This scenario was played as a team event by my gaming group. I act as moderator and facilitator for each game, and I do not participate directly as a player. My listing of “winning” is based on the PG HQ site cannot support a neutral role in AARs.

This scenario starts out missing one important piece of information: there are no setup instructions for the British force. Also, map 4 with its huge ridge line seemed an unreasonable amount of ground for the Brits to control, so the combination of these two facts led me to modify the scenario. I removed map 4, shortened the game by six turns (about the added time to establish immediate control of the ridge line from an entry point, then turn to fight the Germans), and had the British enter on the opposite end of map 5 from the hills the Germans occupied. While this reduced the ability to outflank the German right, that was really a fallacy as the British still couldn’t outflank the rear. Still, forcing a relatively narrow approach did cause some benefit for the German, but players felt this modification was very reasonable overall.

The British forces entered and began moving up. The German tanks rumbled forward to mid map areas and attempted to interfere with the British advance and delay the inevitable massive British artillery support. Both sides maneuvered to try to get advantage, and finally the British player executed a brilliant outflanking of half the German tanks, setting up a beautiful crossfire opportunity while accepting the risk to several Stuarts. All they needed was initiative to rain holy fire down on the German tanks. And not only did they get initiative, they got it with a second activation bonus!

And that’s when things went bad.

The Brits missed three out of four seven-or-better rolls and a bevy of 10/11+ rolls to take out only one single step of PzIIIGs. A half step of PzIIIG is as good as a full step in armored combat, and the Germans proceeded to wipe out nearly half of the thin-skinned British Stuarts. Infantry advances and more maneuvering of the remaining Stuarts pressured a German tank withdrawal, but the British force was crippled.

The tank withdrawal allowed the British to move forward and begin spotting for artillery. The British rolled much better with artillery, managing to eventually inflict three step losses (including both 50mm ATGs), but German morale rolls were similarly stunning, and the British infantry managed to advance to an adjacent position to the German right hill before the beatings were too strong to maintain cohesion. The Brits crumbled on the hill, never managing to actually launch an assault while losing several steps in the process. The Brits retreated and yielded the battlefield to the Germans. British total losses (counting tanks as double) were 21 steps to the German five.

This was a good scenario that suffered from bad die rolls and the thin-skinned Stuarts. The step loss requirements massively favor the Germans since Stuarts are worth so much for steps while being so relatively useless in armored combat. We rated the scenario a 3, but it could have been an easy 4 with a slight modification. Everyone agreed that substituting Crusader I tanks for Stuarts AND requiring the British to control at least one hill plus 10 German steps destroyed would have resulted in a very balanced scenario. While the Brits would lose significant direct fire support, having thicker armor means the tanks may actually reach the German line. With a requirement to only thwart the Brits and score eight step losses for victory, the Stuarts are too much of a gimme for this scenario.

Author	ACav (Germany)
Method	VASSAL
Victor	Germany
Participants	Sonora
Play Date	2023-12-07
Language	English
Scenario	DeRa035

This is another scenario to avoid in shared play. It is really unbalanced, has multiple mistakes in the written instructions and was not play-tested by people on this planet.

I give this one a very generous rating of 2, mostly because it was fun blowing up Honey tanks at long range. Others have suggested a complete re-write of this one, and my opponent and I agree with that idea.