
"Winter War #11 - Mannerheim Line" Topic
4 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
In order to respect possible copyright issues, when quoting from a book or article, please quote no more than three paragraphs.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Solo Wargamers Message Board Back to the 28mm WWII Message Board Back to the WWII Battle Reports Message Board
Areas of InterestGeneral World War Two on the Land World War Two at Sea
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Featured Showcase Article Thinking to invade German-held Europe? Then you'll need some of these...
Featured Profile Article
Current Poll
|
| Korvessa | 28 Dec 2025 2:47 p.m. PST |
My latest scenario in my long running campaign. Rules: Nuts! by Two Hour Wargames 28mm – Solo link
|
gamertom  | 28 Dec 2025 5:57 p.m. PST |
Talk about a turn about! I really enjoy reading how these scenario turn out. |
Grelber  | 28 Dec 2025 5:59 p.m. PST |
I like the house rules you made for ducking back in place. My impression has been that most WWII rules are based on late war British--Americans--Germans--Soviets, which isn't always appropriate for early war armies. Grelber |
| Korvessa | 29 Dec 2025 2:54 p.m. PST |
Thanks to you both. Another House Rule I used a lot is about IST fire. I have discussed it a couple of times on the forum. Apparently not for everyone. I allow the player who wins the "In Sight Test" (IST = a rules mechanism that determines who fires first when opposing forces see each other for the first time) to decline to fire – thus preventing the enemy from shooting back. Some folks think it should be mandatory. Incidentally, it is specifically stated that it is optional in the related "Nuts! Big Battles" rules – although I started doing it before I knew that. It isn't always a good idea to stop and return fire if the enemy is in a better position. I have had several things come up, where I think it would be perfectly justifiable to not shoot and keep moving. To use a cinematic example – recall the scene in Band of Brothers where Lipton and Powers are dealing with the enemy sniper. Using game mechanics, Lipton runs out into the open and initiates an IST with the sniper. Now the Sniper is in cover, so in the game Lipton would likely miss and the sniper could shoot back, likely hitting Lipton – the odds are against him, it's better to keep moving to the next cover. Then Powers, who is part of the same group so when he breaks cover there isn't a new IST, gets a prepared shot, (called Active Fire in the rules) with a better chance to hit. In this game, the Soviets had to cross open ground and get to the trenches, The Finns are in hard cover and the Soviets almost certainly will miss, but Finnish return fire has a good chance of hitting the Soviets who are in the open. Not worth the risk – keep moving. They did the same thing in the BoB mini-series on the attack on Foy – better to keep moving than stop and shoot. I didn't Active Fire with the riflemen either, for the same reason. I did fire with the Light Machineguns – they will force riflemen to durck even if they miss. |
|