Stalingrad Redux

A while ago we decided to do a Chain of Command Stalingrad Campaign. It went really quite well but broke down when our platoons were "non combat effective" (as Holly said, They're dead Dave). In some ways this was a very successful campaign with a historically accurate result. Battles in urban areas were ridiculously bloody, (They're all dead Dave) and we burned through the reserves and reinforcements in a couple of games. The result was that after a while our units became more and more static - we could reasonably expect to hold our positions but had no chance of expanding them. Those that were still breathing that is. It was an interesting lesson.

We had decided to do it again - but this time with some changes to learn the lessons from our previous experience - and then the lock down began (!)

Anyway I thought I would share our cunning plan, just in case anyone else feels the need. We will be using the campaign rules from "The Sharp End" campaign system from Two Fat Lardies . This is really, really the best buy you can get for a tenner, even if you don't play Chain of Command. Seriously, if you play any WW2 set of rules, Bolt Action, Disposable Heroes whatever, just pick them up here from Two Fat Lardies store. They're full of great ideas that will easily transfer to your favourite system. Do yourself a favour - buy them.

Ours will be a ladder campaign, based on a vaguely historical series of locations \ events rearranged in a more Hollywood sequence, with the results of each battle dictating when and where the next game will happen. If the attackers win they will push through to the next "rung" on the ladder, and if they lose they can be pushed back. The campaign will end with either the Germans capturing the banks of the Volga or being thrown back past the city outskirts. Or everyone dying. My money is on the latter tbh.....

Anyway - Stalingrad 5 step ladder campaign – thoughts & suggestions

Campaign Zones as follows – each would be a different scenario\play style

1. Outskirts (Soviet Campaign Objective- campaign start)
2. Train yards and factory
3. Fallen Heroes Square inc railway station
4. Workers Housing \ Pavlov's House
5. Oil tanks and the Volga bank (German Campaign Objective)

Suggested Terrain. We've raided our terrain boxes and also the local club and we are planning the following:

1. Outskirts – Mostly wooden buildings \ burned out small houses with fences etc. Looking at photos these are arranged in fenced off blocks so table should have 4 – 6 blocks each of a couple of houses plus sheds etc. Paul has printed some burned down shacks with only the chimney remaining. We have about a dozen, plus a sawmill and similar, so we can cover a table with suitable bits.

2. Train Yards and Factory area. Large industrial buildings separated by large open areas with lots of blocking terrain.

3. Fallen Heroes Square. A public square surrounded by ruined buildings with a central open area. The square can contain wrecks, fountains, statues etc for cover. I have a 1:48 He111 that I built and chopped up - details here: crashed He 111 . Paul has also printed the railway station building - it's a burned out shell, but fits our requirements perfectly. This will be our neutral table - the mid point of the campaign.

4. Workers Housing – Larger ruins of workers housing with wide streets between them. Paul has a rather ambitious plan to print Pavlov's House, which will fill the centre of a 6x4 quite easily. Looking at the photos and the maps (Island of Fire by Jason D Mark has some amazing maps) there is an awful lot of space around the individual blocks so this could be a bit "interesting" with lots of trenches around the table edges.

5. The Volga Banks. Oil tanks, pump houses and pipes, plus some smaller industrial \ warehouse style buildings. Of the Germans can take this area they will have reached the Volga and cut off the Soviets in the city. The oil tanks are now going to be my Covid terrain project. I've been watching The World at War episode on Stalingrad and in addition to some film of an Ampulomet in action, there's also some pics of troops moving around the collapsed oil tanks - I think I can build them using some plastic paint buckets and chop them down. These have several terrain opportunities as they cover a fair chunk of the table at minimal cost. Possibly. Watch this space.

All areas should have plenty of appropriate scatter terrain – whatever we can grab as available but lots of shell holes, barricades etc.

Forces. To avoid the premature end of the campaign (They're all dead Dave) we're going to give each player 2 platoons, and allow them to swap them around on a scenario by scenario basis. Progression up and down the ladder will be based on aggregate results. To give the Germans an advantage initially, to get them into the city, the Soviets will have to keep the same platoon in the front line 'til the third game. Soviets will only get reinforcements once the game gets past the middle of the campaign, Germans will only get them up to that point.

I'll go into the lists we're using next time........

Naval Gazing Part 3 - a Closer look - Victory at Sea 1:1800 models from Warlord

I think I mentioned how I managed to get a look at the demo set models from Warlord's new "Victory at Sea" set from my local FLGS. They had been assembled in the store but I volunteered to paint them over the lock down. So I've now had a good opportunity to have a look at them, here is an update.

The models are 1:1800 which makes them rather bigger than the usual 1:3000 I'm used to for WW2. This has a couple of interesting points. Firstly, they're bigger  (doh!), which makes them easier to paint. Secondly the level of detail is way higher than you get with Navwar \ Davco, though I can't compare them to GHQ which I've never really seen other than in a breathless nose pressed against the glass sort of way. Main armament turrets and some other details on the cruisers is separate which allows you to pose the turrets or even magnetise them if that is your sort of thing. Having painted a few now I have to say 1:1800 are rapidly gaining my approval.

The models I have finished are a pair of Japanese Mogami Class Heavy Cruisers, and a pair of Fubuki Class Destroyers. The Mogamis are a good example of the way Warlord are presenting these ship classes. The Mogami is (apparently) the 1939 version, however the second model is her sister ship the Kumano in it's 1944 refit with lots more AA, and the model clearly shows the differences.

The USN side consists of a pair of the ubiquitous Fletcher class destroyers and two Northampton class Cruisers, the Northampton and the Chicago - again with different weapon layouts and dates. The bases are marked to that effect.

May need to rethink the deck colour

All the models were speed painted with (mainly) those new fangled Citadel Contrast paints, and touched up with "normal" paint and dry brushing. I think they turned out quite nice and really took no time at all.

The data card in the set is a standard fitting, with notes on the rear showing a number of different refit options. I have mixed feelings about this - the specific naming of ships within a class is quite "kewl" but what happens if I want to do a later refit of a ship that not one of the named selection - do I get a close match and trim the name off?? OK this is very much a First World Problem but it does detract from the "kewl" a bit.

Are the much commented on bases a problem? I'm undecided. They made the models easy to paint, and at least to my eye they don't seem too obtrusive now they are painted. I also think they will help protect the models from handling damage, particularly to paintwork which is the bane of small metal models, so that is good. However I mentioned in the earlier post about the base warping, and in the process of correcting this I snapped one almost in half - clearly misjudged the heat needed to make them flexible. On the other hand repairs were quick and easy as the two halves went together with superglue and the damage on the painted model is (almost) invisible - I'm going to put that down to heavy handedness and unfamiliarity with the resin material used.

I think looking at these now they are painted I am starting to warm to the models and the scale. VAS is not meant to be a game to represent Jutland - like GQ, but what it loses in the grand scale (Grand Fleet scale?) it does seem to make up for with more detail on individual ships both in stats and in the models. Should you rush out and buy fleets in the "new" scale? Well if you already have 1:3000 \ 1:2400 I can see that would be a hard decision and I would probably just wait for the rules to be released and use your existing models. If like me you divested yourself of your WW2 ships some time ago, or have never had any to begin with, then the new models and scale have a lot going for them. 

Once this current social distancing \ lockdown is resolved I will hopefully get some games played and a better assessment of the game as a whole. Til then, stay safe.

Naval Gazing Part 2 - the rules - first impressions

OK so I mentioned seeing the VAS (Victory at Sea) demo set at our FLGS. Sadly I didn't have a chance to read through the rules at the time, but since then I seem to have quite a bit of time on my hands.......

Sadly what I don't have at the moment is ships, or an opponent, so this is going to be a bit "blue sky". or possibly "blue sea". I also have to say I have not played any WW2 naval other than Coastal Forces for quite a while and am quite set in my ways - "if GQ2 was good enough in 1980, it is good enough now" sort of thing. I didn't play the original Victory at Sea either, so bear that in mind.

However I do now have a copy of the starter rules and here are my initial thoughts.

Firstly these are the starter rules, not the full thing. They don't contain any stats for ships other than a couple of battleships. The stats are usually on the data cards provided with the models, however I understand there is a compendium of ships to follow which includes all the stats you will need. I appreciate this will be seen as an attempt to tie players in to Warlord models, which to some extent I think it is, however that's just modern gaming and will take about a minute to resolve if you want to use third party models or a different scale. They're also NOT a straight  lift from the previously published VAS v1 from Mongoose - there is clearly quite a bit of development and polish applied.

On scale, all measurement is from (and I assume to) the ship's bridge, which seems eminently sensible, so there is nothing in the rules that prevents you from using other scales if you already have them.

The actual layout is very good - which we have come to expect from recent Warlord releases. What did strike me immediately is that these rules are not full of Osprey plates, instead they are illustrated with some very nice photo-shopped images of the actual models, plus some artwork that I suspect has been commissioned for the job. There is one glaring and frankly unforgivable picture on page 4 which is in a very different style and appears to show HMS Warspite firing her "A" turret to starboard and simultaneously firing "B" turret to port. I have no words. This is so out of character to the rest of the illustrations I suspect it is a carry over from an earlier Mongoose version - but I digress.

The rules seem simple and straightforward. Initiative followed by alternative movement with the loser going first (not very realistic but a common game mechanic, which means no manoeuvring by squadron) with the shooting phase following the same alternating ship by ship but with the winner shooting first. As damage is applied immediately this could make for some interesting and tense decisions - always a good thing. Gunnery is a "bucket of dice" system which looks perfectly serviceable - normal range being out to 30" - if you want to shoot further you need some spotter aircraft or similar and can only hit stationary targets. Torpedo are just treated as another weapon system, usually one shot but devastating (I suspect a carry over from the sci fi roots of VAS but not unreasonable). Damage is assessed as cumulative damage points lost with a "Crippled" threshold, plus a critical hit system, again nothing new but nothing to suggest any problems. There's is a simple but easy to use damage control system for tracking the ongoing effects of fires and floods with the chance of fixing or the situation worsening, which I liked.  All the rules are clear and well explained and have illustrations to help - at least I found them clear (!)

There is an interesting crew order system to allow you to get your ship to do interesting stuff , some of which are automatic, some are based on a crew quality check which is usually 50/50.

Aircraft are covered in depth, but the stats in the starter set are very restricted - only one type per nation except the Germans who for some reason get the carrier borne versions of the Bf109 and Ju87. It seems strange to include these in the game at all given the number of German aircraft carriers operating in WW2, which was none, to several decimal places.

The second half of the rules covers scenarios, and these are interesting. It's clear that Warlord are aiming for casual "points" based games rather than re-fighting North Cape, but the scenarios provided do look well thought out and will generate interesting games. Having said that these are not totally disconnected from historical reality - you don't need to put your carriers on table for instance, which was refreshing.

Lastly there is the inevitable National fleet sections with special rules for each nation in the initial release, plus some passing mention of French and Italians. These are going to cause some comments, particularly from the historical naval players out there, but I think they do add flavour.

So I can't in all honesty say much about the rules til I play them properly a few times. That being said, my first impressions are broadly positive. I think these rules will give a fast and fun WW2 naval game. I'm 100% certain these will not appeal to everyone, particularly the "Old Salt" naval gamer, but for the casual gamer I think these are going to be worth a look.

Cheers