CSL Scenario #4: Hedgehog of Piepsk p.1

Classic Game, Classic Scenario = Classic Fun!

 

Having earned some gaming credits with my pal Ken, I chose to spend them on playing Scenario #4, "The Hedgehog of Piepsk" in preparation for upcoming classic Squad Leader [CSL] meets I'm organizing. We've played Scenarios #1 "The Guards Counterattack" and #2 "The Tractor Works" a few times, and skipped #3 "The Streets of Stalingrad" as I'm holding off on introducing armor for now.  #4 is another all-infantry scenario, with just a couple of new rules introduced - but they are doozies - Hidden Initial Placement [42] and Offboard Artillery [45]!

HiP boils down to you writing down all your troops, so there aren't even concealment markers on the board. They are revealed if they activate or if the enemy moves adjacent to them.  It's pretty intimidating to look at a board and see...nothing!

OA is the great equilizer, as stated in the rules.  A much smaller force with the right artillery can likely hold off an opponent on the defense.  On the attack, artillery can plaster known or likely enemy positions, mitigating threats before they even act.

Because I had been reading the rules, I took the Germans as they added OA to their forces, three 80mm mortar modules.  I brought my CSL stuff which I had cut and organized for the game, but Ken had dusted off his box and was largely ready when I got there, which was cool - we had some talk about how we acquired our replacement boxes for our originals [he sold his, I think, while mine were destroyed in a roof leak incident, along with most of my counters]. 

Not having played before, I tried to figure out two things that were most important in my mind - high ground for MG fire, and high ground for my observer to call in the arty.  With a bit of thinking, I identified the only level two woods hex on board 2 with a good view of the town and put the observer there using HiP.  Next, I identified and reminded us both that building N2-3 is the only 2-level building on the board. I put my HMG, 2 squads and the 9-2 leader there.  Uncertain about what else might happen, I figured I couldn't go wrong planting myself on the objectives, so I put the other three stacks of figs in the various stone buildings, figuring that the +3 will make up for a lot of bad dice and bad decisions on my part!

Ken divided his forces into two groups, one entering the East edge of board 3, the other onto board 4.  We had discussed the possibility that setup allowed Germans on the crest of Hill 522, and thought they could. Ken didn't want to walk directly into fire as soon as he entered the board, so took an oblique approach.

Boards from the North looking South, so East is on the left. Empty is intimidating!

Looking at the northern Soviet force, I realized that once he got into defilade behind the woods, it was mostly a concealed approach until just near N2! 16 squads would rip that area apart, so I had to start shooting immediately lest I lose the chance.

You can make out the red laser line showing the Line of Fire for my HMG.

But it is more obvious below.  I then rolled a '4' and KIA'd a stack. I thought it was 2, but remembered that MGs have no penetration firing to a lower elevation [2.8] so we put back that stack.  A lucky start for Jerry, either way!

Germans work on calling in arty. I overlooked the +2 to stay in radio contact, so lost it a few times when I shouldn't have - live and learn!  The threat was still viable. Sovs have no idea where my spotter is calling Fire from...

At midpoint, the northern Sovs have lost several squads and the force is down 30% or so. The main culprit being that as rusty players, Ken and I both like to move stacks around - it's more convenient and with a Leader is faster.  However, when you have 32 squads, spreading out seriously limits German capabilities. 

While it's not a complete solution to advancing under fire, it does help - I'll keep that in mind for next time.

The Southern Sovs have a concealed avenue of approach through trees and hills. They suffer few casualties and reach the South side of town relatively unscathed. Altho they run into a strongly defended stone building at R5-6, they discover a weak spot on the East edge of town, and start infiltrating from there!

This was met by a fortunate [and late] mortar barrage, which broke several squads in the Russian fire group U6-R9 that was putting heavy pressure on building R3-4.  At one point, it had 7-8 squads, and I was fortunate to break it into two groups by attacking the woods at T7 successfully, breaking it into two weaker shots.

On the North side, Sovs got 7-8 squads into buildings and are able to fire up to 20 factors against the Germans in S3-R3!  Both the N-building and S3 have to whittle these down while also trying to address the V3-T4 approach.

This was the high water mark of the Sov advance. They did get into the town, but they struggled to amass enough forces to get dangerous fire groups pounding on the Germans. I did lose some real estate, but didn't take enough casualties to seriously compromise my defense capabilities. Meanwhile, the Russians by Turn 8 were whittled down to less than 50% and were spread around.

This was an interesting game - a great introduction to HiP and Arty. There was a lot learned by both of us, especially about really looking at line of sight and figuring out concealed avenues of approach that mitigate defensive fire power. Oddly enough, the game came out a lot like the "Aftermath" reported on the scenario sheet:

It is also a reminder to me that I have previously lost with the Germans when the Russians attack all spread out and I just can't shoot enough of them to prevent brutal advancing Fire and subsequent Close Combats. 

Working on some post-game analysis, I found two useful AARs for Scenario #4:

One is at BoardGameGeek: [click], the other a blog at Medium [click] by "ManoeuvreWarfare".  The latter has a nice diagram showing the likely avenues of approach for the Sovs. Ken used II and IV. I think III is the stronger than IV as it supports II closely. I seems unlikely as it is a long road march.

It was great to get thrown in and try out out. I think our game experience might have been a bit better if we'd done a bit of research. Unfortunately, the blogger fellow seems to have just done it as a plague thing in 2020, and there's not many posts.

The scenario was an interesting challenge for both sides, so I figured I better play it solo and see if I learned anything - which is the next post!

Playing "65" by Flying Pig Games

Get '65 for $100!

From Flying Pig Games website [obviously] but it's here: [click] 

One of my gaming pals, Ken, suggested we give this a go.  Played it thrice - the first time he guided me and The Angry Dackel Steve playing it, the next two times he and I played it.  Third time, we tried a new scenario.

This was an interesting game design with lovely production - counters, game board, everything.  I especially loved the big hexes, which were easy to work within.  No complaints there!

This is the first "take the village" scenario.  The mechanics are pretty hard to explain, there are numerous factors that go into deciding victory, but the key part was taking buildings for the Americans.  Unsurprisingly, causing casualties gets you victory points as well.

Below, an Event card results in the Americans taking mortar fire.  Like a stroke of lightning - literally, as I had nothing to do with it - they suffered some shock and reductions.  I set up with an eye towards fire lanes and ranges.  The GIs split forces and approached from two directions, board west and east.  There's more cover to the east, so I sent a squad into the bush to act as a bit of a tripwire and hopefully delay the Yanks. My goal was denying lanes of fire and slowing his advance.  After all, I'm sitting on the win!

The lighting was not conducive to good pics - the board is even nicer to look at in real life, but no doubt you can get plenty of visuals elsewhere, like at BGG.

I'm hoping to get this Sapper team close enough to discomfit the GIs presently under mortar fire.  I think they got hit 2-3 times, fairly quickly, which was just how the cards came up.

The action heated up quickly on board west.  Some US mortar fire landed, resulting in some shock and reductions for my Minh.

Good view of the counters.  Shows how nicely done they are.  However, also shows that you have to track 9 pieces of data symbols for simple rifle team!

Yanks got in hard and fast, took out one of my hooches and the team therein.

Even more problematic is they also obtained some good fields of fire on the rest of the village.

Meanwhile, my east Teams are taking it in the face, also.  Some good card combos are coming up for the 'mericans.

I believe this was a charge of my Team against the advancing US. That was pretty exciting, and was entirely due to the cards that I drew.

This was another plastering of Ken's west US forces.

My sappers were able to get in close and cause some trouble, but they ended up shaken and reduced.

We both have a weakened teams on the spot.  But I can afford to hold him off and lose a team. He has the burden of attacking.

Turn 7, pretty much end of game.  Overall it was very close.

We both took some losses, and he did manage to take some buildings, but if memory serves, it was a narrow Minh victory. We both felt like it was reasonable, and could have gone either way if the cards had been a bit different.

If I had to make a sweeping generalization about '65, it's the "Anti-Squad Leader".  

In that classic Avalon Hill wargame, you have a lot of control of your troops and your plans, what and when you will do things. Very little reduces your all-knowing and all-seeing 1000-foot view.  The main area of luck is combat and morale.  But it is fair to say that you likely have a bit too much control of timing and movement.  

However, once the bullets start flying, you lose control with morale results pretty quickly, and have challenges to much of your plans, as long as the enemy is engaging you.  Overall, I'd rate it high on the "simulates real Army stuff" scale, with some points being deducted for relative ease of planning and execution. It'd be a bit more realistic if movement was a bit randomized and the enemy even less obvious than the "?" markers make them [altho I do like that mechanic].

Overall, '65 is a solid game that emphasizes the "game" half of "war game". It's engaging and fun to play. You try to manage chaos, take opportunities when they arrive, and hope that you get some results when you need them. In short, it reminds me of playing gin with my grandparents.  However...

- The mechanics are intrusive as you constantly have to read and play a hand of cards. There's lots of fine print, and most cards can do 2-3 things, so you have to constantly check on what is in your hand while your opponent is acting, and then again while you are acting... just like 5 Crowns [which is Hollywood Gin]. So, yeah, it feels like a card game.

From the cards [not your tactical capabilities or plans] you then get to make tactical decisions - this includes basic things like Fire and Maneuver. The cards limit your options to what you draw.  Theoretically, your troops might almost never Fire or Maneuver, if the cards don't come up in a way you can use them, OR you have to use them for one of the other options on the cards [like a defensive option].

- Events that in real life are carefully planned in advance, like fire support, are randomized by Event card draw. This would be fine for a solo game against a pre-programmed "bot" opponent, but feels weird in PvP games.  

- The game has  A LOT of rules and special rules.  Each card has a number of capabilities, the rule book has lots of rules and exceptions, and each counter has 8-10 pieces of data in the form of symbols and occasionally numbers. This requires you to learn their symbol system. 

Despite 80-120 years of wargame experience at the table [the three times we've played], there was a lot of consultation with the rule book. While none of the mechanics were novel, there are A LOT of mechanics and A LOT of particulars to them, so expect to have to read the rulebook numerous times and then have to consult it regularly.  It took us 2-3 hours every time, with a very simple scenario, to get through with just a few minor mistakes.  Lots of other games I could have played the same scenario in an hour.

- Both times I've played the first scenario, the game was close, came down to the very end a minor win [for me as US then as Viet Minh]. So the scenario is definitely balanced. 

My problem with the game is that I don't really feel like I won because I played better than my opponent.  Instead, I "did what I could with the hands I drew" and somehow that ended in a win.  That does happen in real Army life, but usually before the operation. During the operation you are attempting to execute a plan in the face of an enemy that 'gets a vote'.  That's the main area of competition.

In essence, troops have no inherent capabilities to do anything.  Sort of like Command and Colors, everything revolves around building a hand best you can and then using it.  You don't give orders, subordinates don't execute orders and plans.  It's a bit like fishing in a rapids.  You try to seize some fleeting opportunities to do something, hopefully before your opponent does.  There are some card draws that make life much easier for you, I think one is called "Command Ops" or something.  The third time I played I drew this a few times and made Ken's life very difficult.

So if you want a fun "GAME" with mediocre historical "feel" that constantly works against you with game mechanics, but still has a great "narrative" then this may be for you.  And if you have $100 to spend for high quality production.

Personally, I prefer games where the mechanics involved enhance the "feel" of being in the role the game has put the player in, whether General, Colonel, Captain or Lieutenant or Sergeant.  While I agree that many wargames make it TOO easy for players to plan and do what they want, games like this emphasize the chaos so much that it feels more like trying to play poker - if you get the hand you want, you might win.  If you don't, you'll likely lose.  But a hand of poker just takes a few minutes, and the skill is in playing hand after hand after hand.

That's fine for cards.  But in real life military operations, training, planning and decisions matter, as well as the unit capabilities - and units sometimes make their own decisions without guidance from a higher authority!  Here, decisions are opportunistic, and you aren't trying to manage the flow of battle and get inside your opponent's OODA loop.  Your troops don't automatically do anything, even return fire, unless you have the cards to do it. So, that's also pretty unrealistic.

Anyway, it is a game that would be more fun with less rules.  It doesn't remind me of Army, it reminds me of playing a card game.  If you like card games that have a military theme, then you may like this if you're OK with the complexity level of the rules.  If you're looking for something quick, down'n dirty, then this is not likely to appeal to you.  And for $100, I just feel like I'd prefer to spend it elsewhere, so it's good that my pal has the game instead!