From: "Percival, Darren" Subject: [Consim-l] First Impressions von Manstein's Backhand Blow (vMBB) GMT --- long Greetings all Punched and played my very first game of this over the weekend. I have had it in my collection for a few months having picked it up around Christmas last year but have only just managed to get it onto the table. My first impression was the impressive components -- counters seem to be of the same quality as POG (the reprint) and Carthage even though the game is from 2002 and the MAP, the thicker paper is wonderful and gives it that "extra feel" over the older type "thin" paper maps. I have done some reading of the CSW archives and have come across a discussion on the counters, without revisiting it my impressions are that the counters are clear, and the differing background colours for the counter and the unit symbol's) make distinguishing unit integrity a breeze. The larger size is also welcome. The one draw-back to the differing background colours is that an astute Russian player can often distinguish the presence of an SS unit in a stack of non SS units (or visa versa). Given that stack cannot be inspected until combat is declared this can give a bit of help to the Russian but is of no major concern and I mention it more for note than for any real discussion. My opponent and I played through to turn 8 when we decided to call the game -- I had surrounded major portions of the German mechanized forces and had inflicted a lot of INF damage. While I was not of the same opinion about the game being "lost" to the Germans I did feel that I was in the box seat and should prevail. We both quickly adapted to the turn sequence and both commented at how smooth it seemed to flow as well as appreciating the importance of the "administrative move boxes". While I also quickly learned to curse rolling 4 or less when trying to move the southern front marker, this was made up for by my clever selection of Combat chits that add flavour to the game -- especially when they are talked up for the event rather than just the total effects. And I would like to note that the use of the different graphics on the time dependent chits is a nice touch -- how I lamented the replacement of my KV's on turn 6. We did have the errata, but nevertheless managed to find a situation or two to question during the game. The system uses a Locking ZOC and as is the case in many games EZOC (enemy zones of control) interrupt supply, this can be negated by the presence of "friendly unit". However this friendly unit doesn't negates the EZOC for (Regular) Movement, Retreat after Combat or Admin movement (Ref Series Rules 5.2). My opponent questioned that we playing this correctly as he/we found it strange that you could run supplies through the disputed hex but couldn't move a combat unit through it. As rule 5.3 states "...a unit beginning its Movement Phase already in an EZOC may move out of the hex provided the fire hex entered conations no EZOC. The presence of a friendly unit and/or ZOC does not negate the EZOC for movement". While this does appear to be clear cut rules wise it did lead to the situation of some units attacking just so they could be eliminated and then reappear via the replacement procedure and given the initial set-up locations on the south flank it seems that the German unit(s) in 4023 (that start in this situation) and 4225 are on the short end of the stick. I can see them being surrounded as part of a standard Russian opening move. What are other peoples opinions? The second situation that arose was in relation to Combat Hits and retreats. During combat each player selects and players a set of combat chits, these range from DRM's to adjustments to Combat strength and Hits taken. The defender in a combat has the option to "negate" combat hits by retreating and in some situations the defender can also be forced to retreat. If a defender retreats "through" a hex that contains an EZOC then they suffer an additional step loss (Ref Series Rules 12.10 Para 6). Our question is, Does this additional step loss occur after all combat hits and retreats have been determined? Or is it actually an additional "combat hit" that gets taken in to account. We had the situation where there was a concentric attack against GE motorised units, so any retreat was going through an ZOC. GE Player played the combat chit that reduced hits by one. Combat resulted in 2 hits to the German units. 1. Could the GE player retreat two hexes, thereby negating the two hits, then take an additional hit that is in turn cancelled by the combat chit for an end result of no losses OR 2. Is the GE player required to suffer all combat hits (including modification to due to combat chits) and then take an additional step loss if they retreated through an EZOC. This would mean that the units would take a loss no matter what they decided to do (stay in place and take 2 - 1 hits or be required to take one loss that they negate by retreating but then suffer the additional loss for the retreat). This was the only real "question" to arise as all the others were covered in the rules and the errata. All up it was an enjoyably way to spend some time and the game has hit the top of my list of games to "play again". And I hope that repeated playing's will see it move to my list of "regular" play games, even if that list hasn't seen much action lately I will be cross posting this to both the consim list and the consimworld folder for vMBB so thanks for reading and feel free to comment as you see fit. Cheers, Darren ********************************************************************** This email and any attachments are confidential. They may contain legally privileged information or copyright material. You should not read, copy, use or disclose them without authorisation. If you are not an intended recipient, please contact us at once by return email and then delete the original message and all copies. We do not accept liability in connection with computer virus, data corruption, delay, interruption, unauthorised access or unauthorised amendment. ********************************************************************** _______________________________________________ Consim-l mailing list Consim-l@mailman.halisp.net http://mailman.halisp.net/mailman/listinfo/consim-l