Last Updated |
---|
Mon Nov 15 19:48:49 PST 1999 |
Voters = 19 |
WWII PLATOON VOTING RESULTS:
Voters, By Region - North America
Voters, By Nation | ||
---|---|---|
country | percentage | |
United States of America | 84% | |
Canada | 16% |
Favorite Rules | ||
---|---|---|
rules | percentage | |
Command Decision | 74% | |
Spearhead | 16% | |
Clash of Armor | 5% | |
TAC: WWII | 5% |
Rules Regularly Played | ||
---|---|---|
rules played regularly | percentage | |
Command Decision | 81% | |
Clash of Armor | 19% | |
Spearhead | 19% |
Number of Rules Regularly Played | ||
---|---|---|
number of rules played regularly | percentage | |
1 rules played | 81% | |
2 rules played | 19% |
Rules Tried | ||
---|---|---|
rules played at least once | percentage | |
Command Decision | 100% | |
Spearhead | 67% | |
Clash of Armor | 50% | |
Combined Arms | 6% |
Number of Rules Tried | ||
---|---|---|
number of rules played | percentage | |
3 rules played | 44% | |
2 rules played | 33% | |
1 rules played | 22% |
Voters, By Experience | ||
---|---|---|
level of experience | percentage | |
Up To Twenty Years | 44% | |
Twenty Years or More | 28% | |
Up To Ten Years | 17% | |
Novice | 6% | |
Two to Three Years | 6% |
Voters, By Setting | ||
---|---|---|
usual game setting | percentage | |
At the local club | 42% | |
With a friend or two | 42% | |
At the local game store | 16% |
Number of Armies | ||
---|---|---|
number of armies owned or used | percentage | |
3 army/armies | 19% | |
7 army/armies | 19% | |
8 army/armies | 13% | |
1 army/armies | 6% | |
11 army/armies | 6% | |
12 army/armies | 6% | |
15 army/armies | 6% | |
2 army/armies | 6% | |
4 army/armies | 6% | |
6 army/armies | 6% | |
9 army/armies | 6% |
Armies Owned/Used | ||
---|---|---|
armies owned or used | percentage | |
Germany | 88% | |
Britain | 69% | |
United States of America | 69% | |
Germany - Paratroops | 56% | |
Soviet Union | 56% | |
British Commonwealth | 44% | |
Britain - Paratroops | 38% | |
Germany - S.S. | 38% | |
Italy | 38% | |
United States of America - Paratroops | 38% | |
Japan | 31% | |
Soviet Union - Guards | 25% | |
Canada | 19% | |
France | 19% | |
United States of America - Marines | 19% | |
Rumania | 13% | |
Hungary | 6% |
Periods Played | ||
---|---|---|
period | percentage | |
1944 France | 83% | |
1942 North Africa | 50% | |
1943 Russia | 50% | |
1944 Sigfried Line | 50% | |
1943 Mediterranean | 44% | |
1941 North Africa | 39% | |
1943-45 Italy | 39% | |
1944 Eastern Front | 39% | |
1941 Russia | 33% | |
1942 Russia | 33% | |
1940 Blitzkrieg | 28% | |
1940 Africa | 22% | |
1942 South-West Pacific | 22% | |
1941-45 Burma | 11% | |
1945 Western Front | 11% | |
1941-44 Continuation War | 6% | |
1943 Pacific | 6% | |
1943 South-West Pacific | 6% | |
1944-45 Pacific | 6% | |
1945 Eastern Front | 6% | |
What-If/Fantasy | 6% |
Number of Periods Played | ||
---|---|---|
number of genres/periods played | percentage | |
7 periods | 22% | |
3 periods | 17% | |
1 periods | 11% | |
9 periods | 11% | |
11 periods | 6% | |
13 periods | 6% | |
2 periods | 6% | |
4 periods | 6% | |
5 periods | 6% | |
6 periods | 6% | |
8 periods | 6% |
Scales Used | ||
---|---|---|
figure scale | percentage | |
6mm (including 1:285 and 1:300 scales) | 63% | |
15mm | 37% | |
20mm | 26% |
Number of Scales | ||
---|---|---|
number of figure scale(s) used (per person) | percentage | |
1 figure scale(s) used | 79% | |
2 figure scale(s) used | 16% | |
3 figure scale(s) used | 5% |
RECENT BATTLE REPORTS |
---|
David Koontz |
A fantasy 6mm game set in a coastal eastern European city with 6 factions all fighting for control of the radio station, hospital, docks, etc. [1 Jun 1999] |
Duncan Allen |
1944 Falaise Gap Scenario using Spearhead. My German armoured column was wiped out by allied aircraft [9 Apr 99] |
Lawrence Lee |
Operation Battleaxe - A modified version of the central thrust by the 22 Guards Brigade and the 4th and 7th RTR vs Point 206 and Fort Capuzzo. The British objective was to capture both geographic features while fighting off a counter attack by 15th Panzer. The British players never captured the Fort but did manage to fight off counter-attack (never attack Matildas head on!). The end result was a draw. [6 Apr 99] |
Bob Slaughter |
Our last game was Command Decision 2nd edition. We enjoyed the game and found the playing time to be very reasonable. [6 Apr 99] |
chris Mikucki |
Ran an early entry scenario of the German assault on the island of Leros, November 1943. The game was run using Command Decision, and was run for 8 players. The Germans failed to affect an effective assault and the falschirmjagers took very heavy casualties. [31 Mar 99] |
Glenn E. Kidd |
Battle of Skirmonovo. It is German arour and mech vs Soviet armor and mech plus Soviet cavalry. [30 Mar 99] |
Neal Howes |
The last game I played was part of a Hube's Pocket campaign that I am currently running at the Ottawa Miniature Gamers (OMG). I use a second edition version on Clash of Armor that has yet to be published. A vast improvement over the first edition. PS. The better part of German panzer division did very well against a mechanized Soviet brigade. The breakout failed when they ran into a heavy tank reg of JSIIs fresh from the factory! Neal Howes [29 Mar 99] |
Alex Kirk |
Last night we played a real hum-dinger. Rommels attack at the 1st battle of El Alamein. Except that this time Rommel got enough gas to do the wide swing he wanted. Mass death & destruction never before seen by man. A good time was had by all! ;-) [28 Mar 99] |
Matt Davidson |
Command Decision 3. Parker's Crossroads scenerio(23rd Dec. 1944), during the Battle of the Bulge. Elements of 4 US Divisions make a stand at a Belgian Crossroads vs. elements of an SS Panzer Division. I refereed. Command Decision 3. 1944 Philipines. USA vs Japan. US combined arms groups vs dug in and entrenched Japanese infantry with tank support. I played. I have played Command Decision since CD 1 first came out. CD 2 was an improvement and CD 3 is the best yet. Playable and comprehensive. Morale and troop quality are key. Good speed of play with proper level of command handled by each player(1 or 2 battalions). I have played Spearhead as well. Although fun, quick to play and easy to learn(and teach), it makes many generalizations and has a very rigid system, making it, at times, more akin to Napoleonics in feel than WWII. Depending on what one is looking for a WWII set of rules, I would highly recomend either. [27 Mar 99] |
Marc Raiff |
As my group is learning CD3, I ran an adaptation of the battle of Kalmas on the Eastern Front in 1944. The players ran the Russians who were trying to cut off a German rearguard. The Germans were run by the referee to a scripted set of objectives and commands. This idea is based on Glenn Kidd's War College scenarios and is very helpful in teaching new players. [27 Mar 99] |
Michael Mathews |
I heavily modified an old "Panzerleader" scenario for a piece of Operation Goodwood. Five players, 6x9' table, completed in one night. Results were better than historic as the Germans had horrible dice. [26 Mar 99] |
Mark Serafin |
A couple of British infantry battalions and a tank regiment trying to take a hill from a regiment of Falschirmjagers and a pair of King Tigers. German Kampfgruppe coming up in support after a couple of turns. One battalion of German paras came out of woods to take the crest line of a ridge, and were promptly chewed to pieces in the open by the Shermans. On the other flank, the British infantry played hide and seek through the woods with the Germans. The King Tigers held back, waiting for the Shermans to come to them. When the German KG arrived, the Panthers fell victim to Fireflies, and the panzergrenadiers tried close assaulting the British tanks. They suffered the same fate at the paras that tried to engage armor in the open. The Germans finally threw in the towl just as the British artillery was beginning to work over the positions of the second para battalion. Which is good, because as the British infantry commander I was not looking forward to trying to advance in the face of King Tigers. [26 Mar 99] |
John W. Holtz |
A convention game version of Arracourt, 1944. As German CO I watched, helplessly, as the fog lifted just as my subordinates executed a series of advances that found them flank on or at point blank range to a couple of Sherman and Stuart companies. Something like 5 platoons of Panthers and a company of PzGrens were eliminated in one turn. Needless to say, we reverted to a defensive posture for the rest of the game. [26 Mar 99] |
Bill Baker DiGiulio |
Played a scenario from the Spearhead scenario book (Blaze across the Sands). It was a german and italian attack against a British defensive position in 1941. The germans took the worst of it, but cost the Brits enough causialties that the Italians were able to carry the day. I did not have the exact type of minis the scenario called for so i doctored it a bit. The Brits had an extra tank brigade, and I gave the Germans 2 Stuka sorties. [26 Mar 99] |
Paul Calvi |
Trial scenario on CD list [6 Mar 99] |
Alex Macris |
I have been adapting Spearhead for modern play. My last play game was a recreation of the fighting at the Valley of Tears. [19 Feb 99] |
Nick Murray |
Last game was a recreation of the collapse of the Romanian Front in 1944. It dealt with a German Infantry Division that was defending a river line only to find it has been outflanked. The Germans were told to deploy to defend the river as they had secure flanks. They had to fight off a Soviet flank attack before having their orders changed by higher command. This then forced a withdrawal in the teeth of an enemy attack. [11 Feb 99] |