"How well does IABSM handle armor battles?" Topic

I play primarily 2 WWII games, FoW and BGWWII. I also have Panzer, but nobody I know likes it. Neither of the 2 I use quite make me happy with tank to tank engagements.

I like what I have seen of Lard stuff, but have only played IABSM with infantry. I like a lot of thier ideas, just not sure how well it translates to vehicles.

I plan on starting back into N. Africa in 15MM. Any thoughts?

I have played it 1941 Russian front with 10-15 tanks per side it playes very well also played a little 1945 with 6-7 tanks a side plays good. The Germans can pull off some good moves if the cards fall right.

I've played it a couple of times with over 10 tanks a side with no problem. I really like the wsy it hanldes damage to armor.

jdg

It is the set of rules that I prefer for my games in 6mm. They are working on version 3 which does some cleanup on the tank hit and damage tables. The one card per tank without radios can make for a big deck if you're playing Russians or French. A couple of photosets of some heavy armor games are here:

link

link

Because it is a 'toolbox' it is easy to adapt to any particular situation. And I like the Lardy philosophy.

Mark

I am a great fan of IABSM and use it for North Africa in 15mm, my main focus at the moment. IABSM is primarily an infantry game and I think it excels at what it does best: company level actions with supporting arms. My personal view is that it doesn't do tank v tank quite as well, mainly because the handful of dice approach (usually 5 or 6 to hit or to save) sacrifices a bit too much of the detail I prefer. However, it is quicker than looking up charts to check armour thickness, penetration at x range etc and I agree with cosmic that 10-15 tanks a side is feasible. In case you don't know, IABSM 3 should be out early in the new year and I can't wait!
Steve

Well, it will be out unless it winds up where in the Buff went to.

I am on the Lardies Yahoo group, but it doesnt seem fair to ask dedicated people what they think of thier own game.

It seems like you are interested in the level of detail I like, so what is your favorite armor game?

In the Buff is very much on our development schedule, however we had just got to a point where we were dealing with too many rule sets in development at the same time.

The result was that we have decided to put some projects back into next year so that we can focuss on getting others complete. The good new is that Le Feu Sacre goes to the printers tomorrow and that Bag the Hun2 will be following along next week.

IABSM3 is then our prime project followed by Charlie Don't Surf. After that In the Buff and Beerwulf are in line.

So much to do, so little time to do it!

Badger
I like the armour element of another UK published set, Panzer Marsch! We used to play this for Normandy until we discovered IABSM. If you're not familiar with the system, Panzer Marsch! uses a series of 5 range sticks each divided into 6 bands. As an example, an 88mm uses the longest stick (A)while a 2pdr uses the mid length stick, C. If a hit is achieved (die roll allowing for range and modifiers)damage depends on whether the gun can penetrate the target's armour (varies from A best to F worst) at that range band and a dice throw.Once you've made the sticks and know what you're doing it seems to work well as most of the information is on one table. I've thought about adding it to an IABSM game but haven't tried it yet.
Steve

"Charlie Don't Surf. After that In the Buff and Beerwulf are in line."

What are each of these for?. Charlie don't surf probably is for Vietnam, but the rest?.

CDS is Vietnam and is a similar type of game to IABSM. In The Buff is ECW and I think it was fairly far advanced when it slipped down the schedule behind Sharp Practice, Mud & Blood and TCHAE. Beerwulf seems to have appeared almost out of nowhere (perhaps I haven't been on the TFL group enough recently)and is a Dark Ages Saxons/Vikings hack and slash game.

I moniter the group everyday, and indeed beerwulf apears to have sprang full grown from Riches head. If you know the Lardies, it seems to have been given plenty of the proper insperational fluid.

The list of possible names started in bad taste and spiraled down from there. I found it rather funny, but then thats why I am on that particular list.

I shall take a look at Panzers Marsch. I have yet to find a game that really does armor the way I want, but several are close. Artillery on the other hand is never done well at all, but thats probably because I know to much about how artillery is supposed to work.

The artillery system has been completely re-done for IABSM 3, as you probably know from the list. It's not too late to make changes so if you have suggestions to improve how it works get in touch with Rich!

I personally like IABSM for how it plays and the set is as some have said mainly designed for infantry battles. The armored side is a little more abstracted than what you find in some other rules and so will not please hardcore treadheads.

My wargame buddies don't seem to like the IABSM armored rules esp. as I tend to put about a dozen tanks a side on the table – too many handfuls of dice and therefore too warhammer like, they said. Because of this reaction, we will try to go to Command Decision III for games that feature lots of tanks.

Thanks Lagoon.