Panzer Grenadier Battles on February 25th:
Desert Rats #8 - Cavalleria
Errors? Omissions? Report them!
Romania Mare Scenario 1: Bloodletting
Broken Axis #41
(Defender) Romania vs Soviet Union (Attacker)
Formations Involved
Romania 1st “Romania Mare” Armored Division

Overall balance chart for BrAx041
Side 1 1
Draw 0
Side 2 0
Overall Rating, 1 vote
Scenario Rank: --- of 609
Parent Game Broken Axis
Historicity Historical
Date 1944-08-20
Start Time 12:30
Turn Count 14
Visibility Day
Counters 25
Net Morale 1
Net Initiative 0
Maps 2: 102, 104
Layout Dimensions 56 x 43 cm
22 x 17 in
Play Bounty 152
AAR Bounty 163
Total Plays 1
Total AARs 1
Battle Types
Delaying Action
Enter & Exit
Hill Control
Kill Them All
Road Control
Scenario Requirements & Playability
Broken Axis maps + counters

The new Soviet offensive managed to shred the German and Romanian lines in a matter of hours. While Soviet armor sped southward through Podu Iloaiei, the German 57th Panzer Corps command sent the 1st Royal Romania Mare Armored Division forward to meet them. Romania Mare's lead elements encountered the retreating Germans as they topped Crucea Hill while the Soviets struggled to negotiate the right turn around the lake just south of the village of Scobâlțeni. The Romanian tanks halted when antitank fire disabled three of their number and assumed defensive positions. Soon Soviet heavy tanks tried to force the position.


Despite a BBC report to the contrary, the Soviets did not obliterate the Romania Mare that night, though the Romanian division suffered grievously. The detachment lost a significant portion of their tanks and two of the three tank company commanders came up missing. When darkness came they tucked the supporting infantry that had wandered into their positions during the afternoon between the remaining tanks and headed southward.

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).
  • Open-top AFV's: Immune to M, M1 and M2 results on Direct and Bombardment Fire Tables, but DO take step losses from X and #X results (7.25, 7.41, 7.61, BT, DFT). If a "2X" or "3X" result is rolled, at least one of the step losses must be taken by an open-top AFV if present.
  • 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
  • Tank Destroyer: do not provide the +1 Assault bonus, even if closed-top (SB)
  • APC – Armored Personnel Carrier: These are Combat Units, but stack like Transports. They can transport personnel units or towed units. They are not counted as combat units for the +1 stacking modifier on the Direct Fire and Bombardment Tables (4.4). They may be activated by regular leaders and tank leaders (1.2, 3.34, 4.3, 5.43). They do not provide the +1 Assault bonus (ACC).

Display Order of Battle

Romania Order of Battle
  • Foot
  • Mechanized
Soviet Union Order of Battle
Army (RKKA)
  • Foot
  • Mechanized

Display Errata (1)

1 Errata Item
Overall balance chart for 881

All Guards JS-IIs should have AT fire values of 8-8.

(Shad on 2010 Dec 15)

Display AARs (1)

Oh Dear oh Die
Author Poor Yorek
Method Solo
Victor Romania
Play Date 2017-08-03
Language English
Scenario BrAx041

Romanians set up with two T4's each on the E & W high ground (mostly dug-in and on high ground); one sets back holding the road (covers the valley). One on the west is in the regular woods hex (so not dug-in) and so I treat it (playing solo) as invisible (i.e. the Soviets approach as though it is not there - until it fired/or was spotted at 3-hex range). The Soviets push the SMGs and 4x M4/76's towards the western hill; the JSII; the Su-85's and 1xM4/76 approach down the road.

The Soviets approach in a leap-frog fashion along the road. On the west side, the SMG's off-ride in the light woods copse and approach with their armor. Early exchanges lead to two step losses for each side: the JS-II's efficiency and 8-8 AT factor getting in one kill (offsetting the dug-in and higher ground defensive advantages held by ROM). The ROM kill a step of Su-85 and M4.

The ROM T4 holding the woods took a step loss, but was only DIS. The Soviets pushed forward to mount an assault: LDR + 2xSMG + M4/76. All told, a 30+ assault vs a 3-col. In one of those absurdities of fate, the SOV roll a '7' whilst the ROM a '2'. The SOV take a step loss; proceed to fail most of the morale checks (with a DEM on the SMG that didn't take the step loss). Naturally, the ROM make their M2 check! I tried to rationalize it by figuring that the two tanks left in that RED platoon must have: (i) burned out their gun tubes firing HE that (ii) knocked down a large tree that, in turn, knocked down other trees all of which landed on the two encroaching SMG platoons and on the M4/76's. The Romanians were so euphoric that they ignored the shells whizzing by (i.e. made their M2 check).

This threw the SOV attack into disarray as 2/3 of their entire foot allotment was put out of action for a considerable time. On the other slope, the JS-II was in a bit of trouble as the ROM maneouvered for flanking bonuses as the thinner skinned Su-85's were picked off: and, finally, the 2xVAN (ROM INF) arrived (took four turns to roll a 5-6) arrived. The SOV middle had no foot support and, whilst the JS-II was likely to win the purely AT fire battle (despite a lot of misses on both sides to that point) they had to pull back in the face of an INF assault.

It simply took too much time for the tattered SOV SMG remnants to recover (and the ROM/SOV armor on that western hill had pretty much reduced each other to nothing). So the ROM held the road and the Eastern hill; whilst the SOV held the western one and had exited no units (no point in that they couldn't have exited more steps than they'd lost).

NOTES: had that assault gone "normally," this would (or could) have been a different story as the SMG+M4/76 group would likely have reduced the western hill about the time the ROM reinforcements arrived. An interesting battle for the road control would have ensued.

Also note that I played the M4/76's as AC = 4 (not 3 as printed) as per recent APL conjecture. In early turns, two ROM AT attacks missed by '1' so this certainly had a significant role in the scenario.

You must be a registered member and logged-in to post a comment.
Errors? Omissions? Report them!