Doubts on point costs and big tanks

[dmborque]

Hi there!
We are starting to play this game and after 6 games we are having a blast with the fast, yet tactical, rules.

The way we usually play is 1vs1, with each player fielding several tanks.
We agree on the amount of points each player can use and the war period, and then each player "buys" his tanks using the points system.
But we have the feeling that the points system fails when one side is using BIG tanks (jagdpanther or similar).

In the last 2 games the German was using 1 Jagdpanther, 1 Tiger I and 1 Stug IV. The British, an assortment of 5-6 tanks with Comets, Fireflys and M10. In both games the British tanks were utterly destroyed without even inflicting a single damage die.
Even after correcting point costs (along the lines of forum user @Herkybird) the result was the same.

Now we have the feeling that even a single Jagdpanther would be able to destroy 5-6 British end-war tanks! Which might be historically correct!?
So, is this something that should happen? What are the feelings of the more experienced players?

The game is so fun that we would like to start a league, but we don't know how to provide a way to leverage sides.

So, we should...
1. avoid using BIG tanks (though I have the feeling that the same problem will arise everytime there is a 3-4 difference in strike and armour dice)
2. not play like this. The game is not well suited for a points total then buy your tanks
3. use another point costs table
4. the British player can do it, he just has to learn to play the game (while the Geman player does practice shooting )
5. that was bad luck for the British player. Keep playing and you'll see the points system is ok-ish.

Thanks for reading!

[SteveC]

There is an alternative points system which does push up the cost of 'big' tanks.

We've played with 2 Tiger Is versus a British troop of 2 Shermans and a Firefly and a scratch team of a couple of Churchills. Worked OK but we used 2 6'x4' boards with lots of blocking terrain so that the Allied armour couldn't be picked off at long range unless they were careless.

The players with the Tigers won the day as they managed to team up and cover all the avenues of approach. My Firefly couldn't hit a barn door and spent most of the time too far off on the flank to get more than a couple of shots off. Being classed a slow and some less than wonderful movement dice didn't help

[magicfan]

My suggestion is to have lots of woods and buildings about, use them to keep breaking the acquires the big tanks get on you and also try to get behind them, a big tank only has to lose 1 command die and things become awkward for it, lose 2 and it starts to struggle and remember it may have a powerful gun but it cannot point everywhere at once.

[Herkybird]

To be honest, even my points system is only pitched for a maximum of 3 tanks on one side, as per the rules, in which case you only get 1 Tiger against 3 Shermans (one a firefly) (61 v 62 pts) - where the Tiger has a hard job as it cannot engage everything at once (as has been mentioned above)
Also, I find that tanks with similar gun/armour values do better than ones with a disparity.

[Truscott Trotter]

I agree
We have used the points for all our games and it is rather difficult for the Allies to win
We have done it but it requires skill, dense terrain and a fair bit of luck - i.e. the Germans missing ....a lot
We might try Herky's points next time
We generally play 1-2 tanks per player and no more than 6 tanks per side 28mm on 6x10-12 feet table

[SteveC]

Do find Herky's points system does work a lot better than the original in the rules. Our vehicle inventory is essentially legacy based - from older games systems we've used and other one offs that have been picked up along the way. So we struggle to get a multiplayer game with all the vehicles strictly in period ('Hunt the Tiger' being an exception - I've a pair in my inventory ). Older, smaller and fast tanks can be fun, especially if the player with the single vehicle has to watch what the larger hostiles are up to, allowing the chance of getting in a sneaky rear flank shot, dice willing, with no retribution.

But, as said earlier and by other, lots of vision blocking/interrupting terrain and space to maneuver is essential if the game is to last more than a few rounds and challenge the players to think a bit more about what they are trying to achieve.

[Mrjlmayer]

From my recent experience I find the Rules Points System adequate.

I recently introduced What A Tanker! for our yearly Family Game (6 players). We ended up playing two rounds over 4-5hours. We normally don't finish our games due to time so this was a WIN in everyone's mind and was enjoyed by all. We had a large (14'x8' total) but irregular setup with plenty of terrain features to breakup the fields of fire.

Game 1 : The Game swung back and forth but the M4A3E8 finished as lone winner after taking early temp damage from the Tiger, which was hit hard by the M36 before being able to finish the E8 off. The PzIIIN and Marder were able to out maneuver the other M4 and M36 while the E8 was trying to recover dropping the 3-2 lead to 2-1 deficit. After managing to recover from its previous hits the E8 managed to knock out both enemies as they tried to setup flanking positions.
Germans (43) - Tiger 1(21) , Pz IIIJ-M (11) & Marder III (11)
US (44) - M4A3E8 (15), M36 Jackson (15), M4 (76mm)(14)

Game 2 : This Game the M26 took out the Tiger early, again, with lucky long range shot, but the Panther and Puma worked together to well to maneuver and take out the Hellcat and M4 before encircling the Pershing.
German (50)- Tiger I(21), Panther(19), Puma(SdKfz234/2)(10)
US (48) - M26 Pershing(22), M18 Hellcat(12), M4A3E8(15)

Now our Tiger (commanded differently both games) did not hold up well due to unlucky rolls, both times it got hit were by margin of 3+, and conversely the M26 and Panther traded a bunch of shots without connecting or doing damage before the Puma swung around to get shots in its rear & side dropping its dice count which led to its eventual downfall. We debated giving lower side access to cards to even it out but decided to play as they were.

[Truscott Trotter]

I am not surprised at you results as you had the latest and best US late 44 equipment Vs 1942 German stuff
If you set that in Tunisia and gave the US M4 Shermans and an M-10 it might be a bit different

[Mrjlmayer]

I'm not sure I follow your point, of course it would change the outcome. You are altering the points difference, what was a US +1 point game would now be German +6 pt difference and what does the time period matter if the points are based on vehicle stats/capabilities you should be able to mix and match models and at least have a relatively even game. We could have gone for a 2v4 but decided on a 3v3 so choose models to fit the requirements.

[dmborque]

Thanks to all for your advice and experience input.

Our latests games have been with 1/100 tanks (after playing with 28mm scale tanks, 1/100 looks better IMO), on a 48"x72" table with quite a lot of scenery and switching to centimeters as advised in the rulebook. The German ran 3 tanks, the British 5.
We were using a points system I devised similar to that of Herkybird (I think I got his nick right), with a Jagdpanther roughly equivalent to 2 Comet, and not 1.33 as per the rulebook.

Except for one game where I had a very unlucky armour roll with a Tiger I, and got no saves (out of 10 dice) to his 3 hits, the German tanks didn't suffer a single damage die.
Moreover a Tiger I is Heavy Armour, so no point in flanking it You have to get a rear shot to improve your chances.
But appart from a very unlucky armour roll, it seems very difficult for a 6-9 strike tank to damage a 11-12 armour tank.

We'll keep learning to play the game and see if numbers can overcome armour