Home Forums Modern FiveCore Brigade Commander

Viewing 27 posts - 121 through 147 (of 147 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #19614
    Just Jack
    Participant

    Hey, bite your tongues about Team Yankee/Red Storm!!!  If you don’t believe one US company could take on two Commie regiments, then you must be a…  Well, you know 😉

    Yes, I’m back home and getting caught up.  I picked up the rules this evening, need to get them printed.  I’m loving the rules and want to get them on the table; what I’m worried about is the fact I’ve got two WarPac forces set up, and after reading all Jozi’s batreps I’ve really got a hankering for some NATO vs WarPac fights.  Which means I’ve still got quite a bit of work ahead of me…

    I was also daydreaming today about future campaigns, specifically:

    To continue Kampgruppe Klink using Company Command, through France, North Africa, Russia, etc…  From the beginning I’ve had it in my head that the KG will have various commanders, the LtCol Klink would not last the whole war, and after I did up the OOB for France I had decided to promote Klink to Colonel and have him leave the KG, with Schultz being promoted to LtCol and taking over command.  So that was already my plan, here’s where the daydream comes in.

    Col Klink is brought to OKW or OKH and participates in the planning for Barbarossa, and when the time comes he is given command of a Panzer Regiment, and leads it into action in June ’41.  Which I then pick up some 3mm PicoArmor for and play out the Eastern Front with Brigade Command.  There could even be overlap between the two campaigns when the (former) KG Klink switches to the East Front and gets attached to Colonel Klink’s regiment.

    Pretty cool, eh?

    Or I could do it using 6mm Ros Heroics stuff; WAR PANDA, if you’re out there, e-mail me!  You need 6mm stuff for Brigade Command, and I do too, so you need to swing by Ros Heroics in Jolly Old England and pick some stuff up for us; the reason is, otherwise it costs you FORTY PER CENT OF YOUR @#$% ORDER for shipping.  I’m just joking.  But not really (if you’re in the UK).

    V/R,
    Jack

    #19615

    I am browned off that, for some reason or another, the Wargames Store isn’t accepting my credit card.

    I am rebasing by Big Red and Great Blue AH Blitzkrieg forces for The playtest rules, however and hope to get a game in, soon!

    We get slapped around, but we have a good time!

    #19616
    Ivan Sorensen
    Participant

    Have you tried doing it through Paypal instead?

    Nordic Weasel Games
    https://www.wargamevault.com/browse/pub/5701/Nordic-Weasel-Games?src=browse5701

    #19617
    Quaker
    Member

    I think the standard 5core activation system works fine for the skirmish level, but at Brigade I wouldn’t mind some C&C friction issues. So I am thinking of trying the following:

    Battalion Command

    Instead of activating companies normally you can spend an activation on a battalion. Each company in the nominated battalion rolls a quality check on 1d6 and if they pass (4+ for normal troops, 5+ for crummy Soviets) they can act as if activated.

    Quantity has a quality all of its own

    Some armies train to fight in bigger formations than is normal (ie Soviets). To reflect this when such a brigade uses battalion activations they can elect to skip rolling quality checks and partially activate the whole battalion (each company in the battalion must be within 4 inches of another company in the battalion). Such a partially activated battalion can choose to move (and assault) or shoot, but not both. Perform each action by individual company. When moving the whole battalion must move in roughly the same direction and each company must end the move within 4 inches of another company in the battalion. When assaulting each company must assault either the same target as that assaulted by the first company or an enemy company within 4 inches of the first target. When shooting each company must shoot either the same target as that shot by the first company or an enemy company within 4 inches of the first target.

     

     

    With a 4+ quality check and a three company battalion there is a 12.5% chance of zero activations, a 37.5% chance of one activation, a 37.5% of two activations, and a 12.5% chance of three activations. With a 5+ quality check and a three company battalion there is a 30% chance of zero activations, a 44% chance of one activation, a 22% chance of two activations, and a 3% chance of three activations.

    #19618
    Ivan Sorensen
    Participant

    Sure, let me know how it comes out!

    I’ve been tossing around ideas for a 6mm big battle game using the NEIS/NSIS activation system but a fairly simple combat mechanic ala the old Space Marine game.

    Nordic Weasel Games
    https://www.wargamevault.com/browse/pub/5701/Nordic-Weasel-Games?src=browse5701

    #19619
    Quaker
    Member

    I thought about the NEIS mechanic but I felt it wasn’t as interesting if you only had one leader in play (the Brigade HQ). It might work if you added in battalion HQs and rolled D3 for the number of activations. Though then a good way to represent the battalion HQ on the field is needed.

    My thoughts for a Battalion command would be:

    • Can’t take offensive action.
    • Treated like a normal company for shooting (if it is a tank battalion HQ it is treated as one tech lower due to being composed of a mix of tanks and APCs).
    • Gets a free 6″ move every turn (subject to normal restrictions such as being pinned).
    • Can’t roll to activate its companies if it is Taking Casualties! or Bailing.
    • Can have attachments.
    • Same enemy targeting restrictions as HQs.
    • If destroyed all sub-companies count as Taking Fire!.
    • Well trained armies can replace a destroyed battalion command. One of the battalions companies which isn’t under any status effects can have the company command take over the battalion. Put the battalion command back on the table but they and the company that they came from count as Taking Fire!.
    #19623
    Ivan Sorensen
    Participant

    If I did it, it’d be for platoons (each model is one tank or one squad) each activating under the NEIS mechanic.
    Keep combat really simple so you could have like a million 6mm tanks on the board. WHo knows.

    Your ideas aren’t bad at all. In Company Commander, the HQ stand is an active participant, mostly for rallying purposes. I think Jack talked me into it.
    I’d be inclined to keep it as simple as possible (may move, may rally by moving into contact, may not fire unless it has attachments)

    Nordic Weasel Games
    https://www.wargamevault.com/browse/pub/5701/Nordic-Weasel-Games?src=browse5701

    #19637

    Here is a simple rules tweak to give you a bit of friction.

    When you role the die at the beginning of your turn, if the result is two, subtract one activation and if it is five add one activation.

     

    We get slapped around, but we have a good time!

    #19659
    Ivan Sorensen
    Participant

    I did put random events in hte back of that damn thing you know 😉

    Nordic Weasel Games
    https://www.wargamevault.com/browse/pub/5701/Nordic-Weasel-Games?src=browse5701

    #19671
    JozisTinMan
    Participant

    Heresy already abounds! 

    Just to add to that…  Here is a house rule I will be using this weekend:

    Small Squads:  Some IFV’s have significantly smaller number of dismounts than contemporary APC’s, a good example is the M2 Bradley.  These types of units receive a -1 in assault combat with infantry units.  No degradation in company firepower, as they still bristled with heavy weapons, MG’s, etc.

    So, a company of BFV infantry will have a little less UMPH in close combat.  I will apply this to BMP’s as well, but not BTR / M-113.

    http://jozistinman.blogspot.com/

    #19672
    Ivan Sorensen
    Participant

    THat’s a pretty good house rule yeah. Nice and simple and it reflects the situation well.

    Nordic Weasel Games
    https://www.wargamevault.com/browse/pub/5701/Nordic-Weasel-Games?src=browse5701

    #19679
    Quaker
    Member

    That works if you separate the IFVs from the infantry (something I intend to do, ’cause Bronegruppa are awesome). Using mixed stands I’d just say the IFVs heavy firepower makes-up for the shortfall in men.

    EDIT: I actually just realized that Bradleys and BMPs basically don’t get to use their main guns only their ATGMs. I’m tempted to house rule they get +1S when conducting AT fire at 6″ or less against equal or lesser tech tanks, and +1 when assaulting tanks.

    • This reply was modified 6 years, 4 months ago by Quaker.
    #19704
    Ivan Sorensen
    Participant

    I figured that the Bradley and BMP main guns were fairly incidental when firing at tanks. More importantly, I wanted there to be a bit of rock-paper-scissors effect. Mech Inf are strong against infantry targets but tend to be weak against tank targets.

    Your suggestions would work well for Iraq though where Bradley’s chased off T55 with relative ease.

    Nordic Weasel Games
    https://www.wargamevault.com/browse/pub/5701/Nordic-Weasel-Games?src=browse5701

    #19709
    Quaker
    Member

    IRL the tanks would try and pick off the IFVs before they IFVs got in effective range, because 25mm autocannon rounds can at least smash gun sights and de-track a tank (and with a side shot can kill everything less than a super-tank). In a stand-off a tank company will be shooting 2S at a mech inf company at 12″ while the mech inf shoot back with 1S.

    And if hunkering down works in Brigade Commander as it does in normal 5Core (the wording is unclear, but I assume it is so) then tanks can effectively suppress and assault mech inf in the open. Any tank company that decides to engage in a short range duel with a company  of IFVs should be hurting, and if they try and assault mech inf in cover they should lose.

    #19710
    Ivan Sorensen
    Participant

    Mechanically, the close range combat is done as part of the assault, where the tanks are usually toast.
    To me, firing in Brigade Commander is a more cautious, measured thing, while the assault is all out, letting rip with everything from ATGM’s to MRE’s 🙂

    BUT:

    If it bothers you, adding another Shock die to the “heavy” mech inf units is pretty easy and / or dropping one shock die from the tanks if the mech inf is in a pretty defensible position. Tweaking dice like that is one of the easier ways to influence the system.
    Another option might be to keep the mech inf at 1 shock but they can reroll it if they miss on thte first shot (that prevents them from getting 2 results)

    Thoughts?

    Nordic Weasel Games
    https://www.wargamevault.com/browse/pub/5701/Nordic-Weasel-Games?src=browse5701

    #19711
    Quaker
    Member

    A re-roll would probably stop it being too strong. I would still keep it at 6″ or under though, as at long range they would be using their ATGMs alone.

    #19712
    Ivan Sorensen
    Participant

    Yeah, I’d be very concerned about giving them more long range fire power.
    It seems to me that a company’s worth firing ATGM (with relatively low kill rates, at least early cold war) would be more likely to discourage a tank company than reliably incapacitate the company.

    Nordic Weasel Games
    https://www.wargamevault.com/browse/pub/5701/Nordic-Weasel-Games?src=browse5701

    #19788
    JozisTinMan
    Participant

    Quaker, not sure if you saw the post from 3-4 weeks ago, but as Ivan can attest I went through a lot of soul searching over ATGM’s too.  A company of Bradley’s are throwing out a lot more missiles than a company mounted in M113’s with Dragon’s alone.

    I finally came around in alignment with the rules as they finally landed, as while modern ATGM’s like TOW, Milan, AT-5 etc are pretty accurate on the firing range, in combat a tank company will start popping smoke, suppression fire, and fall back instead of sitting in the kill zone and waiting for the missiles.  Plus, IFV’s and ATGM carriers have a limited number of shots. (Seven I think for a Bradley), so will probably not fire them off as fast as they can.

    In practice I am finding that maneuvering a tank company in front of more than 1 ATGM equipped company to be fairly fruitless as the tanks keep getting driven off, and either need reinforcements or to call in artillery.  It goes the other way as well, the ATGM’s hold of the tanks and then the tanks get nailed by artillery or air strikes.

    That being said, I like the idea of a re-roll of the shock die.  I might apply that to dedicated Anti-Tank units, like a Mech Battalion ITV company, or MRR Regimental Anti-Tank Company.  Will use that in my next game and let oyu guys know.

     

    http://jozistinman.blogspot.com/

    #19805
    Ivan Sorensen
    Participant

    Maybe there needs to be some distinction between the types of ATGM as well.

    I could well believe that a unit outfitted with present-day ATGM will do a lot better than when the first Saggers showed up and nobody had any idea what to do with them.

    Nordic Weasel Games
    https://www.wargamevault.com/browse/pub/5701/Nordic-Weasel-Games?src=browse5701

    #19813
    Quaker
    Member

    Jozi I was mainly thinking about the main guns not ATGMs. That is why I wanted to keep it short range as IFVs generally wouldn’t (or couldn’t) fire their main guns if they had ATGMs at long range, but at short range they could switch to main guns which can throw out a lot more firepower of a suppressive nature.

    #19820
    Just Jack
    Participant

    Those are very interesting (and useful) observations, Jozi, regarding maneuvering a tank company in front of multiple ATGM-equipped infantry companies.

    Regarding the previous paragraphs, I’m a bit split.  I really don’t know how effective TOW/AT5/Milan would have been, and I know tanks certainly had their own immediate action drills to ‘defray the cost’ of heading up against ATGMs, but I also know we trained to have HMGs lay into the tanks to allow the TOW gunners to keep on track, theoretically allowing them to get good shots in (though this doesn’t play if the tanks fall back out of range, of course).

    Where I saw as the biggest issue for ATGMs, and Jozi hits on this as well, is reloads.  Not just the number of reloads, but the time it took, and, in some cases, the danger.  My understanding was that reloading a TOW under fire was not really something you wanted to do.  You fired, displaced into defilade, reloaded, then took up a new position.  This was a great idea so long as the enemy cav screen wasn’t hot on your heels, or enemy arty didn’t catch you outside your vehicle in your reload spot (not that it mattered all that much for our CAATs, who were just in HMMWVs anyway).

    Ivan – those early Saggers sure gave the Israelis a hard time when they first popped into play.  I know some will say the Israelis cracked the code in terms of immediate action to ATGM attack, but my counter argument was that the Egyptians didn’t have time to come up with their own SOPs as the war then finished 😉

    Anyway, cool stuff, and I’m looking to hop in with my first game this weekend.

    V/R,
    Jack

    #19822
    Ivan Sorensen
    Participant

    On Saggers – I don’t know what the total number of kills were, but arguably, even if the Israeli did figure out tactics to deal with them, that still limits their ability to act and fight effectively.
    It’s like the discussion about out dated AA weapons I had with someone, somewhere: The presence of a ton of 57mm AA guns in Vietnam didn’t shoot down a lot of planes but it meant the Yankees had to account for them.

    Isn’t the Bradley TOW launchers reloaded manually from outside the vehicle or am I confusing it with another vehicle?

    Nordic Weasel Games
    https://www.wargamevault.com/browse/pub/5701/Nordic-Weasel-Games?src=browse5701

    #19823
    Quaker
    Member

    In theory the M2/M3 can reload the TOW via a special hatch behind the turret. In practice I don’t believe this is done due to how awkward it is. Easier to pull back and then reload externally.

    For early ATGMs like the Sagger you could say that at long range Bail! is reduced to Taking Fire! due to the tanks doing the Sagger dance.

    #19827
    Just Jack
    Participant

    Ivan – Regarding Saggers, what I was saying is the Israelis had time to figure out they need to speed up, pop smoke, look for the plume, and return fire, but the Egyptians didn’t have time to figure out you need open up with HMGs to force the tank commanders to button up and go blind, making it harder to spot the plume, which may have offset the Israelis’ countermeasures.  At least that was our working theory.  And it was me about the 57mm AAA 😉

    My understanding was that Bradleys had to reload the TOWs from outside the vehicle as a practical measure, which means the crew is very vulnerable while doing it, and the vehicle is out of the fight for the duration of the reload (which includes finding a spot, reloading, then travelling back to MLR).  I can’t imagine how much it would suck if you were in turret-down, standing outside the vehicle when an enemy vehicle broke the skyline 50 yards away.  Yes, I know there would other crew members and other vehicles on watch, but man, what a crappy feeling to be that guy!

    V/R,
    Jack

    #19828
    Ivan Sorensen
    Participant

    Yeah, that makes sense. Countermeasures against countermeasures 🙂
    I imagine if there was good local cooperation, hitting the tanks with mortar fire immediately before opening up with the Saggers might work too.
    Of course, timing it just right would be a challenge.

    The good news is that the guy reloading that Bradley TOW would be well motivated to work quickly!

    From what I recall, some IFV (Marder?) can dismount their missiles to fire from the ground which seems like a sensible design for a defensive position.

    Nordic Weasel Games
    https://www.wargamevault.com/browse/pub/5701/Nordic-Weasel-Games?src=browse5701

    #19830
    Just Jack
    Participant

    Our TOWs were paired up with HMGs (either .50 cals or Mk19s) for the express purpose of buttoning up the tanks while the missile was in flight.

    Mortars, arty, and air were all part of the equation too.  And I’ve heard that too about IFVs dismounting their ATGMs.  From our standpoint that was not possible, but that’s what the Dragons were for.

    V/R,
    Jack

    #20208
    shelldrake
    Participant

    I go away for 16 days and look what happens… instead of being the first on the block to get the rules, I am the dude playing catch up!!!

Viewing 27 posts - 121 through 147 (of 147 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.