Panzer Grenadier Battles on April 27th:
Arctic Front Deluxe #40 - Children's Crusade Broken Axis #14 - Târgu Frumos: The Second Battle Scenario 3: Sledge Hammer of the Proletariat
Army Group South Ukraine #6 - Consternation Road to Berlin #73 - She-Wolves of the SS
Errors? Omissions? Report them!
Battle of Leuwiliang, The 1st Day
Lost Battalion #1
(Defender) Australia
(Defender) Britain
(Defender) United States
vs Japan (Attacker)
Formations Involved
Australia 2/2nd Pioneer Battalion
Australia 2/3rd Machine-gun Battalion
Britain 3rd Hussars
Japan 16th Infantry Regiment
Japan 2nd Tank Regiment
United States 131st Field Artillery Regiment
Display
Balance:



Overall balance chart for LBoP001
Total
Side 1 0
Draw 0
Side 2 1
Overall Rating, 2 votes
5
4
3
2
1
3.5
Scenario Rank: --- of 913
Parent Game Lost Battalion
Historicity Historical
Date 1942-03-02
Start Time 15:00
Turn Count 16
Visibility Day
Counters 106
Net Morale 1
Net Initiative 1
Maps 2: 25, 7
Layout Dimensions 56 x 43 cm
22 x 17 in
Play Bounty 190
AAR Bounty 171
Total Plays 1
Total AARs 1
Battle Types
River Crossing
River Control
Conditions
Entrenchments
Terrain Mods
Scenario Requirements & Playability
An Army at Dawn Counters
Elsenborn Revised Maps
Fire in the Steppe Maps
Kokoda Campaign Counters
Lost Battalion Base Game
Nihon Silk Counters
Road to Dunkirk Counters
Introduction

The Japanese 2nd Division began its drive out of Merak on March 1st. The division, following Napoleon's plan of branches, split and split again. Two detachments advanced on Batavia (Jakarta). A detachment under Gen Nasu consisting of the 16th Infantry Regiment and support from the 2nd Tank Regiment, was given the task of cutting the inland road at Buitenzorg (Bogor) to prevent an Allied escape

Conclusion

The Nasu Detachment arrived at the Tjianten River to find the bridge had already been blown by Dutch engineers and the river swelling from rain in the mountains. Still General Nasu felt it important to force a crossing.

The Austrians put up a vigorous defense against the crossing, claiming to have caused 500 casualties. While the Japanese never admitted to the casualties the Australians said they inflicted, they were high enough for Gen. Nasu to call off the assault.


Display Relevant AFV Rules

AFV Rules Pertaining to this Scenario's Order of Battle
  • Vulnerable to results on the Assault Combat Chart (7.25, 7.63, ACC), and may be attacked by Anti-Tank fire (11.2, DFT). Anti-Tank fire only affects the individual unit fired upon (7.62, 11.0).
  • AFV's are activated by tank leaders (3.2, 3.3, 5.42, 6.8). They may also be activated as part of an initial activating stack, but if activated in this way would need a tank leader in order to carry out combat movement.
  • AFV's do not block Direct Fire (10.1).
  • Full-strength AFV's with "armor efficiency" may make two anti-tank (AT) fire attacks per turn (either in their action segment or during opportunity fire) if they have AT fire values of 0 or more (11.2).
  • Each unit with an AT fire value of 2 or more may fire at targets at a distance of between 100% and 150% of its printed AT range. It does so at half its AT fire value. (11.3)
  • Efficient and non-efficient AFV's may conduct two opportunity fires per turn if using direct fire (7.44, 7.64). Units with both Direct and AT Fire values may use either type of fire in the same turn as their opportunity fire, but not both (7.22, 13.0). Units which can take opportunity fire twice per turn do not have to target the same unit both times (13.0).
  • Demoralized AFV's are not required to flee from units that do not have AT fire values (14.3).
  • Place a Wreck marker when an AFV is eliminated in a bridge or town hex (16.3).
  • AFV's do not benefit from Entrenchments (16.42).
  • AFV's may Dig In (16.2).
  • Closed-top AFV's: Immune to M, M1 and M2 results on Direct and Bombardment Fire Tables. Do not take step losses from Direct or Bombardment Fire. If X or #X result on Fire Table, make M morale check instead (7.25, 7.41, 7.61, BT, DFT).
  • Closed-top AFV's: Provide the +1 modifier on the Assault Table when combined with infantry. (Modifier only applies to Germans in all scenarios; Soviet Guards in scenarios taking place after 1942; Polish, US and Commonwealth in scenarios taking place after 1943.) (ACC)
  • Tank: all are closed-top and provide the +1 Assault bonus, when applicable

Display Order of Battle

Australia Order of Battle
Army
  • Motorized
Britain Order of Battle
Army
  • Mechanized
Japan Order of Battle
Imperial Japanese Army
  • Mechanized
United States Order of Battle
131st Field Artillery Regiment
  • Towed
Army

Display AARs (1)

An Interesting & Bloody, All or Nothing Fight
Author treadasaurusrex (Japan)
Method Face to Face
Victor Japan
Participants Tubac52
Play Date 2024-03-13
Language English
Scenario LBoP001

Tubac52 and I tried this interesting, DIY, 16-turn scenario designed by our own Peter Lloyd, as a face-to-face battle when we finally got the counters printed, cutout & assembled. We started on 2 March which was the 82nd anniversary of the actual event and finished it in an action-packed, 4-sessions. My opponent led the Black Force made-up of Americans, Australians and British units. I led the attacking, high-morale, Japanese of the Emperor's 16th Infantry regiment (2nd Infantry Division) on this mixed terrain battle map. Map 7 contains the Tjianten River that the Japanese must cross and push back the defenders that are entrenched in 4 strongpoints. Luckily for Dai Nippon, only 2 of the entrenchments were setup adjacent the the west bank of the Tijanten. The other two entrenchments were not taken before the scenario arbitrarily ended in accordance with the Special Scenario Rules. Both sides drew decent sets of leaders. We used the consolidation, excess initiative and extended assault optional rules and ignored the FOW. We used the following two house rules: 1) Road Movement for Mechanized & Foot Units All FOOT & MECHANIZED units may move on roads at the rate of 1/2 a Movement Point (MP) per road hex, just like MOTORIZED units, and 2) Standardized Movement for Mechanized Units All mechanized units may move through clear hexes at a movement cost of only 1 movement point (MP) per hex, instead of 1 1/2. Add one to this cost if moving up, across, or down slopes hexes.

It took the attacking Japanese 4 full game turns to get enough troops across that river to drive back the first line of defending Allied troops and take the pair of closest entrenchments. An Allied senior leader decapitation occurred on the 4th game turn which stopped a menacing Australian counterattack, before it could get properly supported. Both overeager units of British Mk, VIb light tanks were demolished by across-the-river armor piercing shots by the Japanese type 97 light tanks. This Axis high-point was later followed by both of the Emperor's tank units being halved in later AT fire and close assault combats. Japanese morale recovery efforts and close assaults were exceptional in this play-through.

In our play-through, the Japanese lost the required 5 steps at the end of the 10th turn, when the game ended prematurely. By then, there were exactly 8 Japanese units (two already halved & disrupted) at least 3 hexes east of the river. Allied step losses were 18 and 4 leaders. The Final Japanese step losses were 5 and a pair of leaders. These losses would have been much higher had the game not ended so early. The Allies were still in bombardment range of the river at that point, but not within direct fire range of any Japanese-held river hexes.

So, victory went to the Emperor's soldiers. I give this scenario a rating of 4, mostly due to the artificiality of the sudden stop with only 5 Japanese steps as casualties. My opponent also objected to the "all-or-nothing" victory conditions that don't allow for a draw, since that result more closely mirrors the historic result. We both felt that this one is suitable for both SOLO and SHARED play, and agreed that the 5 step loss rule that ends the game prematurely should not be used.

0 Comments
You must be a registered member and logged-in to post a comment.
Errors? Omissions? Report them!
Page generated in 1.039 seconds.