Prev: Re: SG2 vehicles (was Re: Full Thrust...) Next: Re: [SG] Orbats (was Full Thrust : Electronic Warfare)

Re: GZGL DSII SGII OT - Saving Private Ryan.

From: Adrian Johnson <ajohnson@i...>
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1998 12:48:32 -0500
Subject: Re: GZGL DSII SGII OT - Saving Private Ryan.

At 08:35 PM 11/5/98 +1300, you wrote:
>Saving Private Ryan.
>    I've just been to see this. A great movie! The first WWII movie
>seen where the German halftracks use the correct vehicle, instead of
>US M3 half-tracks repainted in German colours.
>    It also shows why tanks were needed with infantry assaults; to
>through barriers that slow down or stop infantry.
>    Has anyone done any DSII or SGII scenarios based on the actions in

A few weeks back, my group played a game specifically based on the big
fight for the bridge scene at the end of the film.  We use a table appx
x 6' or 7'.  We had a river set up running widthwise across the table
4' dimension) about 18" in from one end.  Bridge in the middle, with a
whole bunch of the Armorcast resin ruined building models around either
of the bridge.	Hills and forrest/scrub in the open areas, road leading
through "country", between hills, up to town and the bridge.  Mission
simple - we have been playing a series of loosely linked games (less of
organized campaign than a continuing story line), and in this one the
attackers were trying to break out after they had been encircled.  The
attackers had to take and hold the bridge, in a limited time period (I
forget the turn limit).  The defenders had to prevent the taking of the
bridge, by any means necessary.  The attacking force was a reinforced
platoon of Legionaires, with several tanks, APC's, and a couple squads
power armour.  The defenders were an understrength platoon (of Japanese
mercenaries, I think) with an emplaced guided missile launcher, a jeep
a machinegun, two size one infantry walkers and a size three combat
 The defenders had a few mine and dummy counters to distribute, and
squads/vehicles started hidden under counters.	Attackers started at the
end of the table away from the "town".	The defenders were allowed to
deploy anywhere on the table, but chose to keep their forces on the
opposite side of the river from the attackers, so as not to spreat out
thinly.  They used mine and dummy counters as "spoilers" to force the
attackers to deploy prior to reaching the town and bridge...

Simple scenario, but fighting for a bridge (or other limited objective)
always challenging, so it was fun.  The attackers had about 2:1 odds in
strength, but played a bit too agressively and without real
to being careful - they tried to bull through fast.  The defenders were
very careful.  In the end, I think the game ended with about 2/3 of the
attackers being wiped out before they gave up and retreated.  The
had negligible casualties.  Very satisfying game (well, I was playing

This scenario showed the old truism about attacking a well-defended
position.  You need 2, 3 or even 4 times the strength of the defenders
successfully press the attack, and a careful plan.  The attackers had
strength, but did not develop or execute the good plan - and they got
chopped to dogmeat...

We do more complex games, and considerably larger (company size) games -
but it's good to play these kinds of simple scenarios sometimes.  Makes
immediately satisfying gaming.	

Prev: Re: SG2 vehicles (was Re: Full Thrust...) Next: Re: [SG] Orbats (was Full Thrust : Electronic Warfare)