Last Blitzkrieg (BCS) Campaign Playthrough 16DEC44 Part 1: The Attacks Begins
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 4 окт 2024
- This video shows the beginning of the first turn (16DEC) and the initial German activation. I had intended to include more activations in this video, but I lost 4 days of filming last week due to work, and I am going to have very limited filming opportunities for the upcoming week (perhaps even two weeks), and I wanted to get something uploaded that showed some actual game play.
I will not be going into as much detail in every activation as I do for the first one, but since one of the goals of this series is to help those unfamiliar with Last Blitzkrieg and BCS get some understanding of how the system plays,I spend some time explaining various rules. This won't be a tutorial series, so I am not covering every single rule, rather I am trying to provide enough (hopefully) information on how things work that people can follow along, or at least understand why I am doing certain things.
The campaign will continue as soon as I am able, and with luck that will be by next weekend. Thanks for watching!
![Game Comparison: 'Last Blitzkrieg' [2016] and 'A Time For Trumpets [2020]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/N8O4E-C3qWY/mqdefault.jpg)
A superlative and professional explanation of one of my very favorite wargames.
I enjoyed this detailed and clear presentation. Excellent.
Thank you very much! I hope you find the rest of the series as interesting and entertaining.
I've just stumbled onto your channel and without doubt one of the most professionally presented that I've seen from both a historic and game perspective.
Thank you for the compliment! I haven't been at it very long, as you can tell by the content on the channel so far, so things might be a little rough around the edges. Glad you are enjoying the channel. Stay tuned for more content.
loving the detail as a guy learning this series, thank you.
Thank you! I can promise you more of the same to come. And if you have any questions about anything specific you see, please don't hesitate to ask. I've had a few (mostly minor) errors creep into play (which I suppose is bound to happen with a game this large), but I am trying to eliminate those (and identify them when I assemble the episodes in the edit). So if something you see doesn't look right, then let me know because there is a chance you have spotted a previously unnoticed oversight.
@@thetabletopsedge yeah I see your correction, you do a great job, like my videos to be this good :) Love the videos, thanks for doing them.
I'm playing through my first scenario of LB right now [Southern Campaign]. I agree with what you say about limited options for the US, all I've been doing thus far are some subtle shifts in battalions, and as much artillery as I can bring to bear [I rolled for 1-hex visibility on Turn 1].
I've been watching those videos and enjoying them! The Southern Campaign is an excellent scenario to start with. It is much more manageable in size than the full campaign scenario, but still retains enough Formations to give you a good look at how the system works. Also, the initial starting point of the scenario is not as chaotic as some of the smaller scenarios that begin later on in the battle.
The first 4-5 days (turns) for the Americans are pretty desperate, and often the US player is simply trying to find something, anything to throw in the way of the Germans. Making the German panzers attack by using their Fire Events is one of the more effective tactics for the Americans. Since a unit is "Stopped" (which is not the same as "Finished", the differences are important and it can be difficult for new players to grasp the differences right away) after using both of its Fire Events, placing any kind of unit on the road in front of the German panzer divisions will keep them from advancing too far, too fast. Of course, most of the units you throw in front of the panzers will die (usually fairly quickly), but that is of less concern initially than just slowing down or stopping the German's drive westward. The big problem facing the American player, though, is a lack of units to throw in front of the panzers. Most of the early US reinforcements arrive from the north, and aside from potentially getting an Airborne division around Bastogne, sizable reinforcements don't show up in the south for several days.
Good luck with the scenario, and I'll be watching to see how it unfolds!
Hope u continue this . I've watched other BCS play throughs and didn't learn nearly as much as from u !
Thank you for the kind words! I am glad that the videos have been informative and helpful (and hopefully a little entertaining). Rest assured, this series is just getting started. There is A LOT more LB (and BCS) to come on this channel. I'm in the process of uploading an unboxing video on the brand new Panzers Last Stand, and hope to get the next LB playthrough episode uploaded this coming weekend. Stay tuned, and thanks again!
That was a great play through of an activation. I'm currently playing the "goose egg" Scenario from Last Blitzkrieg. I'm really enjoying the game and system. Looking forward to your next report on this,its helping me get the rules straight. Thank you for posting.
Glad you are enjoying it and it's helping. You will probably see from your game why my Germans are trying to take St. Vith ASAP. It is the single most important hex in the northern half of the map (and perhaps the entire map). Not letting the Americans develop any kind of defensive pocket around it is vital to keeping the German momentum moving westward. Because US reinforcements usually shut down the northern route, if the US can also hold on to St. Vith, the Germans have no path westward in the entire northern half of the map. "The Goose Egg" scenario is an excellent lesson in how the German advance can get derailed if the US can hold on to St. Vith for the first week of the campaign. Stay tuned to see if the Germans in my campaign can seize it quickly enough to prevent a goose egg from forming.
I so much want to get into this game. Thank you for helping and being so clear in your explanation, this is super useful to all of us beginners.
I'm very glad you are finding it helpful. That was one of my main goals. Knowing that new players will be watching, I've tried to not make rules errors, but small ones slip through the cracks sometimes. Fortunately, I believe I catch all of them in the editing process, and have added explanatory text to clarify and point out my mistakes. It's frustrating to see some of the simple mistakes I make during play, and learning to talk while playing is a skill I'm trying to improve. The v2.0 rules tweaked a few minor things, and it's hard to untrain your brain from the way you've been doing it for the past several years, but I think I've had enough experience with the v2.0 changes that I'm finally starting to internalize them, so those errors should continue to decrease as the playthrough continues.
If you have any questions (either on rules or strategy) as you watch the videos, don't hesitate to post them in the comments and I'll do my best to get you an answer. Thanks for watching!
Excellent replay. You provide great instructions for newbies and confirmation for those of us that already play the game. I very much enjoy this game and look forward to future videos on your campaign. One quick question: Are you keeping track of step losses off board or have you just not bothered placing numerical counters yet?
Thank you! I'm glad you are enjoying it. And since you are familiar with the game, you can help keep me honest if I mess up any rules.
I am a loss roster kind of guy. I'm planning on giving an end of turn summary on the state of the various units where I will show the rosters for both sides, but will also mention unit strengths on a case by case basis as I work my way through the turn.
Thanks for watching! More to come...
Nice job mate. Keep up the great work. Quick question - 4 your first activation isnt their a bonus on the SNAFU for turn 1? No biggies as you got a full activation in any case.
There's no "bonus" or special rules, per se, for the first turn. However, I think you are referring to the +1 SNAFU DRM the Germans receive on 16, 17, & 18DEC. I referenced this as the "Game Specific SNAFU DRM" to be consistent with the SNAFU DRM Chart, and continue to refer to this throughout the playthrough as "Game Specific" (in case you were wondering what that meant in all the other activations) for both the Germans and Americans, who also have a Game Specific DRM (-2 on the 16th and 17th). So for 18VG's first activation, their SNAFU DRM's were: +1 Fresh, +1 Game Specific, +1 Optimal Distance, -1 Crossing of Streams, -1 Tracks (Good Trafficability) for a net +1 DRM. As you'll see in the rest of the playthrough, I will list all the SNAFU DRM's as I make each SNAFU roll, so viewers can better follow along. I did not do that on that first activation because I was showing the chart itself and didn't want to obscure it with text.
One of the things I really, really like about BCS is that it does not require a bunch of special rules or exceptions to model various historical events. A game the size of LB has only 4 pages of game specific rules, which compares extremely favorably to ever other battalion level Bulge game I've seen. Just look at the number of exceptions and restrictions that GMT's new "A Time for Trumpets" needs for the first turn. If your rules require a lot of exceptions, then it might be time to consider rewriting your rules (I'm looking at you, "A World at War"...).
With a simple adjustment to the Game Specific SNAFU DRM (as well as each individual Formation's 2nd Activation number), you would be able to accurately model the 1940 France campaign without any need for a bunch of idiot rules, exceptions, or other artificial restrictions. Unfortunately, Case Yellow is too large to be a viable BCS title, but given infinite resources (or perhaps a digital game format), I think BCS would present that campaign better than other system to date.
Thanks for watching, and if you have any other questions, please don't hesitate to let me know!
Can see there's quite a difference between BbF and LB - the former felt way too "open" but with roads limiting your avenues of approach, in here it really feels like careful manouvering
The opening situation of the Bulge is an excellent showcase for the BCS' strengths. The emphasis on Formation integrity and logistics in BCS (both done with reasonably simple mechanisms) present a real challenge to players in Last Blitzkrieg (much more so than in either of the North African games).
@@thetabletopsedge I've never played BC, how does it compare to BbF / LB? Asking as Tobruk was always higher in my interest list then Kasserine - probably because I've played some games on the subject as a kid, and also some Polish troops (SBSK) were involved in Tobruk's defense...
@@przemekbozek BC falls right in between LB and BbF in many ways. I do think there is a lot of play value in the game, as it has 14 scenarios and they range in size and length from 2 turns and only part of 1 map up to 21 turns and all 3 maps. It was nice to see Operations Brevity and Battleaxe included, as well as Rommel's initial attempts to take Tobruk. All of these are pretty small scenarios, and while they don't give you a good look at the "big picture" BCS provides, they are great exercises in honing your skills at the details of Formation activations. For example, how best to attack entrenched defenders, how to sequence the movement and attacks of the various component battalions in a Formation, and how to maximize the combined capability of any Formation. They are small enough to be played to completion in a single evening's session. At the other end of the scenario spectrum is the Operation Crusader full campaign scenario. This uses all 3 maps and is 21 turns long (5 turns longer than LB). Even though it is 5 turns longer than LB, it plays to completion much faster because there are far fewer Formations on each side. There are some good special rules that provide some real historical flavor, too.
The two reasons BC doesn't see more time on my tabletop are: 1) the rules that no longer restrict MSR's to only roads (from the HQ to the CT) which undermines a lot what I think is what makes BCS so good, and 2) the general subject matter of the game. I've never been a big fan of the Desert War at the operational level. Crusader was such a chaotic and confused battle in which both sides made some pretty egregious errors, that I think it can be hard to game well. The Orders optional rules are mandatory in BC, and for good reason. Without them, you won't get anything remotely resembling the historical chaos. And for that reason, BC does not play as well solo as the other two games do. The bigger scenarios are meatier than BbF.
My logistical issues aside, the BCS holds up pretty well in this game. And since the Desert War is one of Dean Essig's favorite topics, the game is very well researched and it does provide a nice look at some of the less well known operations around Tobruk and the Libyan-Egyptian border in 1941. If you are a fan of the desert, it's probably worth a look, especially if you like BCS. For me, LB is definitely the best of the series so far, and I am very eager to see how Panzers Last Stand compares with the rest of the BCS games.
@@thetabletopsedge Wow, that's an excellent and very informative description - and comparison. Think you coule post them it on BGG as a review😁
I really like how BCS is solo-friendly (even when played multi-player it allows to muse on "next best move" together) and how the supply lines work, so LB will be a priority for now - I like Western Desert, but concern you've mentioned are quite important to me, plus I'm not a fan of big empty maps - I like them more crowded, like in LB..
@@przemekbozek Maybe I will post a little something on BGG. I agree, too, regarding the solo-ability of BCS. You raise a good point when you mention playing it "solo" with multiple players. I find many of Dean Essig's designs have a great educational aspect to them. One can really understand why certain things did and did not (or could not) happen in the historical battles by using many of Dean's games as "studies" rather than a mere game. If you like counter density, LB does not disappoint. The newest BCS game, Panzers Last Stand, appears to be comparable in size to LB. I'll have an unboxing video of it up shortly, but it looks like the counter density is comparable to LB.
Really nice work! Recommend - due to how big the map is - keep the SAME perspective from your camera. That is, either always face it north or always south. Not back and forth. (Think Football game).
I know exactly what you mean. Unfortunately, the size of the map is what is forcing me to film each half of the front from different angles. I would prefer to show everything from the "bottom" of the map (ie - with north at the top of the screen)as this would also keep the names of towns on the map right side up. Perhaps as I upgrade my equipment, I'll be able to set up something that will allow me to leave the camera with a fixed perspective as I move around the table as necessary.
In the meantime, I will try to remember to provide an "establishing shot" that gives a wider view of the table prior to each new Formation's activation, so that viewers will have a better idea of just where on the map the action is taking place when I use the standard, closer views during play. Thanks for the feedback, and know that I'm working on trying to come up with a satisfactory solution.
Thank you! This is super clear and helpful as I work to learn the game!
Glad you find it helpful! One of the goals of this series was to provide a VERY extended example of play to provide plenty of context for how the various mechanics in BCS work. The system itself isn't terribly complicated, but there are a lot of totally new concepts that can be hard to wrap one's head around. The investment in time and brain power to learn the game is worth it. Good luck! And don't hesitate to ask any questions you might have along the way. Thanks for watching!
The Objective Markers show an arrow that points to the Objective hex,
when placed rarely obscures other units.
The KTX markers are a good idea too.
Putting the small arrow on the OBJ markers was a great idea. But they still seem to always get in my way, and I'm pretty fanatical about keeping the map as clutter free as possible. So I've been using the KTX markers with some success. I've been meaning to spray paint some of them in an alternate color for use as Double OBJ markers. This will do away with having to use two physical markers. Just haven't had the time lately, but it's on my list of To Do things this month.
What’s a KTX marker for irl and where do I buy them, please?
We start our Last Blitzkrieg game tonight!
Do units on their "Move" side retain their Zone of Control? I was thinking that the first Infantry unit to move, II/295, could have flipped to Move side and made it all the way down the road to 43.09 or 43.10, and seal off all 106 units except the one in Bleialf. Safe Path should be 13 hexes (8 + 5).
Great Playlist!!!
The short answer is: sometimes. It depends on whether the unit has either an Armor Value (AV) or an Assault arrow (the white arrow) on its Move side. If a unit does not have an AV or an Assault Arrow, then it is Unprepared. Unprepared units do not exert ZOC's, do not get the benefit of Support, nor of Prepared Defense. Combined with the usual reduction in Action Rating (AR) of 1 when on their Move side, putting Unprepared units in close proximity to enemy units is generally something to be avoided. You are correct, though, regarding the movement possibilities of the 12VG infantry units, but the lack of ZOC's they would have due to being Unprepared on their Move side would fail to fully seal the pocket. So they have to do it the slower way, on their deployed sides.
Glad you are enjoying the series so far, and there's plenty more to come! Thanks for watching!
@@thetabletopsedge Excellent!! Neglected the “unprepared” aspect. So the 2nd Activation was a must.
Got the game for Christmas. Just finished the rules. Will start with Goose Egg scenario. Truly a very different style of game. Been an Essig fan for a long time.
It would be well worth your time to download the v2.0 Series Support Book located here: www.gamersarchive.net/BCS/BCSSupportv2.0.pdf
It is full of very useful info. Dean's Designer's Notes are incredibly useful for explaining just what the various mechanics in the system are trying to do, and why they are there. Lynn Brower has an excellent article that helps new players wrap their heads around the "Formation" and "Unit" concepts in BCS. My humble little article will hopefully give you a general framework for how to approach various aspects of the system, and there is a full color example of a complete Activation. After that are some handy tables and charts, including one with commonly forgotten rules.
If you are an Essig fan, I think you will be extremely pleased with LB. I would recommend also downloading the v2.0 series rules and charts. v2.0 cleans some things up, and makes some minor tweaks. It is one of the best rule books I've seen in a long, long time.
Good luck with your BCS adventure, and thanks for watching!
@@thetabletopsedge the Germans won Goose Egg on last turn when 7th Amd failed activation. I’m now playing Peiper and have run into an important question. Can’t find any info in the 2d ed rules. What happens when one attacks an “unprepared “ unit? It seems to me there should be some modification but I can’t find any. It just loses its support. It still maintains its combat strength with its AR! Have you faced this?
@@swankiestnerd8277 If you look at section 1.1d in the v2.0 Series rule book, you'll see (almost) all the effects of being "Unprepared". While there is no explicit combat modification for a unit being Unprepared, there are three effects that often modify the combat Net DRM. First, the Unprepared unit is ineligible for Support, which normally provides a +1 for combat. Second, the unit does not get the Prepared Defense benefits, which include not just the +1 DRM but also the ability to ignore a Situational Retreat. And third, most units' AR is one less on its Move side than its Deployed side, which is essentially a -1 DRM. Here's an example of how attacking an Unprepared unit can affect combat:
A US infantry battalion is defending in terrain on its Deployed side with an AR4, with Support and its Formation is in a Prepared Defense. This would give the unit a DRM of +7. This would be subtracted from the Attacker's total DRM to give you the net DRM for the Combat resolution. If that same battalion were on its Move side (Unprepared), in the same terrain, in the same Formation (still in PD) and attacked, it would have an AR3 and would get the +1 for Terrain, for a total DRM of +4. This would be subtracted from the attacker's total DRM.
If the attack was conducted by a supported and assisted AR4 German battalion with a Suppression barrage in a Double OBJ Zone, then the attacker's total DRM would be +9. Against the first US unit, it would only have a +2 Net DRM, requiring a 9 on the dice roll to take the hex, inflict a step loss, and avoid any losses. Against the Unprepared unit the attacker's net DRM would be +5, guaranteeing the hex is captured even on snake eyes, and requiring only a 4 to avoid any loss, and a 6 to inflict a step loss on the enemy. So as you can see, the Unprepared unit is at an appreciable disadvantage in combat.
Keep in mind, too, that an Unprepared unit is simply on its Move side. It's not moving in a strategic movement kind of mode. It's posture is much more focused on movement than combat, but that doesn't mean it is incapable of fighting. It isn't spending the time to coordinate with its AV support (so it isn't eligible for that), nor to dig in at all or establish fire control plans, etc. (so no PD). The reduction in AR represents the hastier nature of its movement (hence the higher MP's) and the consequent degradation of its combat capabilities.
Two other important things to remember about Unprepared units. They have no ZOC, which means any unit can simply move right past them. They also cannot attack or assist in attacks. It is generally a bad idea to have units Unprepared when they are in the vicinity of enemy units. It is extremely difficult for Unprepared units to hold any ground (as illustrated in my generic example above). Which means as the attacker, you really want to start retreating the enemy to get them on their Move side, which will make all the non-AV units Unprepared, and thus easier to keep pushing back.
Hope this helps!
@@thetabletopsedge Yes, I read 1.1d and got all that, but I didn’t notice AR difference (probably due to my 70 year old eyesight! LOL). The Ami unit involved was well behind the line in move mode due to set up instructions. The attacking VG unit had been very lucky with 2 activations and 2 12+ die rolls entirely obliterating an Ami unit leaving a large hole on a major road into the Ami rear toward Camp Elsenborn. Peiper is now firmly ensconced on the ridge and the 2d and 99th are in big trouble.
@@swankiestnerd8277 Definitely not a good situation for the Americans! Normally, armor isn't too hard to drive out of a defensive position, but Pieper has some high AV units that will be difficult for the American AV units to beat on the Engagement Table. One trick for defeating superior AV is to let the infantry do it. Move assault capable units up and simply attack the big panzers on the Combat Table with a supported and assisted assault (and don't forget the suppression!). If Peiper hasn't had the time, nor inclination, to go into PD (and he probably hasn't), then this is likely the best way to retake that ground and restore the situation.
Of course, all that depends on being able to get a good SNAFU result, and if Peiper is in the rear, the odds of a good SNAFU result are likely pretty low. Hope the 2ID and 99ID have some friends coming soon...
I very much enjoy this series of videos on TLB. The game is on my wish list, but I was told the learning curve is akin to climbing Mount Everest with one hand tied behind the back. How would you rate this game in terms of 1) complexity and 2) realism? Thanks for all your efforts 🙂
Sorry for the delay in getting back to you, I was out of town on vacation last week.
BCS is not a very complex system, but it IS a very different system from most traditional wargames. The perceived learning curve comes not from the actual complexity of the game, but from it's unique mechanics. On a difficulty scale of 1-10 (10 being most complex), I'd rate BCS about a 6. Realism is a tricky thing in wargames. None of them are very realistic. However, some designs are able to give you an idea of the kind of decisions facing historical commanders and have a certain "verisimilitude" that captures the feel of the subject matter. I think BCS does a pretty good job of putting the player in the shoes of a divisional/corps/army commander.
The logistics system is very streamlined, and presents the player with the decisions a divisional or higher commander would consider. You do NOT micromanage the supply system in BCS. That said, decisions you do make within the confines of the logistics system will have a sizable impact (often negatively) on your formations' performances.
I would recommend getting a copy of "Arracourt" if you are interested in trying BCS. It is a small, very manageable game, and is the latest released for the series. It has the v2.0 series rulebook, which is one of the best rulebooks I've seen in any game. It also has the Series Support booklet which is what I would read BEFORE trying to read the rules themselves. There are several good articles in there (including one by your humble correspondent) that will help the new player as they attempt to grapple with this new system. Of particular interest are the Designer's Notes by Dean Essig. He does a nice job of explaining what the various subsystems are trying to do and how they do it.
After reading through the Series Support booklet, dive into the rules. They are well illustrated, and contain many examples. I intended my playthrough series to be a kind of (very) extended example of play, where viewers could see the rule mechanics in action in a real game context. This playthrough was the first time I used the v2.0 rules, though, and there are some minor differences between them and v1.0 which took me a few episodes to fully internalize (old habits die hard). I try to explain any errors that I caught during the editing process, but I think a couple still slipped through.
Last Blitzkrieg is the best (by far) of the BCS so far. But it is out of print and can be hard to find (and often expensive when you do manage to find a copy). Arracourt is an excellent introduction to BCS, though, and is readily available (and also much less expensive). Panzers Last Stand is a nice, meaty late war Ostfront game, but because of some special rules it introduces regarding formation activations, I would not recommend trying to play that one until you are comfortable with BCS (but once you are, it is definitely worth a look).
Hope this helps, and if you have any other questions, don't hesitate to ask. Thanks for watching!
What do you think of the variable activation optional rules?
In a word, unnecessary. But I will expand on that a little bit. As for "2.5l Random Selection", I am adamantly opposed to it, especially in Last Blitzkrieg (LB). Because of the SNAFU penalties imposed by Mixing and Coordination, a random activation order can pretty much end the game on Turn 2 or 3 if the German draws poorly. They already have a big enough mess to try to untangle as is. The SNAFU table will create enough friction by itself, so introducing such an enormous amount of randomness as a chit draw to something as important as the sequencing of your Formation activations will lead to nothing but disaster.
"2.5m Modified Random Selection", while attempting to reduce the harm of a pure random selection, still has the same fundamental problem. Sequencing of activations by the player is a part of the BCS design. I understand that a major complaint some folks have about that is that the side that has a lot more Formations than the other will be able to wait to activate his Formations along a certain sector of the front until after his opponent is completely out of Formations, thus depriving him of any way to react as all of these Formations activate. I published my response to this in the article "A BCS Primer" under the "It's IGO-UGO, Not IW8-UGO" section that first appeared in Special Ops #8, and is now included in the BCS Support Booklet in Brazen Chariots and Panzers Last Stand. It'll take up too much room to repeat it all here, but if you check out the BCS page on The Gamers Archive website, you should be able to find the Series Support Booklet and read my reasoning in full.
"2.5n Activation Smoothing" is the one option I would consider. Rather than randomly determining which Formation must activate, it simply randomizes when the "extra" Formations will activate. The player still has control over the order in which his Formations will activate. The only question is whether he will activate 1 or 2 Formations before play switches back to his opponent. I would have to see if there are any unintended problems created by using this option, but I would definitely be willing to play with it to find out. There is a bit more work involved to implement this option, and I'm not yet convinced (but I could be) that the extra time and effort is worth it.
Overall, I would say that if you were thinking of changing up the activation rules a bit, I would go with 2.5n Activation Smoothing.
How do you keep track of your step losses as you didn't place any markers on the damaged units?
I use the loss charts that can be found on The Gamers Archive page, located here: mmpgamers.com/battalion-combat-series-support-ezp-13#LB
I really prefer as clean a map as possible (including stacks), and will happily accept some paperwork to remove things like step loss markers. If the game is small enough, like Baptism by Fire, I won't bother, but with a monster like LB, I definitely use loss rosters (same thing for games like Last Chance for Victory and the Great Campaigns of the American Civil War series).