The One Hour Skirmish Wargames rules book doesn't get enough love IMO. Thanks to your videos giving it a spotlight, I'll be putting in an Amazin order soon. I hope you do more videos using the rules.
As a VERY longtime wargamer, I can see that One Hour Skirmish games are perfect for real-time videos -- and your production here is first rate. The use of commentary, multiple camera angles and card graphics are outstanding. I have had some skepticism about OHS games as they lack the "granularity" of other period-specific rules - but productions like this are beginning to win me over. (and I'm sure the home rule possibilities are endless). Well done.
The priest at my church is the son of one of those paratrooper bazooka guys from this scenario. He has some amazing stories to tell about this battle. His dad got a Distinguished Service Cross and five Purple Hearts during the war if I recall correctly.
@@KingGhidorah_ John Bolderson fought in the battle. John Jr is the priest I know. John Sr got a Distinguished Service Cross for his valor at La Fierre Bridge.
Because of this channel I bought the one hour skirmish ruleset. Want to try it with ACW. I love that I now have this and little wars to paint models to. Keep it up
Just noticed the 82nd and 101st card decks. Where did y'all get those? These episodes were an outstanding example of a mini campaign for One Hour Skirmish Wargames.
Great content so far, really enjoying your channel. Sometimes the sound is mono. Is this a conscious decision? Or something you might fix in future videos?
Well done etc. Germans had a mortar, could they not have dropped smoke just across the bridge? Blind the 57mm and rush across then peel to the side to try and clear the paratroopers?
I really like the opposed card draws in this - looks like a simplification and blend of Arc of Fire and Fireball Forward. In the Fireball Forward Scenario I don't remember the bridge being either mined or blocked (?) and the ability of the 57mm gun to get a round off was limited. So, though not easy, if the Germans are able to get a base of suppressive fire, then the tanks are worthwile as a mobile wall/machine gun bunker. I believe the FF scenario also has a potential German sniper or MMG off table that can be used to suppress too. I think the defense though successful, was a lot harder and the full companies that the 91st threw at them would wear the US down signifcantly and they would be hellishly short of ammo. In the actual battle did any Germans actually get across the bridge?
No. That is entirely dependent on the tactical situation. My MOS was 11H so my perspective is based on experience. The mistake the German players made was bunching up where the mortar could paste them.
@@jacquesstrapp3219 exactly when would you lead with Tanks in any environment other than a wide open rolling plain with inhibited line of sight? You wouldn’t in wooded terrain. You wouldn’t in a BUA. You wouldn’t in a defile. You wouldn’t in a situation where you suspect there are anti tank assets that have yet to be revealed. So where else would you lead with armour? My perspective is as a 33 year veteran MI E9 (Artillery)
@@CheckYourLeaderTV I think you just answered part of your question. As an artilleryman, did it ever occur to you that advancing closely behind smoke and a rolling barrage might be another time when tanks would lead with mech infantry close behind? How about advancing under heavy enemy artillery? How about when attacking bunkers defended by automatic weapons? How about advancing across the desert where there is no cover for infantry? (as they did in the Gulf War) Have you never read ATP 3-90.1? How did a man as unimaginative and doctrinally ignorant as you ever make E9?
@@jacquesstrapp3219 what your describing is not ‘leading with armour’. That’s leading with prepared suppressive fire from indirect fire support,.. and I’m sure you know it. To lead with armour is just that. The have tanks leading a push. Which is suicidal (as the Russians and Ukrainians are discovering) in anything other than vast open terrain with inhibited LOS where tanks can use their speed, mobility excellent armament and sensors (the latter which are seriously only ‘excellent’ post 1960s). In the scenario above there was no preparation by indirect fire assets or direct fire assets for that matter. It’s miraculous the tanks were not clobbered by Bazookas earlier! To lead an assault with tanks is ridiculous as they lack the ability to winkle out a well concealed individual that can reduce a very expensive tank to scrape metal with an improvised AT weapon let alone a sophisticated ATGM or RPG. Even with predatory indirect and direct fire in anything other than exposed terrain you would not lead with armour, and only then would you do so because you want to cover an open killing ground rapidly. Tanks don’t lead into close terrain, complex terrain or BUAs. Why? Because they are VULNERABLE to infantry AT \ AA weapons. As for bunkers? You lead with sappers / engineers against fixed defences! This is real rookie Lt type stuff!!! And your personal insults don’t aid your arguments at all. To the contrary they undermine them. As a combat veteran with over 33 years experience and a former instructor at ADFA (the Australian Military Academy), Senior Instructor at our NCO Academy, RSM (CSM) of the Australian School of Artillery and military mentor advisor to ANATAG ( NATO) I’ll happily stack my credentials against yours. So again,.. to lead with tanks in assault in any situation other than across open terrain THAT HAS BEEN PREPARED with Indirect fire support and cleared by Engineers is inviting disaster. But don’t take my word for it, simply look at the current Ukrainian Spring Offensive.
The bulk of the panzers were thrown at the British and Canadians. It's the reason it took so long to break out. I have every respect for the Americans but, at times, Hollywood tends to show less respect to Americas allies,
This game system looks terrible. Mortars brewing up two tanks is just goofy enough to steer me wide of these rules. I'll stick to Battleground WWII, Blitzkrieg Commander IV, and Chain of Command.
When you're the only tanks on the board, that's still an advantage.
The One Hour Skirmish Wargames rules book doesn't get enough love IMO.
Thanks to your videos giving it a spotlight, I'll be putting in an Amazin order soon.
I hope you do more videos using the rules.
As a VERY longtime wargamer, I can see that One Hour Skirmish games are perfect for real-time videos -- and your production here is first rate. The use of commentary, multiple camera angles and card graphics are outstanding. I have had some skepticism about OHS games as they lack the "granularity" of other period-specific rules - but productions like this are beginning to win me over. (and I'm sure the home rule possibilities are endless). Well done.
The priest at my church is the son of one of those paratrooper bazooka guys from this scenario. He has some amazing stories to tell about this battle.
His dad got a Distinguished Service Cross and five Purple Hearts during the war if I recall correctly.
What's his name?
@@KingGhidorah_ John Bolderson fought in the battle. John Jr is the priest I know. John Sr got a Distinguished Service Cross for his valor at La Fierre Bridge.
Because of this channel I bought the one hour skirmish ruleset. Want to try it with ACW. I love that I now have this and little wars to paint models to. Keep it up
Fantastic, fun and interesting video. Keep up the great work.
Great video - love that you are using OHSW, the game is nicely done and easy to follow.
Great little table with the end of the narrow causeway represented; not an easy thing to advance through a choke point like that
Yes, we have run this several times and Germans have only won once.
Glad I found your channel. Loving the Band of Brothers tribute and the rule set seems great, going to buy a copy off Amazon. Great work guys..👍
Just noticed the 82nd and 101st card decks. Where did y'all get those?
These episodes were an outstanding example of a mini campaign for One Hour Skirmish Wargames.
Loved it looked so fun and for sure entertaining!!!
Love the total Band of Brothers homage in the intro!!
I see bold gambles, high stakes play, cards and brutal commentary. Now where have I seen this before? :) A nice time was had by all.
I can't wait for you guys to show what you're cooking up with LittleWarsTV. Been watching all those guys for years.
Such a fun video. And what a great group.
Great video keep it up 👍👍🇺🇸
? Who DOESN'T love old French tanks?!?
Another great video, keep it up. Regards Lexi
these work well and look a good laugh. Another cracking game :-)
Great content so far, really enjoying your channel. Sometimes the sound is mono. Is this a conscious decision? Or something you might fix in future videos?
Ooof lost both tanks to a mortar, that's rough!
Where are you guys in Virginia? I wanna come play!
Very true, all the main German armour ie tigers was facing the British and Canadians around caen.
Shouldn't have bunched up on one side. That made a perfect mortar target.
Well I stand corrected from my previous statement. 😂😂
Have you got the OOB band stat sheets for this
I really like the commentary; different. But you need cool names like Vic Romano and Kenny Blankenship...
A fun game, great terrain and figures. I thought the video was spoilt by the sound quality and the irrelevant jokey chatter by the two 'commentators'.
This was so fun I bought the rules.
Did you guys have a sexy paratrooper model on the table? You can see it at 11:05
Yes, that is the Jane US paratrooper figure from the Hot and Dangerous series by Warmers Studio
Well done etc. Germans had a mortar, could they not have dropped smoke just across the bridge? Blind the 57mm and rush across then peel to the side to try and clear the paratroopers?
Yes, they never did use their mortar.
@@BernardK They did use the mortar once. Smoke would have been a good idea though.
Like that mortar fire.... mortars kill a LOT of things... even in Ukraine today
Hold their own!! Come on that is super generous. It was a bloody slaughter for the Germans.
I really like the opposed card draws in this - looks like a simplification and blend of Arc of Fire and Fireball Forward. In the Fireball Forward Scenario I don't remember the bridge being either mined or blocked (?) and the ability of the 57mm gun to get a round off was limited. So, though not easy, if the Germans are able to get a base of suppressive fire, then the tanks are worthwile as a mobile wall/machine gun bunker. I believe the FF scenario also has a potential German sniper or MMG off table that can be used to suppress too. I think the defense though successful, was a lot harder and the full companies that the 91st threw at them would wear the US down signifcantly and they would be hellishly short of ammo. In the actual battle did any Germans actually get across the bridge?
Ben and Austin shouldn't feel too bad. We have run this scenario several times and the Germans were only successful once.
As soon as I heard “lead with tanks…” I knew this would end badly. Never lead with tanks in such a scenario (added for clarity)
No. That is entirely dependent on the tactical situation. My MOS was 11H so my perspective is based on experience. The mistake the German players made was bunching up where the mortar could paste them.
@@jacquesstrapp3219 exactly when would you lead with Tanks in any environment other than a wide open rolling plain with inhibited line of sight?
You wouldn’t in wooded terrain. You wouldn’t in a BUA. You wouldn’t in a defile. You wouldn’t in a situation where you suspect there are anti tank assets that have yet to be revealed. So where else would you lead with armour? My perspective is as a 33 year veteran MI E9 (Artillery)
@@CheckYourLeaderTV I think you just answered part of your question. As an artilleryman, did it ever occur to you that advancing closely behind smoke and a rolling barrage might be another time when tanks would lead with mech infantry close behind? How about advancing under heavy enemy artillery? How about when attacking bunkers defended by automatic weapons? How about advancing across the desert where there is no cover for infantry? (as they did in the Gulf War) Have you never read ATP 3-90.1? How did a man as unimaginative and doctrinally ignorant as you ever make E9?
@@jacquesstrapp3219 what your describing is not ‘leading with armour’. That’s leading with prepared suppressive fire from indirect fire support,.. and I’m sure you know it. To lead with armour is just that. The have tanks leading a push. Which is suicidal (as the Russians and Ukrainians are discovering) in anything other than vast open terrain with inhibited LOS where tanks can use their speed, mobility excellent armament and sensors (the latter which are seriously only ‘excellent’ post 1960s). In the scenario above there was no preparation by indirect fire assets or direct fire assets for that matter. It’s miraculous the tanks were not clobbered by Bazookas earlier! To lead an assault with tanks is ridiculous as they lack the ability to winkle out a well concealed individual that can reduce a very expensive tank to scrape metal with an improvised AT weapon let alone a sophisticated ATGM or RPG. Even with predatory indirect and direct fire in anything other than exposed terrain you would not lead with armour, and only then would you do so because you want to cover an open killing ground rapidly. Tanks don’t lead into close terrain, complex terrain or BUAs. Why? Because they are VULNERABLE to infantry AT \ AA weapons.
As for bunkers? You lead with sappers / engineers against fixed defences! This is real rookie Lt type stuff!!!
And your personal insults don’t aid your arguments at all. To the contrary they undermine them. As a combat veteran with over 33 years experience and a former instructor at ADFA (the Australian Military Academy), Senior Instructor at our NCO Academy, RSM (CSM) of the Australian School of Artillery and military mentor advisor to ANATAG ( NATO) I’ll happily stack my credentials against yours. So again,.. to lead with tanks in assault in any situation other than across open terrain THAT HAS BEEN PREPARED with Indirect fire support and cleared by Engineers is inviting disaster. But don’t take my word for it, simply look at the current Ukrainian Spring Offensive.
The bulk of the panzers were thrown at the British and Canadians. It's the reason it took so long to break out. I have every respect for the Americans but, at times, Hollywood tends to show less respect to Americas allies,
This game system looks terrible. Mortars brewing up two tanks is just goofy enough to steer me wide of these rules. I'll stick to Battleground WWII, Blitzkrieg Commander IV, and Chain of Command.
I do like me some old French tanks. Just maybe not in 1944.