"Tank On Tank board game in 1/285th scale" Topic

One of my favorite all-time WW2 board games is the fast play Tank On Tank game by Lock 'n Load Publishing. Over the past year I've enjoyed converting this hex board system to bigger printed maps, and have used 3mm minis as stand-ins for the game's unit counters. As of late, I ran across a great map texture designed by Ivan over at Wargame Print, which was made up of many field enclosures bordered by small trails and roads. This gave me the opportunity to put in motion an idea of moving away from the Tank On Tank hex-grid, to one that uses field areas for managing the game system's movement and range measuring mechanics – and on a attractive, more realistic looking map board.

Today I ran through a 1st-play of this latest Tank On Tank version with two of my best buds, using this new field-areas mat, and the 2 part scenario played very closely. The action was inspired by the German counterattacks of their newly organized Panzer Brigades that occurred in the Lorraine region of France in Sept. 1944. The German units in this scenario were based on the single armored battalion structure of the initial Panzer Brigade TOE, of mixed Panther and Pz IV/70 companies, supported by a Panzergrenadier battalion. Specific to this scenario, the German player had 1 Panther company of 3 platoon units (of 3 tanks) and an HQ unit of 2, 1 Pz IV/70 company of the same organizational structure, 1 recon unit of an Armored Inf. platoon of 4 halftracks, and a company of leg infantry which was riding into battle on the decks of the Panthers. In front of the assault was a thin screen of American Armored Cavalry (2 platoons of M8s armored cars), supported by 2 sections of SP artillery (2 M8 75mm Howitzer Motor Carriages, combined into one battery unit), and finally 2 Wolverine TD platoon units.

Here's part of the opening round as the German tracked recce makes contact with one of the US cavalry outposts. I allowed the German and US recce units to make their moves w/o costing an AP, to reflect the efficiency of their training and their ability for rapid deployment (especially for retrograde movements away from the enemy).

In the photo above, the M8 armored cars on the flank have been eliminated by supporting fire coming from the Panther company following up the reconnaissance. In the background, the Pz IV/70 company can be seen lumbering forwards on the far left flank of the Panther company.

A few turns later, the American forces having been unsuccessful at engaging the pressing Panthers, had largely been eliminated, and this was the trigger to launch the second scenario into motion with an American Task Force counterattack, comprising a Sherman tank company (3 platoon units of 5 tanks), and an Armored Infantry Company, less their AT Gun platoon (which contained 3 Armored Infantry platoon units of 5 halftracks, and an HQ of 2).

Although the American force was able to gain the first line, and part of the second line villages and woods across its front, the tanks attempted to remain in these positions and shoot it out at the Panthers in the open fields ahead of them. Once the Panthers reversed out of enemy tank range, and kept up a steady fire against the American positions to their front, the Pz IV/70s which had slowly crept forward on the opposite flank finally began to push in against that flank, most importantly forcing the M8 HMCs their to displace. At this point the scenario was hanging in the balance, with the initiative weighted towards the German player. It was time to pack up and hit the road before the afternoon traffic home got too bad, so we called the game a draw. Everyone was happy with that!, and felt the game had been a lot of fun.

One of the rules mods I had tried was a step reduction mechanic, but in most of the combat exchanges it didn't seem to make that large of a difference, so I think I'll stick with the standard unit elimination rules as written.

Hope you enjoyed the short AAR here, and the action shots.

Dave

Hi where did you get the maps print at? there very nice have 10mm acw would like to look into getting maps like this.

thanks
Rick

Here you go Rick:

link

After purchase, you can have the map texture reproduced on a material of your choice by a print shop (I have mine done on advertisement banner vinyl). As you'll see from the image(s) on the linked page above, the map color is rather dark and muted. I brightened the colors up, and did a few more photoshop enhancements for my version (as well as cropping it by 2/3rds length-wise – my map is 4ft. X 4ft.). Anyway, that's where you can buy the map texture from.

That is an amazing concept, both using Tank on Tank for minis, and that plotter mat. I've been eyeing Tank on Tank for a couple years now, might should go ahead and pick it up.

Thanks for posting, and I look forward to more.

Do you have a blog somewhere?

V/R,
Jack

the map and additional 3D effects look great

So, it seems the conversion worked?

Thanks Jack and Todd!
The conversion from hexes to areas did work, but did take some "on the fly" decision/discussion in-game to make it so. The areas were used to count movement points expended (as per game "hexes"), and any built-up terrain, and woods areas were considered to be completely occupied by the contained obstructing terrain – so each field shape obstructed LOS completely through the area. However, we arrived at the decision to allow LOS to be traced past an area occupied by another unit (where in the standard game a occupied hex completely obstructs LOS through it). In this instance, we allowed LOS from a shooting unit to traverse through an area occupied by another unit, if the LOS didn't actually track over the other unit's physical position. This just like tracing the LOS of a firing unit in a miniatures game, and drawing a bead from the shooter to the target (anything obstructing in between as blocking LOS/Fire).
We did also think tracing from "center of firing formation/unit" to "center of target formation" made sense for clarity and simplicity sake. Otherwise Todd, it all worked pretty well!

Jack, no blog, just using a number of "dispersed" fan forums – here's a bit more on the game's conversion thoughts at BGG:

link

Thanks! I just sent off for East Front, looking to do it in 3mm on a 2' x 3' board. What do you think for North Africa? I imagine I could sort of guesstimate stats for the tanks, come up with a couple generic maps, need rules for mines/clearing (assuming they're not already in there). I understand there's a mechanism for building your own scenarios?

V/R,
Jack

Jack, you'll love TOT in 3mm – and on that "half-sized" board, the minis will scale very well with the resulting size of the fields terrain.

Here's my previous East Front conversion with 3mm units -

TMP link

I have a friend who upon playing my East Front version linked above, immediately ordered from Pico for some Italian and Brit packs to organize his own 3D version around the Operation Crusader period in N. Africa. He plugged the Western Desert units into the ranked slots, comparable to the ratings of the current, decidedly 'late-war-rated' units in EF & WF games, to achieve some sensible differences for his desert units. As an interpretation of how the game's designer actually arrived at his ranking factors, I believe much also has to do with "operational efficiencies" of the units considered, and obviously not completely based on the technical attributes of firepower, protection, & mobility alone (the 3 unit factors on each game counter).

FlyX,

Excellent, some cool photos and good reading there, I appreciate it. Now I'm extraordinarily impatient to get my hands on my copy, so I can get an order in to Picoarmor and get this train a-rollin'.

There's not a list of all the units in the East Front game somewhere, is there?

Also, I see the OOB you listed above: German Panther company, PzJgr IV company, an infantry company, and an armored recon platoon. So, in the game where the scenarios are set up, you're using one counter equals one platoon, right? And is each HQ a separate counter? It seems like that is the case, but on BGG someone asked how you played such a large game, and you showed a picture with corresponding counters, but there was only one counter per company.

In any case, don't feel compelled to answer, I should have my copy next week. But I'm a bit compulsive, I get ate up thinking of new projects…

V/R,
Jack

Jack, I don't mind questions at all! Makes me feel useful in my golden (grey) years here.

On BGG's Tank On Tank image section, there's a copy of the East Front game's units included (there's more units not pictured, like the Hungarian and Italian unit counters, but many are displayed) here:

link

I've also made a number of custom counters for unit types not included in the game, such as the Pz IV/70 seen on the unit board below). These counters are also twice the size? (2 inches X 2 inches) than from the game's counters – since players are just using them in my 3D conversion for referencing a unit's factors, and not for moving a number of them on the standard game's hex board map.

Here's some info for your questions, that might be best illustrated visually (hope you can read the text inserts in them).

More directly to your 3mm conversion project, here's a storage set of my Pico Armor units for playing Tank On Tank with the smaller scale minis.

Any additional questions/clarifications I'll be free to assist you with here, and of course you can always use your own innovations as you work up your 3D game set.

Video review of ToT:EF

YouTube link

BTW, for about 12 more hours, Locknload Publishing has the two ToT boardgames on sale. I just bought them both. Also, there is a newly released digital version of ToT:EF available for the PC.

Gentlemen, thanks, that's great!

If I'm making this out correctly, the entire German force for Tank on Tank East Front is:

2 Pz IV companies, each with HQ and 4 tank platoons
1 Panther company, with HQ and three tank platoons
1 Tiger company, with HQ and three tank platoons
1 King Tiger company, with HQ and three tank platoons
2 Stug III (w/long 75) platoons
4 Puma platoons
4 Sdkfz 251 halftrack platoons
1 towed arty platoon
1 Wespe SP arty platoon
2 ATG platoons (look like PaK-43 or PaK-40?)
2 Sdkfz 250(?) armored recon platoons
3 truck platoons
6 rifle platoons

Is that correct? Do you have a rundown for the Soviets? If I can nail this down, I'll send my order to Picoarmor ASAP, before I even receive my copy of East Front.

FlyX, your 3mm (and 6mm, for that matter) looks awesome. I think I'm going to go with more conventional basing, 3 vehicles per. I'm a conventional kinda guy ;)

Coopman, Yep, that's how I ordered my East Front. I really should have pre-ordered 'Red Storm in the Valley,' but I didn't want to get in too far. Money's tight after Christmas ;)

A few (perhaps silly) questions: do the different games have different scenarios? I.e., the scenarios in West Front are not the same as East Front, right? Thus Red Storm would have different scenarios than those and the upcoming Defenders of the Rhine? I'm a scenario hog and will shell out dough (later) just to get new scenarios. And I find the more scenarios I have for a system, the better informed I am to make my own when it comes to that.

Regarding the scenarios in East Front, what period are they for? I haven't seen any Pz II, Pz III, T-26, or BT chits, so it looks like there may not be any early war scenarios? And if my eyes aren't failing me and those really were King Tigers, we're certainly going late war. Would the scenarios make sense to 'follow a unit' through 1943 to the end of the war, upgrading units with new vehicles as they come available (i.e., Pz IV to Panther to Tiger)?

Is there any further info on Red Storm in the Valley? The LNL site just says they'll be bigger, but I can't tell if they mean physically bigger (i.e., more counters/units per game), or if that's just some form of salesmanship to say these battles will be even more exciting. I hope they're not physically bigger, I'm a big fan of small, quick games ;)

Any word on what those ten scenarios will be focused on?

Thanks a bunch taking the time to help, I really appreciate it!

V/R,
Jack

There are no early war scenarios or AFVs included ToTEF. One has to wonder how they could expand the system to include that. With the first factor being the range and attack strength and PzIVs and Shermans having a factor of two, any weaker weapons could only be rated a 1. I guess that you could have units rated 0/1, where its attack strength is a 0 and its range is 1 hex. The other possibility is that they do an early war expansion and make the factors different/incompatible with the already published games in the system. But then you could not use counters from the other games with the early war expansion or vice versa. The two announced ToT expansions do not appear to be for the early war period either. I know that its an abstract system, but I would have been much happier if they had used a separate attack factor and range factor.

2 Pz IV companies, each with HQ and 4 tank platoons
1 Panther company, with HQ and three tank platoons
1 Tiger company, with HQ and three tank platoons
1 King Tiger company, with HQ and three tank platoons
2 Stug III (w/long 75) platoons
4 Puma platoons
4 Sdkfz 251 halftrack platoons
1 towed arty platoon
1 Wespe SP arty platoon
2 ATG platoons (look like PaK-43 or PaK-40?)
2 Sdkfz 250(?) armored recon platoons
3 truck platoons
6 rifle platoons

Jack, good eye for 3mm identifications – but, I've led you somewhat astray. Some of those units and their numbers seen on my 3mm minis tray above can show my own organizational quantities, and some units seen aren't in the board game versions, but are custom units that I've made my own stat counters for in order to include them in my scenarios, especially since I considered them mainstays of the mid-late war period too (example: the StuG IIIs – and have made a custom Marder III counter for a Panzerjager Company that's not pictured). The King Tiger counter/info comes from the West front game, and was an additional unit included within a L 'n L – Line Of Fire magazine issue from a few years back (an expansion unit to the original Tank On Tank game).

Now here's a list of the unit counters included in the East Front game -
Soviets:
3 X HQ T-34
9 X T-34
2 X HQ T-34/85
6 X T-34/85
1 X HQ KV/85
5 X KV/85
1 HQ IS-2
3 X IS-2
3 X AT Gun
6 X Infantry
3 X Armored Infantry
2 X Katyusha
2 X M-30 (Artillery)
3 X Sturmovik "Strikes" (double-sided counter w/Stuka on opposite side)

German:
1 X HQ Panther
3 X Panther
1 X HQ Tiger
3 X Tiger
1 X HQ Puma
3 X Puma
2 X HQ Panzer IV
8 X Panzer IV
2 X AT Gun
3 X Infantry
3 X Armored Infantry
2 X Supply Truck
1 X Wespe
1 X 10cm M14 (Artillery)
3 X Stuka "Strikes" (double-sided counter w/Sturmovik on opposite side)

Hungarian:
3 X Infantry
2 X HQ Turan II
6 X Turan II
2 X AT Gun
2 X Zrinyi
1 X 10cm M14 (Artillery)

Italian:
1 X HQ Semovente
3 X Semovente
1 HQ Infantry (interesting – the only HQ Infantry counter in the game)
3 X Infantry
2 X AT Gun
2 X Obice 105/14 (Artillery)

To your questions about the included scenarios – check them out in the downloadable rules PDFs here:

link

link

A free scenario download from the Lock 'n Load Tank On Tank forum:

link

These and other resources are available from the Tank On Tank section of Lock 'n Load's forum.

I know that its an abstract system, but I would have been much happier if they had used a separate attack factor and range factor.

Coopman, I agree. Though, it's this potential vulnerability for all units that keeps players mindful of committing any of their units into battle (and does stress maneuver by formation, and with/for supporting fires).

The newest version of Panzerblitz (Hill of Death) retains the original game's method of assigning each platoon an attack factor and a range factor. But then the rules allow each platoon supporting the firing platoon to add one attack factor to the firing platoon's attack factor. So each supporting platoon barely adds to the attack strength. Seems to be a strange way of handling it to me.

Regarding trucks in ToT, they apparently cannot be used to tow artillery units from one position to another. Art. units have a zero movement factor, so once placed on the map, they are immobile. And according to the stacking rules, stacking is not allowed. At least this is my understanding of the rules.

Wow, you guys are awesome! Thanks a bunch, I greatly appreciate you guys taking the time. I got my shipping notification today, so I should have it in my hot little hands shortly.

FlyX, thanks for posting the total forces for each side. I'm really not interested in the Italians or Hungarians (nothing personal, of course ;) ), and I like what you've done in terms of making up new counters. How can you play a German armor game with no Stugs??? Maybe replace one of the Pz IV companies with a company of Stugs? Should fit right into the scenarios easily that way (I'm assuming you stat'ed the Stugs out the same as Pz IVs).

Gotta have the PzJgr IVs Jagdpanthers, too, they're just cool ;)

I read through the rules and scenarios; I swear, the older I get the 'tech-dumber' I get. I looked for that stuff online and didn't find it. I'll also say I'm not in love with LNL's website, either. In any case, I was perusing the scenarios in the East Front rulebook, but it's actually missing a couple pages of the scenario portion (skips pages 9 and 10)!!! Oh well, no biggie.

Coopman – I see what you're saying about painting themselves into a corner with Early War, not being able to use the same counters. But I think you can make up your own pretty easily. And I may just do that ;)

I'm happy you can't stack counters, that's usually one of the things that makes converting boardgames to minis so difficult. I see the arty has 0 movement, but ATGs are 1 (though they can't move and shoot the same turn). That seems a little rough as arty only has a range of 8? Maybe have to house-rule it so arty can displace as necessary.

I'm really going crazy, got all kinds of ideas, and can see myself buying West Front as well. If this goes well, I'll no doubt be taking it to North Africa, and I was already pondering Desert Storm. As I said, I get a bit compulsive ;)

Thanks again, though you've cost me money and time! ;)

V/R,
Jack

There is a series of top-down AFV counters available at wargamevault from Strikenet Games. You can see samples of them there.
My order shipped from lnlpublishing today too.

Guys, there's an official rules mod that allows stacking of infantry with armor for being carried, and I've used the same mechanic with truck units (my mod). This allows the use of soft-skinned transportation in the game too (using the Supply Truck stats) – but, with the same liability as with tank riders, that is, if the transported unit is destroyed its carried infantry is likewise (and the truck defense stat is the lowest in the game – reflecting that vulnerability if they're pushed too close to the combat zone).

Here's a link to another, official free scenario, and that rules mod for tank riders -

link

Field Artillery is static, and my interpretation is that this reflects the time needed for preparing an artillery unit for firing indirectly, such as establishing the gun positions, linking in communications to the battery (often by field telephone), readying ammunition quantities for sustained fire operation, and displacing the tows (and/or horse limber teams) a safe distance away to protect them from counterbattery fire. Field Artillery only has a range of 5 or 6 hexes in TOT. Now, I don't want to interject too many mod-ideas to you guys yet, but I will hint that this is something that can be adjusted (no pun intended), so as to take indirect artillery support "off board" (if that works for your own, subsequent scenario-making ideas).

Now AT Guns are given a movement rate. To reflect whether an At Gun as a miniatures unit is in travel mode in-game (and has elected to expend its single AP option on moving). I included tow vehicles right on my 3mm AT Gun stands seen above, and this way players can tell if the AT Gun is moving, by the stand being spun around so the tow vehicle-side is facing forward (the pointed side of my "panzer wedge"-shaped stands), to reflect travel mode. If deployed for firing, the "blunt" side of the AT Gun stand faces/touches the hex side direction of firing. I use the same "blunt"-side convention for foot infantry units, and field artillery, to convey that these types of soft-units are "holding a sector", like the AT Gun units when deployed, so these type of 3D units face a hex side with their blunt side forwards in the direction of facing.

Guys, I also sympathize with you about L'nL's forum – each time I log on I get a security certificate warning (too?).

Here's the 1st 6mm scale mounting system I tried for Tank On Tank – these are 2-1/2 inch hexes with metal plates under the top surface -

The stands above were used with a big hex map.

All the 6mm minis I've converted for using with TOT (less the artillery batteries that are permanently mounted on their hexes) have magnets underneath the castings so they can attach to any stand system I'm using them with (lots of time to prep them w/magnets, but I never have to remount anymore)!

That looks really good – I like the hexes a lot better than the triangles. Thanks for the info above too.
I did not get any sort of cert. warning at the LNL forum on my home laptop. I will see what happens when I try to access it from my work PC tomorrow if I think of it.

Coopman, thanks for checking on this for me!

My group of gaming buds seem not to take armor games as seriously if they're played on a hex map board. Not all the buds……it seems only to be for land actions too – air games, naval – no problems apparently. So, this latest move to the fields mat, and converting Tank On Tank to this area movement style is not only for aesthetic appeal, but if staying with a hex map (even w/hex bases) works best – do what gets the game ready for you guys (and your groups).

Guys,

As always, thanks for the wealth of info.

If trucks don't carry guys or tow guns, what are they for?

FlyX, that 6mm stuff looks amazing, and I'm with you on the 3mm basing, I think I'll put prime movers on the ATGs as well. I think Coopman was saying he likes the hex bases better than the triangle bases, not that he likes the hex map more than the fields map.

I really like that fields map. Someday…

V/R,
Jack

Jack, I'm jazzed you guys have been bitten by the Tank On Tank possibilities….

Those Supply Trucks are included for earning Victory Points that are in one of the East Front scenarios (the Cauldron). To me, they're way more useful to reflect infantry transports, which then opens up the possibility for grand-tactical maneuver on the game boards, and especially so for on expanded battlefield maps (where reserves, or mobile counterattacks might be folded into a scenario's evolving situation). For example, this allows for the use of truck-borne Panzergrenadiers within Eastern Front games, for mobile counterattacks, but not by "our" favorite half-track mounted PzGrens., but assaults to be managed deploying off of soft-skin transports – lots of these Tank On Tank possibilities……

I am going to make extra counters from copies of the counter sheets so that I can have larger battles if I wish to do so. Of course, there would need to be an increase in the amount of allotted action points too.

That is a very nice looking hex mat. Where did you get that from? What size hexes are they?

I did not get a cert. problem warning when I went to the lnl forum on my work PC.

That's my own map assembly, the ground cover being a modified version of a commercial texture, and the hex grid and road net my own stuff – it's got 5-1/2 inch hexes.

Here's an idea too, when you look to expand your units in a game, and if you have enough formations to break them down along the lines of command – instead of increasing the AP amounts, you might consider organizing multiple player commands per side (say 2 players per), and that the AP tote pulls would go back and forth from one side, and player to another, until all the players had a chance for command activation.

I once inquired of this to the designer in a thread on BGG, and mentioned thinking of making up 5 and 6 AP chits to accommodate bigger forces, and he thought this might corrupt the tension and fog of war aspect of the system somewhat (which comes very much from the necessity to "rob Peter to pay Paul"). Just forwarding this, and perhaps as an alternative gameplay method for scenarios that could host more players per side anyway.

Thanks for checking the lnl forum functionality (must be my aggressive AV program).

I agree on the use of trucks, sounds good. From what I've seen of the scenarios, they look to be good-sized for the kind of games I like to play (I'm Goldilocks ;) ), though it's crossed my mind that maybe you have two separate cups, and a force with (much) better command and control gets the 'regular' activation chits plus two 5AP chits. Anyone try that?

Of course, I say that having not played the game yet, or not even having received my copy, so bear with me if that sounds ridiculous ;)

I put in an order with Picoarmor last night, based off the force lists FlyX sent (above, thanks!). Okay, change of plans, I'm already taking it in a different direction. I have a blog with a couple African Imagi-nations that like to go at it every few years, playing the fights in 3mm. I played four games (two air, two ground), but it's kind of stalled because it's actually lower echelon than I (now realize) I want (I was playing with individually-based vehicles and squads).

So that's where I'm going with this. The first war is in the mid 50s, with one side using Western gear, the other WarPac gear, so I just ordered more forces and I'll be loading up Tank on Tank with them.

At least first. As I mentioned, I've got all kind of ideas, next of which are likely to be actual East Front, North Africa, and Desert Storm ;)

V/R,
Jack

I like the way you're imagining applying Tank On Tank's basic mechanics. The early Arab-Israeli Wars might be other expansion possibilities too.

Jack, interesting idea on the 2 pull-cups with different distributions of APs in each. This is why I find Tank On Tank so fascinating – the simple mechanisms are so tweak friendly. What I've done to import subtle, but meaningful command & control differences between opposing forces, is sometimes to include additional formation HQs in a scenario. This interjecting of an additional HQ unit or two for one side, can import meaningful battlefield advantages, ones that can reflect superior training, experience, or even something as opaque as one force having had time to assemble sufficiently before an engagement (as opposed to the other being strung out thru prior contact with the enemy – battlefield "posture" differences). Also, there's few to no Infantry HQs provided with the counter sheets in the games, in East Front only one for the Italians (which might even be a printing mistake). I've been apprehensive to make up custom Infantry HQs, as I think the game's designer may be applying command/performance "friction" here by not granting infantry formations the flexibility of simultaneous activation with their own HQs.

Another HQ mod idea, and this can relate to this issue of Infantry unit activations, is to create Task Force/Kampfgruppe-level HQs. Ones that could serve as "unattached" force HQs, that players could attach as needed to muster some of their more lethargic forces into action – such as being used to marshal infantry units to act together as combined formations (and able to move independently from a player's other units).

FlyX,

Yeah, AIW is another one. You say early, I'm thinking 1956, 1967, 1973, and Bekaa (not Beirut) in 1982. That could be cool.

Unfortunately, while 3mm is relatively cheap, it ain't free, so I need to slow down a bit! I just dropped $80 USD last night to round out my African Imagi-nation stuff and work out a separate WWII project. And that's going only two vehicles per base (counter), and one for HQ! I priced it out do WWII East Front, every counter with 3 vehicles (except HQ, with two), and it was about $120. USD So I'm a bit trapped, as East Front, North Africa, and Desert Storm are all things I'm dying to do. Desert Storm my have to come first as it fits with my ongoing "Cuba Libre" campaign.

Picoarmor is absolutely fantastic; I submitted the order last night about 10 PM, already got an e-mail saying it's shipped!

I think you're absolutely right, it's probably better to simply add another HQ, rather than mess with the chit system for activation. And that's a good point regarding not just better command and control, but to reflect certain tactical situations/dynamics. And that's interesting about only one Infantry HQ; first it seems a bit unfair (I'm a former infantryman ;) ), and second, regarding flexibility in the rules, do HQs in the game only control the same-type units (Pz IV HQ only controls Pz IVs), not any adjacent units?

If that's the case, then it certainly seems to make sense to have higher-level HQ present. Hell, that's why TFs/KGs had infantry, armor, and arty all under one commander. Not a knock on the game, just something for me to take a look at. USPS says I should have my copy tomorrow.

V/R,
Jack

Jack, the HQs on a side can be used to order any adjacent unit types – so mixed tank/armored infantry teams, or armor/leg infantry teams for example can activate together (cross-attaching is no problem).

Hey, could you post your blog's(?) link here, as I'd like to check out some of these on-going game projects you've mentioned (others might too)?

FlyX,

Gotcha on the HQ, thanks. Regarding the blogs:

Here's the 3mm Modern Africa where Tank on Tank is going to start:
link

Here is Cuba Libre, another modern Imagi-nation of sorts:
link

I actually just posted a few skirmish batreps and, perhaps more importantly, a synopsis of what Cuba Libre is, here on TMP:
TMP link

And here is my 'regular' blog, with a lot of different stuff (still mostly WWII to present, but it's got all my painting and quite a few batreps):
blackhawkhet.blogspot.com/?m=1

V/R,
Jack

The Tank on Tank Expansions should be out in March. No new unit counters included, but 2 new maps and new scenarios in each, with tweaked special scenario rules. It will be interesting to see what they do with these expansions.

Jack, you've been doing tons of 3mm and 15s already, and looking forward to your batreps w/TOT.
Hey, really like your 15mm Vietnam terrain pieces and presentations too (good work there)!

Coopman, it'll be interesting seeing how useful these special scenario rules are? (could imagine minefield rules being rolled into the system)

Coopman – Thanks for the update. I'm not too fond of 'special rules,' hopefully they're just expanded rules. Sorry to be pedantic; I just don't like rules that only apply to this particular thing at this particular time. If they add rules for minefields, as FlyX suggested, to me that's expanding the rules, something I can apply to any battle.

FlyX – Yeah, I've had a busy few years, glad you like it. There's enough there to spend a month going through, if ya like ;)

I've got a lot of painting ahead before I can get to batreps, but 3mm goes pretty quick. Worse, I've got to re-base all my current African 3mm stuff…

V/R,
Jack

Yay! Got my games from LnL today. The counters are nice, if a bit on the thin side for my tastes. Can't wait to get it on the table. Probably won't happen until this weekend though.

Got mine too! My Picoarmor order should get here tomorrow.

V/R,
Jack

Guys, looking forward to your 1st-play impressions – and although the scenarios can be played solo using the random Action Points cup, the fog of war and tension really ramps up if played face to face with an opponent using the "opposed" AP pulls mechanic, and…..don't forget to gloat when telling your opponent he's used up his measly 2APs, and that it's now your turn! :)))

I read on boardgamegeek that you can play solitaire by doing this:
Spend two APs
Roll a d6: on a 3+ you get a 3rd AP
Spend the 3rd AP if you got it
Roll a d6: on a 4+ you get a 4th AP
Spend the 4th AP if you got it

This kind of keeps the player in suspense, or gives some fog of war to the situation.

I played the ToT:WF first scenario twice this morning. I can see why players like this game. It teaches some basic principles of warfare such as mobility, supporting fire, flanking the enemy, superior range, terrain benefits, limited resource expenditure, and maximizing your opportunities for success, all in a compact easy to play package. I am also thinking of the miniatures possibilities now. I will use a hex matt though.

! ! !

Coopman, what scale will you be doing your own 3D conversion in?

Well, I already have a bunch of painted GHQ and CinC micro-armor, so I'll probably use that.

Dammit, sorry guys, I lost this thread for a minute.

I've received my copy of Tank on Tank and my 3mm stuff from Picoarmor. It has now been added to the queue for painting and basing (re-basing for some). That's in off to Africa with my 7-year old. I will keep you posted.

V/R,
Jack