DS2: Battle of Bloody Bridge

Last night, I ran a DS2 battle, approx 4K points per side. Meeting
engagment, two sides fighting over Bloody Bridge in the middle. (Not
really required for the units on the board, most of whom are amphibious
or GEV, but needed for logistical units to follow). 

Participants were JP.Fiset, Jim Bell, Richard Bell (no relation), and
myself with Tom McCarthy showing up to draw chits of massive lethality
for a while. 

Forces:
ESU
6 size 4 Slow GEV MBTs mounting MDC/5s.
5 size 3 Fast Tracked MBTs mounting KHP/4s.
4 size 2 HiMob Wheeled TD mounting GMS/H.
8 size 2 HiMob Wheeled APC mounting RFAC/1, GMS/L, infantry.
7 squads of infantry.
4 size 2 HiMob Wheeled TD mounting HKP/3.

NAC
6 size 3 Fast GEV MBTs mounting DFFG/4s.
8 size 2 Fast GEV MICVs mounting RFAC/1.
4 PA elements.
6 size 2 Fast Tracked MICVs mounting RFAC/1, GMS/L. 
6 infantry elements.
8 size 4 Fast Tracked MBTs (some mounting HVC/4, others HVC/5). 

The board had a mix of mountanous outcroppings (scalable only by
infantry... only brought my SG2 hills), thickets of scrub, small ponds,
plus one large bisecting river and a swamp. Some cultivated fields (12x8
fields)and Bloody Bridge. 

Both forces entered from one short board edge. Shooting started on turn
2. Turn 1 saw a lot of movement, especially from the fast GEVs with the
PA aboard. (They pretty much seized the bridge by turn 2). 

ESU forces split their heavy GEVs 3 to a flank, and sent the 5 tracked
MBTs and the wheeled GMS TDs (BRDMs) up the one side, and the infantry
and APCs up the center. The other flank had the aforementioned 3 GEV
MBTs and also got the 4 wheeled HKP TDs (Coonhounds).

NAC forces sent their GEV forces up one side of the board (they split
the GEV MBTs, but all the other GEVs were on the board side facing the
ESU tracked MBTs and wheeled GMS TDs. Up the other board side they sent
the tracked forces. 

The first couple of turns looked very good for the ESU... they didn't
get to the bridge first, but their first engagements with the enemy
forces resulted in a couple of dead MBTs with very ineffectual fire in
return on the flank facing the NAC tracklayers. On the other flank, the
NAC GEVs pushed across the water but in one volley, the ESU (my T-72s! -
only 4 had angle) absolutely murdered all 3 of the NAC GEV MBTs. At this
point, the NAC players started snivelling that their stuff was fast but
not good (their damage pulls had sucked, the ESUs had not). 

Then Mr. McCarthy the Lethal arrived to pull chits as a guest
participant. Then the worm turned. 

Shortly thereafter, the ESU heavy GEV force facing the NAC tracklayers
died to a man. Then the NAC tracklayers and the two surviving GEV MBTs
on the flank evaporated the ESU Wheeled HKP tank destroyers for
virtually no cost (Richard's dice went very cold). That flank then
promptly lost its ESU APCs as the NAC tracklayers cut in and headed for
the bridge. 

On the other flank, the NAC PA rushed the ESU heavy GEVs and scared them
into a withdrawal. They then proceeded to assault the unit of ESU
Tracked MBTs and kill several. In the end, that one PA unit did more
damage to enemy forces (killing or destroying or routing 5 enemy MBTs
for the loss of one stand of PA) than any other single unit. NAC forces
had some luck on that flank too when they managed to blow up or wreck
the ESU wheeled GMS TD force. 

In the end, the NAC were essentially just commiting war crimes as their
MBTs flowed across the central bridge and laid fire into the few
remaining surrendering ESU APCs. In the end, the ESU may have retreated
a couple of three vehicles off the board, everything else died (except a
pile of infantry debarked and hiding in some scrub with no ride....).
The cost to the NAC was most of their GEV MBTs, one of their track
laying MBTs, and about 3/4 of their APCs/MICVs. They retained most of
their infantry and PA (now on foot) plus enough MBT forces to hold the
Bridge. 

Despite an early advantage for the ESU, we have to call this one Major
Victory for the NAC. 

Questions Raised:

1. Can vehicles close-assault infantry by themselves? We said yes (let
them use their APSWs as infantry fired back with their IAVRs). If so,
should being assaulted by tanks give the defender a similar mod to their
confidence test to being attacked by PA?

2. Can vehicles be close-assualted by infantry? If so, shouldn't being
in armour give the defenders some positive mods to their confidence
test? Watching size 4 GEVs run from PA was funny, but perhaps very much
too easy. 

3. Should odds factor into your morale tests for CA? 1 lone PA stand
attacking a tank formation shouldn't be as effective as 8 of them.....

4. If you are under fire, the ONLY thing that seems to effect is
movement. You can still shoot unmolested and with no activation roll
right? (including reaction fire?)

5. Reaction fire seems automatic. Should it maybe have a check?
Otherwise whoever gets in position first has automatic death dealing to
the other guy. Especially if the unit RFing is "under fire"?

6. If you have shaken infantry, and they want to CA an enemy, do they
make both their "reaction test for being shaky" and a "close assault
initiation test"? 

7. What happens if you are shaky and try to do something and blow your
reaction roll? (moving towards enemy)? Do you do nothing or just can you
not do _that_ and instead do something like fire? The Reaction Roll rule
says you don't follow the order... but what does that mean?

We had fun. I look forward to integrating artillery, command units,
smoke, and some things like GMS/P or L or APSW to give the infantry some
teeth. And figuring out Under Fire/Reaction Tests better.

Tomb.