Henri

"Most of Fionn's HTs were knocked out by air and artillery fire. All of his armored vehicles (except for the Puma) were lost in normal battlefield conditions. The problem with this map for the attacker is that you really HAD to rush. Fionn's problem was that he rushed in an uncoordinated manner and that was what hurt him so bad. In other words, the fact that he rushed forward wasn't the problem, rather HOW he rushed forward." I don't dispute that, but it is unclear to me exactly how he should have rushed forward in order to have a better chance, even had he known the enemy dispositions (which he didn't). It seems to me that osing the scouting halftrack had a negligible effect on the battle. What could that halftrack have accomplished otherwise? At least it gave info on enemy dispositions. Leading with his infantry would have been suicide as they would have been mowed down by machine guns, and getting his MGs close enough to make a difference would have been chancey at best. So what should he have done? Two more questions: it is generally considered that a ratio of 3/1 in forces is required to attack a defensive position. Did Fionn ever have such an advantage, or could he have maneuvered to obtain it, taking into account fog of war? How should Dionn have scouted the position, given his lack of time? The Puma? Or should he have waited to have his whole force together (giving Martin time to prepare) and launched an all-out attack on the town? I doubt it, but who knows? Henri

I might as well sound off too...Both Fionn and Martin have played pretty well and made some serious mistakes, but aking into account fog-of-war... It seemed to me that early on Martin concentrated too much on the important point of locating his teams with good fields of fire, apparently forgetting completely to think about how they were going to retreat. Fionn earlyon over-estimated the ability of comand and control in his plans in the town, which somehow inevitably fell apart when his units tried to regroup. However it seems to me that Fionn, despite one or two serious mistakes (the Puma...) and some extreme bad luck (the airplane...) is playing better than Martin, because he is playing the psychological game, which can be devastating when well-used. That is why I am in the minority who voted that Fionn would win, even though I voted around move 25. Early in the game, it seemed to me that neither player tried very hard to disrupt his opponent's thinking by means of maneuver. Fionn was considerably hampered by having his starting positions determined in advance. Had he had the choice, I doubt that he would have chosen the one given. Personally, I would have used a feint along one axis followed by a thrust with the main force along another axis, hoping that the enemy would have started to move to face the threat.Or maybe thrown a 50/50 die to determine if the feint should not really be the main thrust, which could be deadly if the opponent doesn't react ("Keep your enemy on the horns of a dilemma"). It's hard to say from this game, but inexperienced players in any game game can't stand uncertainty, and can be made to try to resolve the situation when it would be better to wait and to maneuver. Fionn used this to some extent in the later part of the game. Everything considered, I think that the US had the original edge because of the constraint of German lines of approach, and especially because of the airplane. Would it have been reasonable in WWII to expect such a German force to engage without at least one AA gun? How many would give the edge to Martin at this stage if Fionn still had his Panther? Henri

I like AARs and I like the ones posted by Fionn and Martin. But if they were going to be others, they could be less detailed, since the present ones have the additional purpose of showing how the game works. Of course style is a question of personal taste, but AARs that can be read at one sitting along the lines of those posted for otehr games such as Steel panthers and East Front would be nice.

A problem with conditional reinforcements is that a player who knows about it could purposely slow down his advance in order to get more reinforcements to improve his chances later. One would end up playing the system instead of the battle. A better idea might be conditional reinforcements with probabilities low enough so that it wouldn't pay to do the above.

Oops, sorry, I thought that neither player would see the threads for everyone. I modified my question in such a way that no information is given about what the two players really did, because I think that is a good subject for discussion independently of the real game. So here is another try without (I hope) no informationat all about what the players actually did.Please reply in the same way - forget what they actually did and the reasons for it, as they already have explained that.Imagine that you have no more info than that given before the game started. The Germans have the onus of either attempting to reach the town before it falls, or of going slow and taking it back from the Americans.Deciding on the best strategy depends on a number of factors that are not obvious to me: 1) do the German orders imply that the town must not fall at any cost? Is it Ok to lose it temporarily? Are the expected losses in the latter case such that it is preferable to take more losses to get there faster? 2) Do the Germans have any choice? Do the snow and the narrow forest roads almost force the Germans to advance slowly and to take the chance that the town will fall to protect their advance? 3) Should the Germans divide their force? Since there are a number of paths to the town, should the Germans take a chance and send most or all of their force down a single path, the one with the least chance of a destroyed unit blocking the road? Since the Americans almost have to protect all the paths at least with a token force, wouldn't this have more chance of a quick breakthrough than splitting the force? Would 3 paths be better than 2? Or is this a given of the scenario (in which case some division commander should be kicked...). Should the US defend against the German reinforcements with a token force or leave only a small force in the city and concentrate on blocking the reinforcements? What is the best ratio and disposition of forces when carrying out an assault while expecting enemy reinforcements? Would it be a viable choice for the US to throw everything at the town, hoping to take it before the German reinforcements arrive? In sum, do the conditions justify both or both player to forego some rather fundamental military principles 1) Avoid dividing your force; 2) When reinforcing, your first priority is to get to the battle; 3) Try to do the unexpected. Any ideas how the scneario should be played, independently of how the players are actually playing it? Henri

Here is an off-the-wall comment on the strategy used by both players. It is not clear to me if this is wrong or not, since I do not have the game. Offhand, I would say that the Germans have the onus of either attempting to reach the town before it falls, or of going slow and taking it back from the Americans.Deciding on the best strategy depends on a number of factors that are not obvious to me: 1) do their orders imply that the town must not fall at any cost? Is it Ok to lose it temporarily? Are the losses in the latter case such that it is preferable to take more losses to get there faster? 2) Do the Germans have any choice? Do the snow and narrow forest roads actually force the GErmans to take the chance that the town will fall? This seems to be the opinion of teh gErman player. 3) Were the Germans justified in dividing their force? Since there are a number of paths to the town, should the GErmans have taken a chance and sent most or all of their force down a single path, the one with the least chance of a destroyed unit blocking the road? Since the Americans have to protect all the paths at least with a token force, wouldn't this have more chance of a quick breakthrough? If not, why 3 paths and not 2. Or is this a given of the scenario (in which case some division commander should be kicked...). Is the US decision to defend against the German reinforcements with a token force the best? What is the best ratio and disposition of forces when carrying out an assault while expecting enemy reinforcements? Would it be a viable choice for teh US to throw everything at the town, hoping to take it before the German reinforcements arrive? Henri