Tigerman's Barbarossa Game now at HBG
-
Going to have to play alot more to figure things out. Got to get everything timed out. Russia had 53 infrantry in Moscow that defended at 6 because they drew a card for all inf defend at +2 in citys on attack on murphy’s law chart. Germany had to attack because Russia was at 138 icp’s. So was seeing if Russia would lose better pieces. If you roll high die numbers, the better pieces get killed first on the casualities list. Germany had a chance until the inf defended at 6. Great 2 man game. Ton of planning to do.
-
@SS:
Going to have to play alot more to figure things out. Got to get everything timed out. Russia had 53 infrantry in Moscow that defended at 6 because they drew a card for all inf defend at +2 in citys on attack on murphy’s law chart. Germany had to attack because Russia was at 138 icp’s. So was seeing if Russia would lose better pieces. If you roll high die numbers, the better pieces get killed first on the casualities list. Germany had a chance until the inf defended at 6. Great 2 man game. Ton of planning to do.
It really looks like a cool game. After I play Global a couple of times. I want to try this game as well as the other campaign type games. Thanks for showing your game. :-)
-
OK, I own the map and am planning to set up and play the game next week or so. Some remarks and questions:
*Is there a d12 battleboard available for download somewhere (inlcuding all the advanced pieces)?
- i find the weather rules a bit odd in that you roll for them every turn; i.e. you can go from summer straight to winter without ud in between (or 4 winter turns in a row wetc.). Wouldn’t it be better to have set winter and summer turns on say the even turns and on the ones in between roll for either clear/ mud and mud/snow?
-
Are there fortification and lend lease rules in this game?
-
You go to page 9 and down load the rules. Land lease is used starting on certain turn. Russia gets 8 icp
s per turn when activated. Forts dont remember. -
I made the weather chart to reflect the unpredictability of the weather on the Eastern front during the war. Remember the winter snow came earlier than normal and stayed longer…also the muddy conditions after the thaw hurt the Germans. I know that in some games the weather has played a huge factor, but this is part of the strategy the German and Russian players have to account for. The axis could wind up with awesome wether during the winter and push further into Russia or they could have 4 turns of snow and mud (6 months) that would almost be disastrous for a fast blitzkrieg.
-
Possible to change 1 rain or snow to a good in each column if Germany seems to never win. Tigerman, of all the games you played and others, what kind of wins and loses do the Allies and Axis have?
-
At first the Russians would win around turn 8-9. But or last 2 games Russia was unable to hold Leningrad and this allowed the extra help from the Fins. This gave the Axis a victory by turn 10-11. I will say if the weather isn’t good it hurts the Axis more than the Russians. One rule we added in our game that may not have made the 4.0 revision; Russia loses 5 pics for every factory lost. This helped balance the game a little more.
-
Yes thats what happen in our first game. Russia won turn 9. As I said early post of game it was key to get Leningrad early and use Finns to help. Ok will use the 5 icp russia loses for each factory rule.
-
@SS:
Yes thats what happen in our first game. Russia won turn 9. As I said early post of game it was key to get Leningrad early and use Finns to help. Ok will use the 5 icp russia loses for each factory rule.
Of course the fact that Russia wins, is not necessarily a bad thing as this was also the historical outcome. IMHO, the Axis should have a window of opportunity to achieve victory at a certain point and as time progresses chances of achieving this should decrease ever more.
-
Do the Germans also gain IPC’s by conquering (parts of)cities or do the numbers shown only indicate victory points?
Secondly, why was the decision made not to attach any IPC’s to (m)any of the other territories? Now, it could well be a strategy for the Russians, so it seems, to stack up in the cities, after all, what’s the point in defending the other areas?
Planning on playing my first game of barbarossa next week!
-
Germany starts with 60 icp’s and then only gets 48 icp’s after every turn for the whole game and the cities are just victory points towards there goal.
As tigerman stated ( new rule ) Germany gets 5 icp’s more for each factory they capture.
-
@SS:
Germany starts with 60 icp’s and then only gets 48 icp’s after every turn for the whole game and the cities are just victory points towards there goal.
As tigerman stated ( new rule ) Germany gets 5 icp’s more for each factory they capture.
OK, that clears it up. What does surprise me though is that this way Germany is forced to actually fight in urban terrain. We all know what that led to in Stalingrad. It’s also why they avoided a direct attack on Leningrad historically.
Is the fact that cities consist of three zones meant to represent the protracted nature of city fighting?
As for supplies; if i get it correctly one supply point is paid for each territory out of which an attack is made rather than for each territory attacked into (as in Battle of the Bulge), correct? Thanks for the swift replies!
-
@SS:
Germany starts with 60 icp’s and then only gets 48 icp’s after every turn for the whole game and the cities are just victory points towards there goal.
As tigerman stated ( new rule ) Germany gets 5 icp’s more for each factory they capture.
OK, that clears it up. What does surprise me though is that this way Germany is forced to actually fight in urban terrain. We all know what that led to in Stalingrad. It’s also why they avoided a direct attack on Leningrad historically.
Is the fact that cities consist of three zones meant to represent the protracted nature of city fighting?
YES
As for supplies; if i get it correctly one supply point is paid for each territory out of which an attack is made rather than for each territory attacked into (as in Battle of the Bulge), correct?
YES
1 supply token is used for all units including supplies, being moved in a zone. ( Except naval and trains ). The supplies have to be in the zone that the units are being moved from, or in an adjacent zone. Supplies are used in the Combat Movement and Non-Combat movement sequences.
I use supply tokens from Battle Of The Bulge Game with chips.
You will need alot of chips -
On the IC rule. Russia loses 5 ipcs per IC lost but the Axis do NOT get an increase of 5 ipcs per. I should have made that more clear.
-
Along with the next rule revision I will update the new advanced setup charts.
-
Hi,
I have some more questions regarding the latest version of the rules posted on BGG (27 September 2014):
1.) In the section on the Pripet marhes it says that the defending units get -2 to their defense values. Shouldn’t this be the attacker (or perhaps the - should be a +)? It doesn’t really make sense to me, so I wonder if this is perhaps an error.
2.) In the section on aircraft, the first bit of text in bold says that aircraft that are not medium or heavy bombers do not return to a friendly area during non-combat. however, this is contradicted later on when e.g. fighters are discussed separately. here it says that they must return to a space that has been friendly controlled for at least a full turn during NCM. Which of the two is it?
Thanks!
-
Finally got to play this game for the first time yesterday and here’s a shortlist of my initial impressions along with another highly important question regarding the rules.
Pros:
-
I love the way supply has been incorporated into the system! It also greatly promotes attacking enemy stacks of these with SBR’s which is also historically accurate. At the beginning of Barbarossa the Luftwaffe cut Soviet communications effectively and in this way denied possible strong Soviet counter-attacks.
-
Personally I really like all the unit variety this game provides in the advanced set-up
-
The slight deviation of A&A rules here and there allows for interesting developments on the battlefield; e.g. having your opponent counter-attack BEFORE you can strengthen your positions during NCM causes an interesting twist.
Cons:
-
The game is incredibly time consuming to set up. Set-up and cleaning things up took me about 3 1/2 hours between them. While I actually enjoy setting up a game and seeing the forces assemble little by little, I just don’t have the time usually to spend so much time on it. Game-play itself is also very time-consuming due to the large variety and quantity of units etc. We only managed to finish the first turn, that is up to and including combat for both sides.
-
I’ve had to make my own battleboard as it doesn’t come with the game and it’s really a must!
-
At set-up at least, it’s hard to keep a good overview of the units as spaces are clearly too crowded, let alone when you move them into enemy territory.
-
To be able to play, it requires a very hefty financial investment to get all the units and the map. Not necessarily a problem to me, but then you do expect an all but flawless game in all respects.
-
When looking at HBG’s site it seems the game is still under constant development. While this in itself is good, why would one want to buy it now, if apparently it’s not truly finished? At the site there’s also a picture of a battleboard for the game which contains entirely new concepts to apparently incorporate tactical elements on the strategic scale of the game. While I would applaud such an addition, the problem is that version 5.0 of the rules makes no mention of these concepts whatsoever.
-
Most importantly, the rule book clearly contradicts itself at times, leaves too much to interpretation at other times and changes seem to have been made between v 4.0 and 5.0 in some places while failing to update these in others (the aircraft landing or not landing during NCM , for example).
In sum, we felt the game holds a lot of potential, but actually still has too many teething problems to justify its cost in both time and money. We will, however, give it another try when the questions we have get cleared up.
One further highly importnat question:
- Can unit engange in combat twice through blitzing? It’s unclear whether the two forms of blitzing are meant to include A&A’s normal form of blitzing (engaging the enemy after moving through an unoccupied enemy zone) or whether, as the blitz phase comes AFTER the combat phase, units can move through an unoccupied enemy zone in the blitz phase (as well) to attack enemy forces (again). Please clarify!
-
-
Been reading all these posts and it seems the Russians are winning most of the time. If so, here’s some suggestions for the developers to consider:
1. There seems to be no penalty for the Russians on turn 1, whereas they were caught off guard. Here’s two suggestions of which I personally prefer the first (or even both):
A Allow Axis units to blitz across rivers on turn 1 (only)
B Apply a -2 penalty on all defensive values for the Russians for the first round of combat or even for the entire turn.Also been wondering why the Russians get the Siberian reinforcements for the remainder of the game. In actuality, while their impact was big in the battle of Moscow, I’ve always understood their relative numbers were small. So perhaps to better balance the game in favor of the Germans, the Siberian reinforcements could apply to 1 or 2 turns only.
Keep up the good work!
-
1…this is not an error but you may have a valid point.
2…Aircraft (Attack/Defend/Movement/Cost)
Aircraft used in general combat, but not used in Strategic Bombing Raids (SBR), move and fight but do not return to a friendly zone until the NCM movement.
Simply stated the planes on SBR bomb then return to base. Aircraft used in general combat do not get to return until the NCM phase.
Suggested Topics
