (1 man), MMG team (2 men) and JeanC.
The Belgians have 1SL (with 1 CI), 3 JL (2 with 1 CI), a full DBT Squad, 2 GdC with 2FM1930 LMG and 2 Riflemen each, a MMG team (5 men), and a T13b.....
....especially if that is all they have. I would be really be ahead on CI's. And Table 4 has some culverts to destroy and the Belgians would have no engineers.

I am still not really convinced that this would be reasonable especially if they could not draw on 1d6+3 supports as they would in turn 2.

John

batesmotel34
Posts: 399
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 12:14 pm

Re: More Rivers To Cross PSC

Post by batesmotel34 » Sat May 25, 2019 9:34 pm

John,

No figures lost would return for attacker or defender. I would allow the defender to use a fresh platoon if one is available. Either way defender supports would be chosen fresh per the scenario with no defender supports carrying over from the first game. That's how I'd run it.

Chris

User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 6487
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: More Rivers To Cross PSC

Post by Truscott Trotter » Sat May 25, 2019 10:00 pm

So Cris if the defender has a full strength platoon and a full compliment of support while the attacker has a platoon less casualties and may have lost support also what is the incentive to attack by Blitzreig?

One point for the OP the mission with the culverts can still be won by the defenders without blowing up the culverts- just defeat the attackers!

JimLeCat
Posts: 717
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 8:57 pm
Location: Durham, England

Re: More Rivers To Cross PSC

Post by JimLeCat » Sun May 26, 2019 9:36 am

I would run it the same way as Chris, giving the defender all the normal options, with the exception that they get no wounded back (until the next game).

You ask why an attacker would choose to use this under those terms? Well, firstly, the chance to take two Maps in one Turn is huge. Secondly, if they won the previous game with a higher force morale I would give them the usual difference back in casualties, since that is an immediate result.

I basing that this on two things:- one, the campaign notes say nothing about the defenders, and where Rich is concerned that generally means don't read anything into it. Two, if the defender had to fight with what they had left after losing one game, why would the attacker *not* choose to do it every time? Three, given the defender has more than one platoon, indicating they have enough foces for a defence in depth, why should they be totally unprepared for a successful attack on their forward defences?

Hope that helps.

Cheers,
Jim

User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 6487
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: More Rivers To Cross PSC

Post by Truscott Trotter » Sun May 26, 2019 10:10 am

Erm you are only allowed to Blitzkreig once per campaign

Post Reply