You are on page 1of 9

The following is a list of changes to Volcano Man’s F40 Alternate scenarios

*any questions or VP level balance suggestions should be emailed to me at*
The following optional rules are intended for use with these “Alt” scenarios:
Q: Why the aition of the Alternate Assa!lt "esol!tion r!le#
A: The reason is that with the McNamara based db, it was decided that the Alternative
Assault Resolution rule was necessary because of the use of many infantry units that now
have range 0 hard attack values. This makes the rule vital so that these units can be
historically weaker or stronger de!ending on their rating" in assaults against armor,
!illbo#es and bunkers. $ith this rule disabled as it was before" the range 0 hard attack
values for infantry are not used. The intent is that infantry units with higher hard attacks
can stand u! against armored assaults better than infantry with lower hard attack values.
%f course high or low assault factors also balance everything out.
!oo" out for those air stri"es# The !uftwaffe is a double edged sword now$ The most
powerful of its stri"es are the %e&&& medium level bombers and they are not &''(
accurate$ This should discourage )erman players from using them in “danger close”
situations when the target is ad*acent to friendly forces$ +u,-s are also no longer as
effective as a tactical nuclear bomb. they are very effective against armor but not so
much against infantry$
/rench infantry are no longer as vulnerable to fire but most of them are still relatively
wea" when it comes to assaults$ Try to pair them up with other infantry battalions0 AT
guns or armor companies to strengthen their ability to hold ground$ Place them in built up
areas as much as possible$
1elgians are very effective in assaults$ Pay attention to their strengths and wea"nesses$
Ad*usted allied artillery so that they have -2( firepower instead of the previous 2'( firepower 3in normal
and stoc"piled barrages4$
56cept for the %7 unit0 ad*usted the 89$)rossdeutschland formation so that its quality is 1 instead of A to
represent the fact that the formation was well trained0 but /rance :;' was its first combat action$
9aised /rench colonial and <orth African division quality by one level 3if they were = before0 now they
are >0 if > then now 10 and if 1 then now A 3?ouaves44 to represent the fact that these were some of the
best formations available in the /rench Army$
@lightly edited the A'2&2B'&B@tonneBAlt scenario to ta"e into account the drop in morale of the )erman
)= regiment$
Cpdated the )erman air availability rate from D'( to &'( to match their historical sortie rate and
>orrected the 1elgian T&2 light tan" speed value 3E' instead of &24$
Cpdated P=T file movement data so that the precise relationship between Trac"ed0 %alftrac"0 Armored
>ar and FotoriGed units is now more logical$ 1asically0 in cross country mobility0 it is now scaled so that
Trac"ed H %altrac" H Armored >ar H FotoriGed 3and Fotorcycle I 1icycle4$
>orrected an @@ PoliGei 9egiment unit that could arrive as reinforcements in the same he6 as an enemy
8nstituted JFc<amara D$& dbJ$ Kith the new changes to the rules for ranged fire0 the 9ange Fod value 3in
the P=T4 has been changed from D to &$2 and all vehicle and AT gun hard attac" values have been
decreased by about E2( 3-2( of previous values4$ This tones down the tan" on tan" L AT gun on tan"
combat a bit0 while at the same time ma"ing ranged fire 3particularly at a range of E he6es4 more effective$
@pecified a standard M'( <ight Fovement =isruption value$ <ow0 if you conduct non strategic movement
at night0 then there is a M'( chance that the moving unit will be disrupted in each he6 it moves into
3sub*ect to unit quality modifiers4$
5stablished a &( chance 31litG"rieg period value4 for engineer units to create 1un"ers in a T95<>% he6$
5stablished a E$2 hard attac" modifier for artillery units that fire at & he6 range$
>hanged the )erman s8) DD &2cm 3towed4 infantry guns so that they are no longer classified as heavy
artillery$ This is done to represent that these guns were specifically made to deploy quic"ly and were
relatively light guns$
Ad*usted the VP levels of the A'2&'B'&B>ampaignBAlt and A'2&'B'EB>ampaignBAlt campaign scenarios
based on feedbac"$ The VP levels are now easier for the /rench to get a Fa*or Victory at the low end0 and
easier for the )ermans to get a Fa*or Victory if they destroy large portions of allied forces$
>orrected P=T file so that motoriGed units are no longer able to enter Farsh he6es 3previously
Fotorcycle0 FotoriGed0 and Armored >ar0 unit types were erroneously allowed to enter such he6es4$
8nstituted Fc<amara database version E$E$ 8n this version artillery hard attac" ratings have now been
ad*usted slightly in a more logical manner 3and more consistent with Fc<amara:s values4$ )uns of N
&2'mm have a hard attac" of D 3instead of E4 and guns of H &2'mm 3that are not siege and pseudo siege
guns4 have a hard attac" of 2 instead of a mi6 of ; and 2$
@tandardiGed the stac"ing limits in the P=T files to be D2'3road4L&;''3nonroad4$ Previously the nonroad
stac"ing limit was &D''0 which was an odd number which restricted some infantry battalions from stac"ing
in one he6$
Ad*usted various artillery related P=T values$
@tandardiGed the Fud >ondition movement modifier values in the P=T files to be more severe on
mechaniGed units0 basically reducing their mobility in Fud so that the penalty for Fud movement is E6 the
@oft condition value0 rather than the old &$26 the @oft condition value$ N%T&: The intent is to further limit
mechani'ed movement in Mud conditions so that anything other than tracked vehicles are severely limited
in such an environment to the !oint that the user voluntarily limits the movement of tracked units in order
to kee! u! with the rest of his slower moving forces es!ecially wheeled vehicles".
>orrected )erman motoriGed artillery units to be type: FotoriGed instead of type: @oft %alftrac"$
)reatly edited the P=T movement values0 building on the changes made in previous versions$ There is
now a standardiGed approach to mechaniGed movement in urban terrain$ The approach is that any
mechaniGed unit must pay a large amount of FPs to move between urban he6es0 so that it ma"es it
impractical to enter cities with mechaniGed units unless you do so by using Travel Fode movement along
roads$ This means that city fighting will be very time consuming and costly to mechaniGed units0 since they
will be bogged down when moving from he6 to he60 where as regular infantry 3foot units4 can move quite
quic"ly in such environments$ This goes a long way to discouraging city fighting with mechaniGed and
motoriGed units which is an improvement over the old way0 which practically encouraged such unrealistic
)reatly ad*usted the A'2&2B'&B@tonneBAlt scenario based on %E% testing feedbac" and from additional
Added a unit component and artwor" for )erman @turm Pioneer units 3for @turm$Pio$1tl$;D in
>orrected the /rench Panhard armored car defense ratings$
>orrected VP levels in A'2&'B'&6B>ampaignBAlt and A'2&'B'EB>ampaignBAlt scenarios$
>hanged @turm$Abt$Ooch detachment names to their )erman names$
>hanged the %7 name of the )erman )= regiment by adding the P character$ The organiGation name was
not changes so as to "eep the same unit 8= colors$
>orrected P=T file Travel Fode costs on rail he6 sides$
Fade correction to BAlt P=T files so that foot units can move into rough terrain$
Ad*usted P=T file marsh terrain protection levels from E'( to Q&'( 3penalty4$ This was done to further
ma"e marsh terrain a “nogo” terrain type 3besides the BAltRs high movement modifier for marsh terrain40
since0 unli"e swamp terrain types which has thic"ly wooded areas and hammoc"s 3patches of dry ground40
there is absolutely no cover available in a marsh environment which is made completely of submerged land
with water growing vegetation$ A soldier in a marsh would be unable to go into the prone position without
lying under water so he would be restricted to "neeling at best$
1alanced the VP levels in the A'2&2B'&B@tonneBAlt scenario$
Ad*usted P=T movement values to solve the trac"ed vehicle versus wheeled vehicle mobility dilemma$
The dilemma is that wheeled vehicles offer high mobility on roads0 ma"ing them much faster than trac"ed
vehicles in this situation$ Trac"ed vehicles have high mobility in cross country where the wheeled vehicle
suffers$ <ow0 instead of wheeled vehicles being as mobile as trac"ed vehicles cross country0 wheeled
vehicles are more mobile when the stay on the roads and are less mobile when they are moving cross
country$ Trac"ed vehicles are superior in cross country movement$ This is also true for motorcycle and
bicycle units$ 8t is no longer possible to have a bicycle unit peddle at high speeds across the country side0 or
have a motorcycle unit cover great distances cross country$ This change also ma"es road *unctions and
highways much more vital since wheeled vehicle units cannot simply go cross country without sacrificing
time$ 8n desert environments the values differ0 wheeled vehicles still suffer compared to trac"ed vehicles
across open desert0 but not nearly as much as other environments$
@tandardiGed gun unit assault ratings 3as well as all roc"et artillery towed or otherwise4$ )un units
generally have lower assault ratings now so that they must rely on other unit types 3to stac" with them4 in
order to effectively defend against enemy assaults$ 8n other words0 unsupported gun units are *easier* to
overrun$ <otice that it says “easier” and not “effortless” S you will still need to devote an assault force to
the tas"0 so donRt e6pect to overrun such units with small reconnaissance units or things of that nature$ The
relative ease will still be dependent on the defense factor of the unit as well as the composition of your
assault force$ Antitan" guns will still utiliGe hard attac" values in the assault so you will generally be more
successful when you assault antitan" guns with infantry units0 not armored units$
>orrected )erman armored car assault ratings$ @omehow there was an error in the previous calculation
which caused them to be two times their correct value$ All other armored car assault values were correct$
The end result is that you should ta"e more care of your armored car units now and only use them to ma"e
contact 3not to bloc"0 hold or maintain contact with the enemy4$ @ome )erman tactics may not be valid
anymore0 such as using armored car units to race behind and hold an enemy unit in place after a
brea"through0 so e6ercise caution$ Armored car units should only be used to spot the enemy and to screen
your forces$ Trying to accomplish anything more will li"ely end up in their demise0 especially if they are
left ad*acent to enemy infantry who can usually ma"e short wor" of them in an assault$
>orrected all AA ratings$ There was a flaw in the calculation of the previous AA ratings and now the
corrected ratings are much more formidable than before0 especially for !AA guns$ This has a great effect
on game play since AA guns become more useful when used in their primary role instead of being used as
a front line unit$ /or the most part0 the VPs for AA gun units have increased dramatically because of their
corrected AA ratings$ Another aspect of this AA rating correction is that %AA guns 3high altitude guns4
have a reduced AA rating when compared with !AA guns$ This is due to the fact that high altitude guns
have a lower rate of fire and are primary used against carpet bombers 3high altitude level bombers4 and
reconnaissance aircraft 3which are also high altitude4$ 8n this regard0 carpet bomber and recon air units now
have an identical reduced defensive factor and the end result is that %AA guns are effective against high
altitude level bombers and high altitude reconnaissance aircraft but not very effective against low altitude
bombers and fighters$ As a side note0 the ;'mm 1ofors and the 7uad E'mm /!AO are positively deadly
against aircraft now0 seeing a E''( increase in AA rating# 1ig than"s to Far" @terner for pointing out this
9emoved the orphan )erman E&-$8nfanterie$=iv %7 unit from A'2&'B'&B>ampaignBAlt and
A'2&'B'&6B>ampaignBAlt scenarios$
@tandardiGed all supply unit ranges 3as per the recent changes to other BAlt campaign scenarios4$ @upply
depots are &2 3unchanged40 and all other supply units 3truc"s0 wagons0 mules0 air drop etc4 have a range of
2$ This was done to allow greater control of supply distribution for the mobile supply units$
>orrected cavalry unit defense values$
Ad*usted allied recovery ratings from E( to D( 3identical to a6is4$
Ad*usted )erman air availability from E'( to D'($
>orrected a calculation used to determine towe AT g!n defense$ The net result is a Q; defense strength
to all towed AT gun units$ <ow the average towe AT g!n 3between 2'mm to -2mm4 is &M0 which is the
same average defense of infantry$
@lightly ad*usted )erman ,,mm %AA34 unit quality to get more historical results$
>orrected /rench E2mm A> gun ratings and portrait 3previously 8 had it as an AA gun4$
@tandardiGed Pillbo6 and 1un"er defense and modifiers 3depending on the period and front of the war4 to
be consistent with 8P and Trench modifiers$ 1asically0 the Pillbo6 and 1un"er modifier is identical to
Trench0 but where they differ is in the defense value$ 8t ma"es no sense to have a 1un"er or Pillbo6 have a
modifier lower than the Trench modifier0 considering that a 1un"er is simply a Trench that has overhead
cover$ The Pillbo6 simply adds more protection to this concept$
>onverted /rench units bac" to their original quality$ Khy the sudden change in heartT 8nitially0 it was
determined that the Fc<amara based values would provide more power to /rench units and0 because of
this0 it was thought that the /rench would be too powerful for the )ermans to deal with$ %owever0 after
further testing it was discovered that the effect between the original quality and the quality reductions was
minimal and not required as once thought$ >hanges in other areas 3such as the Fc<amara db values and
P=T values4 nullified the need to reduce /rench unit quality levels any further but at the same time brought
out historical strengths and wea"nesses$ 8t is also best to "eep them at their original quality now and then
change it0 if need be0 later after thorough play$
5lite units such as the ?ouaves and >olonials are raised to 1 and the /oreign !egion is A$
9aised the quality of the 1elgian and =utch armies 3as a whole4 up one level$ The 1elgians were nothing
better than so much cannon fodder in the stoc" game$ <ow their regular troops are rated as = with reserve
formations as 5 3instead of 5 and /4$ 1elgian elite units are rated > with a rare few at 1$
>orrected an error in the formula used to determine hard attac" values for artillery units$ The previous
formula was slightly inconsistent with the way that the soft attac" values were calculated$ The correction
yields higher hard attac" values for most guns of &'2mm and greater caliber$ @ome guns0 particularly the
1ritish E2pdr /ield )un0 now have decent hard attac" capability to better help cause fatigue or disruption
to armored units0 especially in the early war period$
>hanged @turm$Abt$Ooch to !uftwaffe nationality$
Twea"ed /rench quality ratings one level lower than stoc" 3which was necissary given the overall increase
in their combat power and the change so that all A!T resolution optional rules are no longer required to get
historical results4$ 5lite units such as ?ouaves and >olonials remain at >$ /oreign !egion remains at 1$
The primary reason for this shift is their historical performance as a whole$ There are more factors involved
in determining /rench base quality than strictly whether they were trained regulars or not0 such as national
morale0 their general lac" of preparedness to meet this new form of warfare and the overall neglect of the
entire /rench military due to the Faginot !ine$ The Faginot !ine was more than *ust a wall. it became a
philosophy0 a theory0 a psychological crutch and especially a monetary drain on the rest of the Army$ All of
this caused neglect on the /rench Army as it became almost a secondary tool whose sole purpose was to
supplement the Faginot !ine$ All of these served to lower the general level of quality of /rench forces in
&U;' and arguably lowered it to a level below what can be considered the norm$
8n game play concerns0 it is easy to point to why it is necessary for the shift in /rench quality$ 8n some
stoc" scenarios the /rench start out either disrupted or with high fatigue levels 3and no losses4 or they have
low fuel status for no apparent reason$ This was done for play balance concerns because there /rench were
too strong in that particular scenario$ %owever0 the problem arises when you play a campaign that0 by its
nature0 cannot be tailored the way the sub scenarios are for balance$ Therefore0 all BAlt scenarios that have
/rench units that begin a sub scenario with both high fatigue and no losses or in a disrupted state with no
losses have been restored to their nondisrupted no fatigue state$ 8f a sub scenario requires tailoring then
this is a tell tale sign that something is not right with the VV1 and that the campaign itself will have a
historical outcomes$
Altered the quality of some 1elgian units from 5 to = 3)renadiers and >arabiniers4$
!owered the quality of 1elgian /orce O from 1 to > 3these units were far too effective before4$
Fa*or quality ad*ustments in the /rench Army$ There are several reasons for this0 but the most important
reason is that with the Fc<amara db the /rench unit ratings across the board are much better than the
standard values$ Kith this in mind0 having the /rench Army rated0 on average0 at > 3as it originally was4 is
now ahistorical0 because it allows them to be far more effective than they were$ A new level was needed$
@everal studies have been made since the war and most studies point to the same conclusion. the /rench
army was a far cry from what it was during Korld Kar 8$ The /rench was not poorly equipped per se0
rather the quality of its troops and of its leaders is what deteriorated$ 8 say this with caution$ The individual
man was not lesser0 certainly not$ 8t was that the training0 discipline0 morale0 cohesion and battle
preparation is what was severely lac"ing$ >omplacency too" a severe toll as too much emphasis was placed
on the Faginot !ine0 and the /rench army was regarded as a secondary force that would supplement the
fortress if0 by some miracle0 the line was ever breached$ The Faginot !ine was viewed as impenetrable to
the /rench high command0 the epitome of their application of the lessons learned from Korld Kar 8$ The
ma*ority of /ranceRs defense budget went to the constructing and maintaining this comple60 and it is easy to
see why and how the rest of the army suffered because of it$
The /rench officers in high command held a doctrine which was based on their Korld Kar 8 e6perience$
%owever0 completely un"nown to the /rench0 the )ermans too" great actions to avoid anything remotely
resembling to the type of war that occurred from &U&;&U&,$ The )ermanRs revolutionary new blitG"rieg
doctrine combined with /rench complacency and reliance on static defense was a lethal combination and
troop quality must reflect this$
Kith all of this in mind0 a new quality scheme was devised which0 as a rule0 would be one level less quality
level of what a Korld Kar 8 /rench army would have been rated: 958 (oreign )egion" 3140 >olonial R*+
not RM+," 3>40 ?ouaves 3140 Tir$ 3=40 1>P 3>40 9egular 3=40 9eserves 3540 /ortress troops 3/4$
Ad*usted )erman ,,mm %AA )un34 units 3the PG+gr units4 to represent the @dOfG halftrac" mounted
version 3half AA rating but soft halftrac" type for better cross country movement4$
!owered A6is recovery rate from M( to ;($
8nstituted the Fc<amara standardiGed database$ After years of research0 the unit ratings used in
TalonsoftRs old >ampaign @eries was ta"en and0 through a mathematical formula0 the data was converted
into a database relevant to the PanGer >ampaigns system$
Fany vehicles and guns were more or less the same ratings but where it differs is in the hard attac"
strengths of later war tan"s and the defense strengths of some units and the overall lower assault ratings for
armor 3ma"ing infantry more powerful assets0 vital for successful assaults4$ Fost of the deviation from the
stoc" values begins to occur in the middle and late periods of the war$ /or e6ample0 turretless tan"
destroyer vehicles are now almost impotent in assaults0 however they are stronger defensively$
%ere are a few observations from play testing 3general observations from several PG> titles4:
>ombat is now more of a ranged affair$ Artillery is no longer the indirect fire capable antitan"
guns that they were before. you had better chec" your firing unitRs hard attac" rating before you
waste it on a hard target$ 8t is better to conserve your artillery for infantry or light s"inned
vehicles instead of the habit of *ust bombarding everything you see 3which was a viable tactic
before4$ This contributes to bolster the strength and survivability of tan"s on the battlefield as a
whole0 ma"ing them really only vulnerable to air stri"es0 antitan" guns and other armor$
Also0 as a veteran PG> player0 you will have to unlearn a lot of things you may have grown
accustomed to doing$ Vne e6ample is with the new hard target halftrac"s defensive rating$ The
defensive rating is now at a realistic level to where mechaniGed infantry cannot feely go Gooming
around the battlefield in their armored shells when there is a presence of enemy armor or anti tan"
guns in the area$ 8 have witnessed many cases where mechaniGed infantry in the stoc" games were
left in their halftrac"s to suffer fewer casualties0 or where someone used them as a vanguard for
their forces$ Khile it is still possible to remain in T mode for armored protection0 you will have to
ta"e more into consideration such as air stri"es or AT gun ambushes$ An entire column of
halftrac"s can now be totally obliterated 3along with the infantry inside4 if a careless player
advances without reconnoitering the area first$ This is pretty accurate considering that up to ten
troops were carried by each halftrac" as well as two crew members$ @o0 for every ten men
eliminated in a volley on a T mode mechaniGed infantry unit0 it would be roughly one halftrac"
"noc"ed out$
That said0 "eep in mind that there should be no direct comparison between infantry carried by hard
target vehicles 3hard halftrac"s4 and infantry carried by soft target vehicles 3motoriGed0 bicycle0
motorcycle0 cavalry etc4$ The defense ratings are not directly comparable because they are of two
different target classifications$ @o0 a motoriGed unit might have a higher defense rating when in T
mode than a hard halftrac" unit does0 but the motoriGed unit is a soft target which is e6tremely
vulnerable to any weapon on the battlefield 3especially artillery4$ >onversely0 a mechaniGed
infantry unit in0 hard target vehicles 3halftrac"s40 are only vulnerable to certain types of weapons
of the armored piercing variety$ )enerally spea"ing0 halftrac"s provide more protection to the
infantry in artillery stri"es than a motoriGed unit$ @o0 truly0 T mode halftrac" infantry and T mode
motoriGed infantry will fare differently depending on the circumstances$
Antitan" guns0 for the most part0 are much more powerful now and have longer ranges$ 1ut by
the same to"en0 they are also more vulnerable to artillery stri"es and are almost completely
impotent against infantry 3e6cept for a select few antitan" guns who are now also useful against
infantry as well4$
Assault guns 3A)s4 and tan" destroyers 3T=s4 are now very anemic in the assault category$ This
is primarily due to the fact that they have no turret and must pivot steer in order to aim their
weapons systems$ This ma"es them e6tremely vulnerable to infantry assaults$ Oeep this in mind0
as you would do better to thin" of tan" destroyers and assault guns as “armored self propelled anti
tan"Linfantry guns”0 which0 in all actuality0 is what they were$ 8t is best to either pair these units
with an infantry component or use them to attac" units at a standoff range$ 1uilt up areas 3such as
forests and cities4 will almost totally require T=Rs and A)Rs to remain with infantry since they
will be unable to use their standoff range$ And you can all but forget about using them to assault
those stac"s of disrupted and isolated enemy units to get those easy "ills$ Also0 in many cases0
some T=s are very lightly armored now$ This is especially true for open top or open rear tan"
destroyers$ These should e6clusively be used at standoff range and under cover if possible$ 8n all
practical terms0 most of these lighter armed vehicles were intended to ta"e on wea"er tan"s$ 8n
many cases0 if you have a tan" destroyer unit "noc"ing out your tan"s you have one of two
choices: close the gap and ta"e the fight to them or send in your infantry$
8nfantry have now gained a greater importance because the overall reduction in the assault
capability of most armored vehicles will leave the ground ta"ing to infantry and infantry L armor
teams rather than it being possible to ta"e ground with a large quantity of tan"s as it was before$
Armor is also vulnerable to ambushes by antitan" guns so in many such cases the infantry will be
the best tool for ta"ing out these antitan" gun units$
As the )ermans0 use your Pioneers as often as possible in assaults$ Wou will find0 for the most
part0 that )erman armor and infantry can ta"e large casualties in assaults if you are not careful$
Khere their real strength lies is in their direct fire effectiveness$ Vften though0 the )ermans will
have plenty of firepower but continuous assaults will realistically grind them down$ That said0 the
)ermans should utiliGe their Pioneers in assaults to ma"e such assaults more effective 3and lose
less troops in the process4$ As the 9ussians0 you will find that the role is reversed. @oviet troops
are generally not very effective in direct fire but they are very effective in assaults$
@pecial note must be mentioned about bun"ers$ 8n the past artillery was somewhat effective
against bun"ers but now they are not$ Wou will find that using your AT guns and tan"s0 mortars
and aircraft are rightfully the best units to use against them$
@tandardiGed all artillery of caliber &2'mm and higher as “heavy artillery”$