Posted on 28 June 2019 at 21:53:28 GMT Hi All,
Some of you may be aware of the great new Unit Specific army lists by Mark Bevis available from Wargames Vault. There are only two at the moment but there are more planned and there is a request topic on the Pendraken Forum if you are interested in requesting a specific list.
If you have seen them, and looked at one, I would be interested in players opinions on a couple of topics that have arisen after reading through the two lists. This is in no way a criticism of Mark B's excellent work it's just a couple of questions that I would appreciate peoples opinions on.
OK firstly big thanks to Mark B for doing these, I think its a great idea and will prove to be very popular. I do have a couple of queries on the way the army lists have been constructed and would welcome input into how other players feel about certain aspects of the lists.
1. The huge amount of HQ's in the lists. Do players use an HQ at Company level in their games or do they play with an HQ at Battalion level. Wouldn't this slow the game up considerably with sometimes 3 or 4 times more activation rolls being needed.
2. Some of the units represented at Platoon level are, according to the original Micromark lists, included at that level even when they are listed as having 2 or 3 weapons/vehicles etc. Surely these should be added together and then become a Battalion level asset rather than add a Platoon at Company level.
E.g. In the German 29th Panzer Grenadier Division (BKCG1) the Divisional 129th Recce Battalions 3rd and 4th Heavy Armoured Companies are listed as having a Sdkfz 251/2 in each Company. According to the Micromark list each Company should have a Section of 2 x Sdkfz 251/2. Would this be better combining the 2 Sections into a platoon of 4 x Sdkfz 251/2 and have it at Battalion level.
I would be interested in other players thoughts on this as I personally have always considered the game to be at a scale of 4-6 vehicles = a Platoon in game terms.
Cheers
Richard P |