| Last Updated |
|---|
| Mon Nov 15 19:48:49 PST 1999 |
| Voters = 8 |
WWII PLATOON VOTING RESULTS:
Voters, By Nation - Great Britain
| Voters, By State | ||
|---|---|---|
| state or province | percentage | |
| England |  | 88% |
| Scotland | | 13% |
| Favorite Rules | ||
|---|---|---|
| rules | percentage | |
| TAC: WWII | | 50% |
| Spearhead | | 38% |
| Command Decision | | 13% |
| Rules Regularly Played | ||
|---|---|---|
| rules played regularly | percentage | |
| Spearhead | | 60% |
| Command Decision | | 20% |
| TAC:WWII | | 20% |
| Number of Rules Regularly Played | ||
|---|---|---|
| number of rules played regularly | percentage | |
| 1 rules played | | 100% |
| Rules Tried | ||
|---|---|---|
| rules played at least once | percentage | |
| Spearhead | | 80% |
| Command Decision | | 60% |
| TAC:WWII | | 20% |
| Number of Rules Tried | ||
|---|---|---|
| number of rules played | percentage | |
| 2 rules played | | 60% |
| 1 rules played | | 40% |
| Voters, By Experience | ||
|---|---|---|
| level of experience | percentage | |
| Twenty Years or More | | 38% |
| Up To Ten Years | | 38% |
| Up To Twenty Years | | 25% |
| Voters, By Setting | ||
|---|---|---|
| usual game setting | percentage | |
| At the local club | | 50% |
| With a friend or two | | 50% |
| Number of Armies | ||
|---|---|---|
| number of armies owned or used | percentage | |
| 6 army/armies | | 40% |
| 15 army/armies | | 20% |
| 3 army/armies | | 20% |
| 5 army/armies | | 20% |
| Armies Owned/Used | ||
|---|---|---|
| armies owned or used | percentage | |
| Britain | | 80% |
| Germany | | 80% |
| Britain - Paratroops | | 60% |
| British Commonwealth | | 60% |
| Italy | | 60% |
| Soviet Union | | 60% |
| Hungary | | 40% |
| Rumania | | 40% |
| Allied - Other | | 20% |
| Axis - Other | | 20% |
| Canada | | 20% |
| Finland | | 20% |
| France | | 20% |
| Germany - Paratroops | | 20% |
| Germany - S.S. | | 20% |
| Insurgents | | 20% |
| Soviet Union - Guards | | 20% |
| United States of America | | 20% |
| United States of America - Paratroops | | 20% |
| Periods Played | ||
|---|---|---|
| period | percentage | |
| 1941 Russia | | 63% |
| 1942 Russia | | 63% |
| 1942 North Africa | | 50% |
| 1943 Russia | | 50% |
| 1941 North Africa | | 38% |
| 1943 Mediterranean | | 38% |
| 1943-45 Italy | | 38% |
| 1944 France | | 38% |
| 1944 Sigfried Line | | 38% |
| 1940 Africa | | 25% |
| 1940 Blitzkrieg | | 25% |
| 1941-44 Continuation War | | 25% |
| 1944 Eastern Front | | 25% |
| 1945 Eastern Front | | 25% |
| 1945 Western Front | | 25% |
| 1939 Polish Campaign | | 13% |
| 1939-40 Winter War | | 13% |
| 1941 Balkans | | 13% |
| 1941-45 Burma | | 13% |
| 1941-45 Insurgency | | 13% |
| 1945 Manchuria | | 13% |
| Pre-1939 Europe | | 13% |
| What-If/Fantasy | | 13% |
| Number of Periods Played | ||
|---|---|---|
| number of genres/periods played | percentage | |
| 1 periods | | 25% |
| 3 periods | | 25% |
| 16 periods | | 13% |
| 18 periods | | 13% |
| 4 periods | | 13% |
| 7 periods | | 13% |
| Scales Used | ||
|---|---|---|
| figure scale | percentage | |
| 6mm (including 1:285 and 1:300 scales) | | 63% |
| 20mm | | 25% |
| 10mm | | 13% |
| 15mm | | 13% |
| 1:200 | | 13% |
| 2mm | | 13% |
| Number of Scales | ||
|---|---|---|
| number of figure scale(s) used (per person) | percentage | |
| 1 figure scale(s) used | | 63% |
| 2 figure scale(s) used | | 38% |
| RECENT BATTLE REPORTS |
|---|
| John Hingley-Hickson |
My last battle was the British involvement in the battle for the Ardennes (something which is not well written about). TAC:WWII as usual gave a thoroughly good feel for the battle, the tactics used and the formations. It allows flexibility, yet accurate historical representation. In this battle, the guards division advanced, to help our American cousins who were in the doo doo, YET AGAIN. The British advanced with the armour taking on the King Tigers, while the infantry took the Panzer Grenadiers. This action was a delaying action until the rest of the division was able to arrive and halt the German advance. Very thrilling action with the armour almost being destroyed, while the infantary held their own. The whole flavour of the game could only be experianced through Tac. [6 Apr 99] |
| David Chappell |
Skirmanovo (November 1941) - A Soviet counterattack East of Moscow to halt the German onslaught. Game was fought with double blind movement using a system similar to Bill Owen's. The Soviet 50th Cavalry division arrived late, but the Germans were very extended by then, counterattacking the Soviet tank Brigade and Rifle division. They left too few reserves and Pliev's cavalry had an easy task destroying the undefended German rear area troops, transport assets and headquarters units. Clear Soviet victory. [2 Apr 99] |
| Euan Caldwell |
1944 1:200 British Armoured Division against German Kampfgruppe [29 Mar 99] |
| Robert Young |
In my last Battle with Spearhead I played on the German side trying to stop the Indians of the 4th Indian Division from breaking out of Benghazi. [29 Mar 99] |
| lee garnett |
Two German tank battalions, two infantry batalions and a motorcycle battalion attacked a Soviet force of two infantry battalions, one cav regiment and a tank regiment. Important lessons learned - Pz111 can't afford to trade blows with T34 and KV1s. [28 Mar 99] |
| Dr. Anton van Dellen |
1944, Soviets versus Germans, Soviets hugged right back and picked off German armoured formations coming over a ridge in the open, despite taking heavy losses from the remains of a Panther battalion and Luftwaffe attacks. [11 Feb 99] |
| Chris Pringle |
"Kampfgruppe Friebe", a scenario from Tac Publications's latest supplement, Eastern Front 1944. I umpired for two other players. Two German Panzer Bns with two PzGren Bns trying to break through a Soviet rifle regiment with AT support, to relieve Tarnopol. 22 game turns (7 hours in the game, played in 3.5 hrs real time). Absolutely historical outcome: Germans almost got there but ground to a halt with all thei tanks stuck in the mud or KO. As the author of Tac I am biased! But although I haven't played CD or CoA, from talking to those who have I think I will stick to Tac, as I prefer its limitations to theirs. [11 Feb 99] |