• ASL 8 The Fugitives
• ASL 10 The Citadel
• A30 Defeat in Java (Might have balance problems, but worth some playings)
• A54 Raate Road (Classic early-war Finn-Russian clash)
• A64 Chateau de Quesnoy (A defender's dream scenario)
• G33 The Awakening of Spring
• AP3 A Breezeless Day (Quite possibly the best two-board scenario ever made)

This month Matt Shostak analyzes another BV classic, Jeff Shields shares another scenario design (King Tigers!), Tim Hundsdorfer writes a Quickie Scenario Review, Mark Walz takes a father's look at ASL, and I write a hideous little article about....um, well you probably wouldn't believe me if I told you, so just read it for yourself.

John Slotwinski
Editor, ASL DIGEST

My last analysis of The Commissar's House was intended to take a look back at a fun scenario that might be of interest to beginning players, and accessible because of its inclusion in the very first module, Beyond Valor. With the avalanche of new ASL products in the market it is easy to overlook these older gems. In the same spirit, I would like to take a look at the very first scenario, Fighting Withdrawal.

Attraction: Basic infantry street fight, with the chance to use the Finns with their special capabilities, in a scenario featuring one of the most difficult military maneuvers, from which the scenario gets its name. The scenario is well balanced and well tested (Russian 108, Finn 84 according to the Internet record as of this writing). No matter which side I play in this scenario, I always feel that it is quite a challenge. Take Note: Ammo shortage prevents the Russians from throwing fire lanes with their machineguns. This is easy to miss, so review the definition of Good Order for SW in the index, and A9.22.

Russian Advantages: Starting Positions, HIP, sniper.
Russian Disadvantages: troop quality, difficult maneuver to perform, ammo shortage.

Comments: So how can the Russian maximize his strengths and minimize his weaknesses to win this scenario? As usual, the first step should be a careful look at the victory conditions. The Finns must exit more victory points off the south board edge than the Russians to win. So the Russians can win even if neither side exits a unit, or if they exit the same number of points. Since the Russians start off between the Finns and the southern board edge, the Finns will have to get through them to win. That is why I have listed the starting positions as a Russian advantage.

I have heard this scenario described as a foot race, and in this case the Russians have a head start. Note that although most Russian squads are restricted to setting up in or between rows V and AA, their HIP units (SSR 4) are not so restricted. Thus, a Russian squad could be set up HIP on the southernmost row (row A), in the hope of simply advancing off the board for an easy 2 victory points. Of course, the HIP capability could also be used to spring a trap on some Finnish units as they make like track stars in the later stages of the game, trying desperately to get as far forward as possible, but unable to avoid a certain chokepoint. The ubiquitous sniper should aid the withdrawal somewhat. Very few scenarios have such a high SAN. It is vitally important for the Russian player to keep a close watch on every roll and not to miss any sniper attacks. (It also shows class, here and always, to point out a SAN result for your opponent when he misses it.)

Despite the starting positions, the HIP, and the sniper, the Russians also have some serious disadvantages to contend with in planning their defense and withdrawal. First, their troops are not nearly as good as the Finns in any respect. Ammo shortage chips in, as already mentioned, by preventing the use of fire lanes, which can be frustrating to the Russian player since this kind of terrain is perfect for them. Most important, however, is the difficulty of the maneuver the Russians must perform. The fighting withdrawal requires the Russian player to continually choose new positions for his troops, all the while trying to keep them in good order and put up enough of a forward defense to hold the Finns at arm's length. Difficult, sometimes agonizing, decisions about when to stay and fight and when to keep moving will occur on just about every turn. The wrong choice can turn what was once a good position into a death trap as Finnish troops seal off the exits to a particular pocket, threatening the occupants with death, or worse, (in terms of victory points in this ASL game) capture. The very difficulty of this maneuver is part of the attraction of this scenario.

Let's now go into a little more detail on the Russian setup and plan. I don't intend this to be the definitive setup, but rather some suggestions about things that might be important or worthwhile. Frankly, I don't think I have this scenario figured out well enough to present a perfect defense. Right off the bat, the very first setup decisions are tough. It is tempting to set up a bunch of guys in row AA, concealed, ready to shred the Finns as they cross the street in row BB. Such a forward defense, however, would get overwhelmed, resulting in a lot of dead and captured Russians, and the Finns would cruise to an easy victory. If you don't believe me, try it yourself and see what happens.

On the other hand, you don't want to let the Finns cross the street completely unopposed. This is the first difficult decision for the Russians, and I don't claim to know the perfect answer (I only know that some options are not the answer). I think one or two squads in row AA, concealed, and also a couple of dummy stacks in row AA, might work to slow the Finns a bit. Keep in mind that these units are likely to be sacrificed, but if you can get them out safely to rearward positions, by all means do so.

Using dummies on the front line means that there will be less concealment for real Russian units. Therefore I like to try to set up as many as I can in places where they will be able to gain concealment at game start. This usually means somewhere to the rear of the setup area, say rows V-X. I didn't mention a commissar as a Russian advantage because I look at it as a necessity. I like putting a commissar in V10, where he can gain concealment and be available to rally the squads that will deploy to his front, in such places as Z10, Y10, etc. A nice place for a squad on flank protection might be W1, and a unit in V4 has a decent field of fire down the middle. Note the effect of the blazing building in U6. Not only will it most likely consume T5, T4, and U4 as well, but also it will be blowing drifting smoke out to U9 and later T6-T8. The Russian does not want to get caught defending a line with the smoke providing cover for the Finns to move up adjacent and jump into CC, so when the line falls back from its initial positions, it would seem wise to pull back behind the S4-Q10 road, so that the Finns will have to endure more open ground in order to close with the Russians.

Choosing when and how to withdraw will be critical for the Russians. Consider, for example, the area on the west board edge bounded by the Y1-U3-Q1 road. This is decent terrain for a while. But units that stay here too long can be seriously endangered by a Finnish squad with a machinegun in W4, which could throw a fire lane out to P0.

There are many places that could be used for the HIP units, so tailor your strategy to suit your play style. Because the MMG is so heavy and suffers from ammo shortage, I like to use it in the HIP role. It might even be important enough to warrant a leader as well, although the scarcity of Russian leaders makes this a difficult decision. Some good places are O1 and O10, perhaps at level 1, because they can dish out some serious firepower at the adjacent chokepoints and help stop a Finnish push along a board edge.

The second HIP squad could be used as a goalie in any number of locations, such as B4, B6, D1, H9. Alternatively, it could be used in a more forward location for a more aggressive defense.

Finnish advantages: troop quality
Finnish disadvantages: scenario pace

Comments: The only Finnish advantage in my mind is in troop quality, but what a huge advantage it is. These squads have better firepower and morale than their adversaries, and the same range. They have assault fire and spraying fire. Finns can self rally, deploy without leadership, recombine without leadership, are stealthy (unless Green), and immune to cowering, all of which combine to place them head and shoulders above their Russian counterparts. A big disadvantage for the Finns is the pace of the scenario. The distance from their starting positions to the southern board edge is 28 hexes, so in this 7 turn game they have to average an advance of 4 hexes per turn to exit a unit. Of course, double time, leader bonus, and road bonus can help make up lost time, but still there is no time to dawdle. This serves as an interesting counterpoint to last issue's scenario, The Commissar's House, where the Germans had a much shorter distance to travel in a longer time span and could afford to spend more time shooting. Here in Fighting Withdrawal the Finns will have to do a lot of moving. And that brings with it the risks of those -2 DRM shots the Russians will often be able to pepper them with as they move about in the open streets.

It is usually a bit more difficult for me to say precisely what an attacker should do in a scenario, because so much depends on how the defender sets up, and also the outcome of the first turn or two. Thus I won't try to go into exact hex locations for units, and who will fire at what or move to what hex on turn 1. But there are still some general principles that can be discussed. First of all, I know in many scenarios attackers like to form a schwerepunkt with most if not all of their units, and strike along a board edge, which not only gives them local superiority but also flank protection. Although I think some of those principles make sense here, the playing surface is so narrow that it probably is more trouble than it is worth to commit all of your units to one board edge. I think you might find it too congested. Rather, a strong attack down one board edge, supported by smaller forces in the middle and opposite edge, might pay bigger dividends. The supporting units can prevent the Russians from reinforcing laterally, allowing the schwerepunkt to do its work as designed against a numerically inferior foe. Moreover, it is more likely under such a plan to have most units in positions to fire at the Russians.

This scenario is ideal to practice half squad tactics. Early in the game I would want to probe with half squads, sometimes running them right into suspected Russian positions, double timing if necessary, to force loss of concealment. Other half squads might try to penetrate past the Russian units to get behind them and interfere with their rout paths. Hey, if I'm going to expose a unit to the great danger of -2 DRM shots, I'd rather it were only a half squad, right? Such probes by half squads put the Russian player in a bind. Should he shoot at them while he has that nice -2 DRM? Or would it be better to retain concealment? He'd certainly rather shoot at a juicier target, but if the half squads get behind him, it could easily spell doom for the Russians when they try to rout later on. The ability to self deploy means that the Finnish player can put as many half squads as he wants into play to suit his own play style.

There are a few other general points the Finnish player should keep in mind. There will rarely be good reasons to fire during Prep Fire. Assault Fire is almost as good. Taking prisoners is probably better than invoking No Quarter, because of the high value of any prisoners that you manage to exit with. Lastly, the sleaze tactic of self breaking in order to rout forward could be used to your advantage. (Note the Q&A from the '93a Annual for A10.41). Naturally, the Russian player will want to keep units in positions to prevent a forward rout of broken Finns. The Finns press hard on their heels. This is not a brawl but a game of maneuver. [This is another classic scenario that should be played over and over again. I should also mention that the Chaney-McGrath balance recommends using both balance provisions (1 extra turn/No ammo shortage) for this scenario. I would play it either way. -jas]

Near Moinet, E of Bastogne, 13 January: In mid January the Americans had opted for the "small solution" of pinching off the Bulge salient at Houffalize instead of attacking the shoulders farther east. Once the salient had been reduced the battles of attrition soon followed. While the Germans had lost the initiative, they still retained excellent forces for defensive fighting. Indeed, several American armored attacks had been mauled by the King Tigers of the notorious 506th Heavy Panzer Battalion. In one such engagement Company C of the 68th Tank Battalion lost all but one of its 17 tanks! But the Americans had plenty of fight, and plenty of tanks. As the 15th Tank Battalion renewed its push outward from Bastogne it ran headlong into the tigers of winter.

Aftermath: As Americans probed his defenses Oblt. Paul, commander of the 1st Kompanie, called for reinforcements. Then Shermans flooded the snow-swept fields. Just as the Tigers were getting flanked, Lt. Tegethoff arrived with two more King Tigers. The Americans fired furiously hitting Tegethoff's Tiger 9 times before a Sherman snuck around for the coup d'grace. As Tegethoff's Tiger started to burn, he and his crew bailed out. The 6th Armored Division's progress was rightfully slow that day, but the Americans had inflicted heavy casualties to a former nemesis.

BOARD CONFIGURATION:

+-----+-----+-----+
|17   |13   |43   |  N>
|     |     |     |
|     |     |     |
|     |     |     |
|     |     |     |
+-----+-----+-----+

BALANCE
German: Shorten the Game to 6.5 Turns.
American: Lengthen the Game to 8.5 Turns.

VICTORY CONDITIONS:
Americans win at game end by exiting 60 VP of the east edge of the playing area, or by inflicting more CVP than they receive. Any other result is a German victory.

TURN RECORD CHART
German sets up first.
American moves first.
7.5 TURNS.

GERMAN OB: The 1st Kompanie, 506 schwere Panzer Battalion [ELR: 5] set up east of hexrow T inclusive [SAN: 0]:

5xPzVIB, 9-2 AL

Reinforcing elements of 2d Kompanie enter Turn 4 along the east edge of the playing area:

2xPzVIB, 9-1 AL

AMERICAN OB:
Elements of 15th Tank Battalion, 6th Armored Division enter on Turn 1 along the west edge of the playing area [ELR: 3] [SAN: 0]:

2xM4 TankDozer, 2xM4A3E2(L), 4xM4A1(76)W, 9-1 AL

Reinforcing elements arrive Turn 2 along the west edge of the playing area.

4xM4A3E2 (Jumbo), 4xM4A3(76)W, 2xM36 TD, 9-1 AL, 8-1 AL

SSR

1. EC are Overcast, with Deep Snow. As per snow conditions, the stream, and water obstacles are frozen, and marsh and brush are treated as OG. Elevated roads are considered level 0. All roads are plowed.
2. Gyrostabilizers are available in accordance with H1.42. The American player may designate one Sherman as an OP tank with one module of 105 mm OBA (HE and Smoke).
3. Contrary to D8.23, smoke can be placed but the Hindrance DRM for each smoke counter (Non-Dispersed, Dispersed & Infantry) is reduced to +1 (EXC: burning wrecks are treated normally).

[NB: The 506 schwere Panzer Battalion gained notoriety for stopping the 2nd Armored Division dead in its tracks on November 17, 1944 at Puffendorf, Belgium. The Americans lost 57 tanks during the engagement!]

Scenario Design: Jeffrey Shields, jeff@vims.edu
Helpful criticisms: Carl Fago
Sidebar: "5 King Tigers and the guy calls for reinforcements. What a sissy." Tim Hundsdorfer

Designers notes: The schwere Panzer Battalions were attached as shock troops to various units. During the Ardennes Offensive the 506th s. Pz Btln was attached to the Panzer Lehr Division. Only 8 of its tanks were available by 20 December as the baggage train had been held up. I would appreciate additional information on this unit. Parker (op. cit) gives few details of this particular encounter. While there was no doubt some infantry involved in both sides of the battle, I have chosen not to include them. Panzer Lehr had seen a lot of fighting by 13 January hence the ELR would be lower than that of a fresh elite unit. Similarly, the 6th Armored had seen some heavy fighting, but their morale was high. Infantry forces might be represented by the following: GERMAN - 6x548, 228, 3xLMG, MMG, 2xPsk, 9-1, 8-1, 81 MTR, 5 trenches [ELR: 3]{SAN: 4}; AMERICAN - 5x667, 5x666, 3xMMG, 2x60mm MTR, 3xBAZ, HMG, 9-1, 8-1, 8-0, 7-0, 4xM3 HT, M3A1 HT [ELR: 3]{SAN: 2}. CVP would change such that the American would have to get 60 CVP of TANKS (excluding HT), and 15 CVP of INFANTRY off the east edge.

SUMMARY: A company of Rangers tries to wrest a two story building from elite Japanese.

ALLURE: Short. Good IRC or E-mail game.

EXCITEMENT FACTOR: 4 (0ut of 10) Yawn. Good Ol' Board 2.

BALANCE: 55-45 Pro Japanese. A lot of open ground for the American to cover. Real dicey.

REPLAY VALUE: Moderate. It's easy to feel diced, and you have to be able to shrug it off.

DEFENSE MAXIMS: Spring the traps so that you get point blank and FFNAM, FFMO, and you've got the firepower to keep the Americans away from the lighthouse. You are short on troops, so this situation may be one where you want to deploy a squad. A half squad with the mortar is good on the hilltop as far forward as possible. One in the lighthouse is good as well--you'll want him to break and not step reduce. Take every shot you can and hope for a lot of sniper activity.

ATTACK MAXIMS: Keep track of how far you have to move. You'll need to get INTO the lighthouse on turn 5, or a half-squad can simply break and go upstairs, costing you the game. Pass your moral checks. Don't stack. As tempting as it is to apply some firepower with the -1 leaders, it just isn't worth it. Keep the leaders back rallying guys, as there is a reasonable chance you can rally under DM.

GRADE: B- (probably higher if you don't mind the dicey nature of the scenario).

[This is the perfect Father's Day/ASL article. If I had my act together this issue would have been sent out last week. -jas]

It was 8 O'clock on a Friday night, and I was just beginning to look over HedgeHog at Piepsk. I was hoping my children would go to sleep on schedule so that I could get a few hours solitaire in before bed. But that was not to be. My son came downstairs, and said in a pleading tone "Can I play?" What do you say to a seven year old? "No, go to bed" or "Honey take care of this kid for me" or "You're too young to play this game, maybe when you get older." I was at a loss for words. I didn't want him resenting me, or the game, and all my words rang hollow and selfish. Then I was struck by inspiration, why can't he play? He doesn't understand the rules and probably won't for at least several years. How can I play ASL with him?

I thought about ASL, and I realized that ASL boils down to fire and movement. So how do I go about teaching fire and movement? First problem, movement. I pulled out board 6 and said lets race. He picked out a 467 and I grabed a 447, and soon he was counting movement factors from A5 to GG5. Then from Y10 to I1 etc. We now call the game "Race."

Next problem LOS. First I decided that all buildings for now are ground level only. No boards with hills have been used yet either. We play two games to practice LOS. The first is Peek A Boo. He selects a hex to place his 467 in, and I select a hex to place my 447 in. Then we take turns counting up the number of hexes are squad can be seen from. The one with the fewest hexes wins. The second game is called gotcha! Use one board, both players secretly pick their entrance hex. For example: he might pick A1 while I pick Q1. Then taking turns you move your squads across the board with the goal of being the 1st to move across the board or obtain a line of sight to the enemy squad.

This weekend we'll begin playing fire fight. No rallying, no routing, no moving. Just my 4 x 337 vs. his 4 x 658. He picks any four hexes he wants to set up in, all squads must be adjacent to at least one other squad.

My squads must then set up > 3 but < 5 hexes away in his LOS, and none of my squads may be adjacent. Then we'll blast away at each other until one of us has no unbroken squads.

I hope to have my son playing Strayers Strays by the end of summer. If he gets that far, that'll be quite an accomplishment I think. But the ultimate goal is to teach him to love the game, I'll gain a lifelong playing partner, and ASL will continue for at least another generation. My daughter has also shown some interest in ASL [jas says she'll yield a dowry of at least 30 portage points if she learns to play and love the game.]

So instead of seeing your young children as an intrusion on your playing time, look at it as an opportunity to spend some quality time with them and teach them the game!

[Special thanks to Tom Repetti for reviewing this and convincing me that I'm not crazy for writing it. -jas]

Last weekend I had a couple of particularly frustrating games of ASL. Both of my opponents handed me my hide. I was not happy. I played like I had forgotten every ASL tactic, rule, and maxim I had ever learned. Years of study and practice had resulted in nothing, NOTHING! My ASL-confidence hit a low and I instantly ELRed from a solid 8-1 to a wounded 6+1. At that low moment inspiration hit me like a Panzer overrunning a partisan farmer, and I realized that learning and playing ASL is just like learning and playing golf.

'Golf' is such an ugly word for some of you (Why do they call it golf? Because 'shit' was already taken, ha ha ha....) but hang on and give me a chance. I know that many of you can relate.

The first time I played golf I sucked rocks. I did things to those golf balls that defied the laws of physics. (Ever see a ball go directly opposite of where you aimed?) I sprayed balls all over that course. I took divots the size of tires. In many cases my divots went FARTHER than the golf ball. I probably lost one ball on each and every hole and when the chaos was all over I had shot a humbling 140 (roughly 68 over par.) I was eating large quantities of humble pie. But I had fun the whole time. After years of practicing and playing and learning from vastly superior players I have finally reached mediocre status. I am now an 18-handicap and I have resigned myself to that fact that I will probably remain an 18-handicap for the rest of my life. That makes me a reasonably decent golfer. Definitely not Tiger Woods, but not Bill Murray either. But I'm happy with my 18-handicap. (As are the women and small children who used to run off the course when they saw me coming!) An 18-handicap means that sometimes I have great holes, and sometimes I have lousy holes. Sometimes I can snag a birdie, but I can also end up with a triple-bogey. I usually have a decent round, but occasionally I can end up with a 98 and once in a rare while I'll card an 80.

But regardless of how I play I always have fun. And that's the reason why I play. ASL is the same way. When I started I sucked, but I still had fun. I suspect everyone else had a similar experience. After all, if your first game was against an experienced player you probably lost, but you must have had enough fun to stick with it, otherwise you wouldn't be reading this hideous golf-ASL analogy article!

Seriously though, for us novice to intermediate level players it is the fun of the game, and not the winning or losing that keeps us playing. We cant all be Banozics, even if we aspire to. Eventually most of us will reach some skill-level-saturation and further improvement will be extremely small or non-existent. But that's ok because regardless of how well we play it's the actual playing that brings us back for more.

Someday I hope to get the nerve up and play a game with a Nixon, or a Pleva, or a McGrath, and while I'm certain to lose, it would still be fun. Kindof like playing golf with Palmer at Augusta.

Copyright is retained by original authors. Contact the author before making any use of any of the articles contained in the Digest.

John Slotwinski
Editor, ASL DIGEST
jslot@gauss.aptd.nist.gov