The game was finally started on Saturday. We're playing Scenario 2 of the original game, using the original rules, including all the optional rules listed in the rule book.

We were both VERY rusty, so it took about 2 1/2 hours just to set up, since we were having to check the rule book every five minutes to make sure we weren't planning anything that might end up being illegal. The first turn also took about 3 hours, for the same reasons. But the second turn only took about an hour, due to the fact that we were getting back into the groove again, as well as the fact that we were both running low on supply!

The Iranians have opted for an aggressive defense, starting with divisions in and around Tabriz, Rasht, Teheran and Mashad. After two turns, the Soviets have vaporized the division around Tabriz and have battered the division near Mashad pretty badly. But the Rasht division is still holding the Caspian coast road in pretty good order.

The B-52's have made their first flight and immediately targeted the airbase in Afghanistan, which is responsible for the Backfire sorties. Two hits inflicted. US Special Forces are in theater now, and will be wreaking havoc with the Soviets shortly. CV-63 is still skulking south of Diego Garcia.

The Soviets may have to take a breather to bulk up supplies again before making another push for Rasht, and then Teheran. 30 Game Turns is a LONG time. If the Soviets keep advancing at the rate they're moving now, it may be a short game...

One rule issue has popped up: The "Detection" rules on 33L-4 say:

"In order to attempt to detect an enemy unit, the enemy unit must meet the following requirements:
* It must be within the Detection Range of a friendly ground, air or naval unit.
* IMMEDIATELY prior to the detection attempt, the enemy must have moved OR the enemy unit must have used its ASM, Bombardment, Anti-Air or Sub-Surface Rating against the unit attempting to detect.
EXCEPTION: A unit may always attempt to detect an enemy unit with which it shares a hex, whether the enemy unit has moved or attacked or not, provided no previous detection attempt has been made at that range."

Fine. But in the "Naval-Naval Detection" example on 34R-2, there is a very clear description of a US submarine moving around, making detection attempts against Soviet surface unit that has NOT moved, has NOT fired, and which does NOT share a hex with the detecting U.S. unit. Not sure which is correct, the rule or the example.

Also, it's not very clear to us if an Air Unit, for example, can go out on a Strike mission against a Naval unit that has not yet been detected, detect it, and then immediately strike it. Other sections of the rules seem to indicate that you must have a target in mind when you launch a strike mission. If the unit has not been detected yet, then it can't possibly be a firm target. What happens if you don't detect the intended target? Are you free to just keep moving around hoping to detect something else to kill?

We instituted a house rule whereby an air unit cannot strike a naval unit that it has just detected. Effectively, we've created a "Recon" mission. So, the U.S. P-3 can, during the first Action Stage, go out and detect a submarine, but it cannot strike it. Another strike mission must be launched, either by another air unit during the same Action Stage or by the P-3 unit during the next Action Stage, when it can launch a valid strike mission against a known target.

We'll see how that works out.


Views: 497

Replies are closed for this discussion.

Replies to This Discussion

Interesting. I'm to start turn 7 of scenario 2 at our gaming session tonight. One problem I see is that if you use the optional rule about subs becoming undetected immediately upon being out of any unit's detection range then how could you launch a strike if using your house rule. We play that you can launch a strike mission against asn undetected unit and if you fail to detect it you have wasted 2 supply points. In our game Tabriz fell on the first game turn, Rasht has fallen and the assault on Tehran has begun. I'm bringing on the turn 6 reinforcements and considering launching gas attacks once they are in place next to Iranian cities. How are you handling the Soviet Afghan forces?? I've decided to go down and try to take the town along the coast in hex L09 (?) that has a port and an airfield. I've also decided to try and take Kernan by drawing a long supply line from supply source B. It'll take awhile but I can't see any other wayb of doing it. Keep up the AAR. We are probably the only people in the world playing this scenario right now!!
We're only on turn 3 and Scott (my Soviet opponent) has been using chemicals like they're air fresheners. We'll see if he regrets that decision a few turns down the road.

Regarding the optional Sub Detection rule: we're implementing it so that it does not become undetected as soon as it's out of detection range. We check during the turn's End Stage; at that time, if it is not inside the detection range of any enemy unit, it becomes undetected again. The rules state that it would remain detected for the entire game, which seemed unreasonable to us. So this way, you've got the full turn to target it once it's detected.

Regarding the Afghan Soviets, they've are moving directly west toward Kerman and, I suspect, a link up with the forces that are presently pulverizing Mashad. We'll see..

I'm going to see if I can get Scott to post his (commie) thoughts here periodically. Looking forward to your next AAR as well.

When playing the USSR I like to wait until I can use chemicals to gain key targets, since the effect of them lessens each round until 6 turns later. I then use the heck out of them...the column shifts are great..5 for the first three turns!


Your question seems to be in line with one I asked and had answered by Mark Herman a few years back in the CSW Gulf Strike folder.

Here is the answer:

"P3 patrols

I must confess that I found this last rapid thread interesting enough to go look in the rules. I have not played this game in more than 10 years, but when I saw this thread it did not seem to be the game that I designed.

As far as I can tell and I am sure some 'expert' will disagree with me, but it seems you can launch a P3 on a Bombardment strike, move near a submarine, detect it and attack it. The pre-requisite for an interception mission of a detected naval unit, does not hold for a bombardment mission as bombardment missions have no pre-requisites.

I do not recall ever having ruled otherwise, but you never know I'm getting old.

I hope that helps, Mark"

My question was message #408.
Well that sounds like the definitive answer to me. (I think that, after all these years, he's just about had it with people asking Gulf Strike questions!) So, I guess it follow that, if you don't detect the unit you're targeting, then you've wasted two supply points and have to go back home (as Steve mentions in his post). Sounds good to me.

On Monday night Tehran and Konark fell - a good turn for the Reds. Having Konark is especially sweet as I've got two airbases to fly in and I'll put 3 MIG 23's on intercept on one base and two MIG 23's and a Backfire on offensive on the other. The Yanks are going to have to expend a lot of energy getting rid of that threat. He's got an airbase established in the Horn of Africa but is not going to be able to bring the carriers up to sweep the mines in the Straights of Hormuz until he takes care of Konrak. I'm starting to build my supply line from the Mashad area down to Kernan. On the main front I'm going to be pushing him back towards Esfahan and he's not going to be able to stop that until the Americans get established on the operational map. I know that in the long run he'll be able to do so it's just a matter of how long I can delay him. I've a rules question. Assuming there are elite units stacked with and attacking with an artillery unit do you still get the elite unit troop quality modifier?? The rules say that when elite and line "troops" are attacking together you use the lower quality modifier. It doesn't seem to make sense that artillery would degrade the troop quality, especiaaly on defense. You could have an elite unit by itself get 3 columns on defense while an artillery unit would give you two columns meaning that having artillery in the battle would cost you a column if artillery are considered "troops". How do you guys play it??
Artillery could degrade the troops, never mind the troop quality, if those rounds start falling short because you got a bunch of draftees supporting the elites!

But seriously, I've always played it literally. Elite troops must be alone. I guess it's worth taking another look through the rulebook to see if there's any hint of an exclusion for support units.
Geoff and I have had a running debate about this for years...the rules seem to state that they loose elite status, but this doesn't make sense in my view. The way we have always played that only armored units and infantry units are used to determine troop quality.

BTW does anyone else read the rules, about special forces, to state that units can be eliminated during ambush and raid? I just do not see a detachment (9 men) being able to do this, 27 men for a raid. We have created a house rule limiting SF to only eliminating units that bombardment can. Thoughts?

I do love using SF to slow down attacking units, and of course to help with bombardment on key stacks. We always protect against raids, so it is not common that raids can be done.

Re: Troop Quality - I've reversed my position on the issue of whether or not support units affect "troop quality". We are now also playing that any unit with a parenthesized defense strength does NOT factor in to the troop quality calculation. As Scott (my opponent) pointed out, their parenthesized (1) defense factor does not even get counted when defending in a stack with a non-support unit, so why should they affect troop quality?

Re: Special forces being able to eliminate enemy units on a Raid - we're just leaving this rule alone. It's really kind of a long shot anyway. Not something that's going to happen often. I really don't like to tamper with the rules any more than necessary. But I understand your point.

On Special Forces..until we created a house was not uncommon for combat units to become eliminated do to ambushes. (We protected ourselves against raids, since all you need is an assault unit in the hex.) While the US player was using his SF detachments to delay USSR divisions, the USSR player would use his to delay the US brigades AND to catch damaged units trying to pull off the front line. It was this last option that always led to several eliminated combat units.
Geoff and I were playing Iraq's attack on the GCC this weekend. After a deep strike into Saudi they engaged US and GCC forces. Two divisions had become damaged, due to ambushes, 3 hits and 4. Then in combat they attacked using gas, and were hit with US ground support plus 1 hit from the combat. The Iraqi Divisions both ended up with 8 hits, and the next turn the US placed new ambushes and Iraq tried to pull her damaged divisions off the front lines. They hit ambushes with a 8 and 9 rolled, both divisions eliminated....this is not a abnormal occurrence. (Of course with a 30% chance of getting a hit, eliminating both divisions was real bad luck.)

David Potter
Mark look at the detection again..if the moving player moves into a hex with undetected units he can always attempt detection, provided no previous detection attempt has been made at that range!

"EXCEPTION: A unit may always attempt to detect an enemy unit with which it shares a hex, whether the enemy unit has moved or attacked or not, provided no previous detection attempt has been made at that range."



Help Center

Latest Activity

Wayne Rotella commented on Mark DAgosta's photo
16 hours ago
Mark DAgosta posted a photo

Land of the Two Rivers: Iraq War

Playtest map for upcoming game "Land of the Two Rivers", my first attempt at game design.…
Joe Admire joined Matt Severns's group


Buyin', Sellin' and good ol' fashioned horse tradin.......Can't find what you need? Go to the CSW…See More
Steve K commented on Steve K's blog post Games I'm Playing 2019
"Gaming Session in Cedar Rapids: June10-13. Pacific Tide (3rd US loss I have played!) The US Civil…"
Larry Banaszak is now a member of ConsimWorld
David Kazmierczak updated their profile
Profile IconMarek Dąbrowski, AJE SAKAMOTO and Nick Cartel joined ConsimWorld
Jim Werbaneth posted a blog post

Line of Departure at Origins!

For those of you who will be attending Origins this week, I will be there, and doing some…See More
Jun 10




CSW Related Links

Please be sure to check-out these CSW services.

© 2019   Created by John Kranz.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service