Home Forums Modern Cold War Commander scaled for 1:1 actions?

This topic contains 11 replies, has 7 voices, and was last updated by Altius Altius 5 years, 1 month ago.

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #5050
    Sparker
    Sparker
    Participant

    Dear All,

    I’d like your opinion on a Cold War Commander (CWC) rules scaling issue please?

    I’ve been seeking a good set of Modern/Cold War Gone Hot set of rules to use with 15mm figures, based on a 1:1 AFV and squad of infantry figure scale.

    Over the years I’ve tried various modern rules, CWC, Challenger 2000, WRG, FEBA, Contact!, and various private adaptions of both Rapid Fire! and Flames of War. I’ve also had a good read of, but not played, Fistful of Tows, and, most recently, Sabre Squadron. It may be that with the advent of FOW’s Fate of a Nation, FOW is the way to go in terms of popularity…But of all these I have found CWC the easiest to use…

    But as I said I like my rules to be 1:1, whereas CWC is essentially built around each model representing a platoon, hence the multiple attacks possible. I realise that they claim to be used for 1:1 straight out of the box, but it still seems odd to have a single tank firing 6 times at an opponent before it gets its retaliation in…So here’s my questions for you:

    How would it be if the rules were used as is, but applied to individual AFVs or infantry squads, but the ‘attacks’, and ‘hits’, are reduced proportionally? The value given in the stats is divided between the number of constituent AFVs or squads to give an individual value for ‘attacks’ fired and ‘hit’s absorbed?

    For example, in the data section a Chieftain Mk xi platoon gets 6 ‘attacks’, and for the sake of argument, can absorb 6 ‘hits’. So each individual Chieftain in that Troop of 3 now has a stat value of 2 ‘attacks’ and 2 ‘hits’ (Number from original stats/number of elements in the platoon: 6/3=2). This needn’t slow down play too much, and doesn’t alter the overall balance between firepower and armour protection, but does allow a more granular approach for larger scaled models. As an example, our Troop of 3 x Chieftains decide that 2 will fire at the halt at oncoming T-64s, whilst one will retire to the Troop’s next fall back position. The Brit player therefore has 2 + 2 = 4 attacks to roll against 1, 2 or upto 4 oncoming T64s. Each of these T64s that are hit rolls its retained ‘Save’ value, but any unsaved strikes count off against the individual T64’s ‘hits’ value, which will have been reduced from, say, 5 to the divisor of that platoon’s original strength, rounded up. So a ‘HITS’ value of 2 if in a platoon of 3.

    1. How would this affect Comamnd and Control? Apart from allowing greater granularity in detaching sub-platoon elements, I don’t think there would be any effect – Commanders would still give, and fail, orders by platoon of 3 to 5 elements. Or have I missed something?
    2. Less controversially I hope, for 15mm scale convert all distance values from Centimeters to Inches.

    Looking forward to your thoughts and critique…

    • This topic was modified 5 years, 2 months ago by Sparker Sparker.

    http://sparkerswargames.blogspot.com.au/
    'Blessed are the peacekeepers, for they shall need to be well 'ard'
    Matthew 5:9

    #5059
    Ivan Sorensen
    Ivan Sorensen
    Participant

    I’m only passingly familiar with CWC but if the standard rules assume say 4 tanks firing at 4 tanks, in theory, you should be able to employ them for 1 tank firing at 1 tank.

    The biggest issue is that a tank will tend to either be “okay” or “burning” with not a lot inbetween, whereas the accumulation of hits work better for a platoon that will suffer degradation in fighting ability. That may not be an issue though if you are okay squinting a bit 🙂

    As far as 15mm goes, just keep the distances the same, unless you are playing on a small table. It’ll feel like a totally different game if you do and it’ll give a better impression of weapo nranges.

     

    Am I right in assuming you want infantry mounted in squads and individual tanks, rather than individual infantry?

    Nordic Weasel Games
    https://sites.google.com/site/nordicweaselgames/

    #5318
    Drang
    Drang
    Participant

    I’m not sure that the CiC command rules really make sense on such a small scale.

    The Nefarious Fu Manchu....In SPAAAACE

    #5390
    Sparker
    Sparker
    Participant

    Thanks guys. Yes I think I will base my infantry on squad bases a la FOW to provide flexibility. You both make good points about the C2 and the lack of variation in combat results at a smaller scale….I guess the only answer is playtesting!

    http://sparkerswargames.blogspot.com.au/
    'Blessed are the peacekeepers, for they shall need to be well 'ard'
    Matthew 5:9

    #6121

    Graham Knight
    Participant

    Well I have played at squad level and it seems to move OK  – You just have to think about your 6 shots being the effect of the various bits of kit designed to get a first strike.  The other thing that you might think about is the Future War Commander adaptation for 1:1 skirmishing. Maybe with a little re- engineering it might work for moderns.  That said I play Force on Force, so fire team against fire team and these work fine for Vietnam using 15mm .

    I have just invested in some 28mm Kit to lend serious argument to a Platoon of 21st Century US infantry 1:1 and at platoon level.  Their opposition are in possession of T90s, BTR80s and BMP3s.  These may make the Table for Force on Force, but I am beginning to think that they will be better suited to playing outside in the garden. The closer I get to 60 the more I seem to regress to the fun games with Airfix 54s, digging foxholes in the lawn with our fingers.  Its just that the toys are rather better painted and rather more expensive and sophisticated these days.

    Graham

    Delhi

    #6137

    steders
    Participant

    but it still seems odd to have a single tank firing 6 times at an opponent before it gets its retaliation in

    I never looked at it as each tank firing 6 times but just that the ‘unit’ has a good gun, the number of dice rolled reflect this effectiveness. The problem will come when you look at IFVs and lighter tanks. They only have a couple of dice anyway, how will you reduce the number they roll?

    We have played 15mm BKC and CWC with each vehicle on a 1:1 basis and it still works.

    #6227
    Sparker
    Sparker
    Participant

    Thanks Graham and Steders, I hadn’t looked at it that way….will have a think and a few dry runs!

    http://sparkerswargames.blogspot.com.au/
    'Blessed are the peacekeepers, for they shall need to be well 'ard'
    Matthew 5:9

    #6479
    Altius
    Altius
    Participant

    I’ve played a lot of games using FWC’s skirmish conversion and I happen to like it. It works just fine for modern combat also.

    Where there is fire, we will carry gasoline

    #6607

    Mr. Average
    Participant

    FWC Skirmish should scale pretty well, but at that level my personal preference is Force on Force for modern actions.  FWC/CWC is my preference for large-scale combat – battalions, divisions, etc.

    #7110
    Sparker
    Sparker
    Participant

    Well just a brief update. Solo playtested my CWC 1:1 adaptions a few times this week, and they seemed to work pretty well, albeit purely armour v armour. As you predicted, there were some C2 issues, and I think I will have to provide NATO platoon level ‘Combat Elements’ with their own commands, whilst the Sovs will have to get by with Company command teams. But all reasonably historical to my mind, and a great excuse to get more exotic kit out on the table! Next step is some all-arms solo playtesting, and then to inflict it all on someone at the club. Will probably be a while, but in case anyone is interested will raise a separate post once there is anything to update.

    Thanks again!

    http://sparkerswargames.blogspot.com.au/
    'Blessed are the peacekeepers, for they shall need to be well 'ard'
    Matthew 5:9

    #7534

    Graham Knight
    Participant

    Sparker

    That would be the way of it for CWC. Certainly the illustrations in the book tend to give the command at a higher level for Soviet Style armies at Battalion level with the NATO A grades getting company level command elements.

    Graham

    #7564
    Altius
    Altius
    Participant

    You really have to do it that way, with the lower command ratings of the Soviet-bloc commanders and Rigid Doctrine rule. I also like to use the Fixed Formation rule, although that one’s optional.

    Where there is fire, we will carry gasoline

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.