Home Forums Modern Hind and Seek – Rules for the Soviet-Afghan War

This topic contains 71 replies, has 7 voices, and was last updated by  Stephen Madjanovich 1 month ago.

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 72 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #60534
    NKL Aerotom
    NKL Aerotom
    Participant

    Greetings all, I have been working on a simple ruleset for the Soviet War in Afghanistan and I thought I would post it here if anyone is interested in having a look or perhaps trying it out. These rules are aimed at 6mm scale miniatures, but could be used with 10mm or 15mm as well.

     

    The rules have been finished and you can purchase them here

    Main aims of this ruleset:

    • Streamlined Vehicle and Anti-vehicle rules – as simple as possible to allow the focus to be on infantry
    • Morale and troop quality important – morale is whats tracked on infantry instead of casualties – although casualties cause units to lose morale.
    • Focus on asymmetrical warfare – Mujahideen rely heavily on ambushes and disappearing into the terrain. They also have limited equipment compared to the Soviets.

     

    #60539
    kyoteblue
    kyoteblue
    Participant

    Single based figures ?? Or could I use FOW  bases ??

    #60541
    NKL Aerotom
    NKL Aerotom
    Participant

    Multibased figures ideally – FOW basing would work fine. I specify 1″ X 2″ base sized for squads and 1″ x 1″ for weapons teams  in the rules, but thats aimed at 1/300 or 1/285 scale – and may be subject to change depending on playtesting and how comfortable the bases feel for the miniatures. I’m waiting for some 1/300 scale minis to arrive so I can see what feels right.

    I’ll provide some different size recommendations for different scales at some stage, but essentially any rectangular shape would be fine as long as both sides have the same size base 🙂

    #61469
    cmnash
    cmnash
    Participant

    Oooh!! Just discovered this thread – very interested in this and thanks for posting the rules here!

    I’ve downloaded tehm and will read/try-out as soon as I can

    .

    #61483
    NKL Aerotom
    NKL Aerotom
    Participant

    Thanks cmnash, I’ve made quite a bit of progress on these rules – Have done a bit of a re-write and am in the middle of finalizing the new version and starting to playtest. I would be interested in hearing what you think and any suggestions, even though this is the ‘old’ version now 🙂

    I’ve since implemented an asset system (so forces on the ground can be swapped for better positions, better intel, escape routes, artillery support) to allow a very small force to still be equal to a larger force.

    I’ve also introduced a reputation system and rules to allow units to ambush while remaining hidden (to allow for “Where is that fire coming from!?” type situations) and rules for units under fire to detect these hidden units.

    #61484
    NKL Aerotom
    NKL Aerotom
    Participant

    Also the basing convention I’ve come up with is 15mm X 30mm for infantry squads, and 15mm X 15mm for weapons teams:

     

    Some of my soviet forces coming up:

    #61489
    cmnash
    cmnash
    Participant

    Thanks cmnash, I’ve made quite a bit of progress on these rules – Have done a bit of a re-write and am in the middle of finalizing the new version and starting to playtest. I would be interested in hearing what you think and any suggestions, even though this is the ‘old’ version now 🙂 I’ve since implemented an asset system (so forces on the ground can be swapped for better positions, better intel, escape routes, artillery support) to allow a very small force to still be equal to a larger force. I’ve also introduced a reputation system and rules to allow units to ambush while remaining hidden (to allow for “Where is that fire coming from!?” type situations) and rules for units under fire to detect these hidden units.

    Hi Tom, I really like the dispersal rule – from one read-thru it strikes me as a great way to represent the guerrilla forces, as does the ambush rule.

    That read- thru has me itching to get some toys out and play the rules, especially with the additions you’ve referred to! any chance I could see the latest version please? 

    .

    #61490
    cmnash
    cmnash
    Participant

    I expect that you already know of this book, but for anyone else interested in Soviet operations in Afghanistan, or seeking scenario inspiration for later anti-insurgent operations, you should really read “The Bear Went Over the Mountain: Soviet Combat Tactics in Afghanistan” (I got a ‘used’ paperback copy via Amazon)

    .

    #61501
    NKL Aerotom
    NKL Aerotom
    Participant

    Hi cmnash, I can send you the latest version once I have finished it off, as it is there are a few holes and things I  need to consider / add in from a brief playtest yesterday. The asset system at the moment is not fully fleshed out.

    I’d be happy to email you the latest version once it’s ready, just let me know your email.

    The core hasn’t changed much from the version above – the weapons, vehicles and actions system is all the same, although some weapons have had edits (wrong caliber or suchlike)

    One large change is that the detection range for dispersed forces has gone down to 6″, making them harder to find (after watching some combat footage from Afghanistan and realizing 6″ = about 120m in the rules)

    Also thanks for the recommendation, I’ve been reading the bear went over the mountain for the past few weeks, up to page 84 and the vignette “An airborne battalion seizes the Satukandav Pass”

    I’m also reading The other side of the mountain at the same time to get a feel for Muhajideen tactics – I feel like its good to experience both sides at once so I don’t get a biased view of the war. The difference in approach between the two sides is staggering, and one of the integral factors of this game.

    Look forward to keeping in touch in future, always good to have people who are interested in try out these crazy games – especially one broaching new territory for me like H&S is.

    #61504
    cmnash
    cmnash
    Participant

    Hi cmnash, I can send you the latest version once I have finished it off, as it is there are a few holes and things I need to consider / add in from a brief playtest yesterday. The asset system at the moment is not fully fleshed out. I’d be happy to email you the latest version once it’s ready, just let me know your email.

    That would be  :I-can’t-believe-I-got-my-own-email-address-wrong:  

    The core hasn’t changed much from the version above – the weapons, vehicles and actions system is all the same, although some weapons have had edits (wrong caliber or suchlike) One large change is that the detection range for dispersed forces has gone down to 6″, making them harder to find (after watching some combat footage from Afghanistan and realizing 6″ = about 120m in the rules) Also thanks for the recommendation, I’ve been reading the bear went over the mountain for the past few weeks, up to page 84 and the vignette “An airborne battalion seizes the Satukandav Pass” I’m also reading The other side of the mountain 

    That’s been on my amazon wishlist for a while now. Having found your rules, I ‘think I’ll be getting it soon!

    at the same time to get a feel for Muhajideen tactics – I feel like its good to experience both sides at once so I don’t get a biased view of the war. The difference in approach between the two sides is staggering, and one of the integral factors of this game. Look forward to keeping in touch in future, always good to have people who are interested in try out these crazy games – especially one broaching new territory for me like H&S is.

    Please do keep me up to date! In my imagi-nations I’ve already set up an area for a mujahideen style insurgency, so am looking forward to trying your rules out!

    • This reply was modified 1 year, 10 months ago by cmnash cmnash.

    .

    #61511
    NKL Aerotom
    NKL Aerotom
    Participant

    Great, I sent you an email.

    The other side of the mountain is available in PDF form online here, if you’re interested:

    http://www.tribalanalysiscenter.com/TAUDOC/Other%20Side%20of%20Mountain.pdf

     

    Its amazing to have resources such as this and The Bear, Makes creating a convincing game on the period much easier and gives me heaps of ideas on scenarios, unit usage, force sizes and many other interesting details that only people who were there would know.

    #61513
    cmnash
    cmnash
    Participant

    Great, I sent you an email.

    Which I didn’t get … it would have helped enormously if I’d been able to get my own email address right wouldn’t it?  it is actually   email(dot)colinmnash(at)gmail(dot)com

     … what a complete muppet …. 

     

    The other side of the mountain is available in PDF form online here, if you’re interested: http://www.tribalanalysiscenter.com/TAUDOC/Other%20Side%20of%20Mountain.pdf

    Marvellous! Thanks for the link!

    Its amazing to have resources such as this and The Bear, Makes creating a convincing game on the period much easier and gives me heaps of ideas on scenarios, unit usage, force sizes and many other interesting details that only people who were there would know.

    I certainly found The Bear enlightening, fascinating and every bit as useful as you did Tom.

    Thanks again for the link

    • This reply was modified 1 year, 10 months ago by cmnash cmnash.

    .

    #61515
    NKL Aerotom
    NKL Aerotom
    Participant

    … what a complete muppet ….

     We got there in the end! re-sent to correct email this time

    #61517
    cmnash
    cmnash
    Participant

    … what a complete muppet ….

    We got there in the end! re-sent to correct email this time

    and received – thanks! Looking forward to giving them a try  

    .

    #61796
    NKL Aerotom
    NKL Aerotom
    Participant

    Finished a few Soviets off:

    #61888

    alan
    Participant

    Tom,

    Just getting onto this thread from your postings on TMP.

    looking forward to the final version of the rules: will you include any scenarios?

    Alan

    #61889
    NKL Aerotom
    NKL Aerotom
    Participant

    Hi Alan, welcome!

    There are currently 5 scenarios in the rules – Convoy, Search and Destroy, Defend Fire base, Reconnoiter, and Airborne Pincer. I’m currently reading through The Bear Went over the Mountain and The Other Side of the Mountain, and will add in new scenarios as I come across interesting ones.

    At this stage there is no “standard” deployment and victory conditions for a non-scenario game, as I feel scenarios are important for motivating the Soviets to move, but I think it would be good to provide a quick-start scenario with a single common objective like securing an Mi-8 Crash or somesuch.

    If you have any kinds of scenarios you would like to see in the game, feel free to post them here! 🙂

    #61893

    alan
    Participant

    Tom,

    Thanks for the prompt reply.  They are indeed great books which I too have to get round to reading some day.  The fact you are bringing out these rules will give me some incentive!

    will the DRA forces be featuring in the rules?  I was thinking of getting some of these as well as the Ruskies.

    with regard to the scenarios, they do seem to cover a lot of ground: could you give an indication of the number of bases needed for the largest one?

    All the best,

     

    Alan

    #61894
    NKL Aerotom
    NKL Aerotom
    Participant

    Hi Alan, the scenarios do not specify forces, only objectives, deployment and victory conditions. Players will either have an even strength for a one-off game, or use their factions current strength in the area. This strength could take the form of forces on the table, or assets like recon, intel, prepared positions, weapons caches, etc. The rules are (hopefully) made so that a player can choose to take a smaller force but well supported with assets and be equivalent to a larger one. I’m planning to leave army list composition up to the players, with a points system to keep things even.

    DRA forces are available for the soviets, being low quality and average quality squads, slightly cheaper than the soviet regulars, but with the possibility of not being where you need them if influenced by the Mujahideen player.

    I think a good number of bases for an average sized game would be 5-10 infantry bases and 5 – 10 specialist teams like heavy weapons or spotters. The Soviets would then have a bunch of vehicles, anywhere from 4 to 20, while the Mujahideen would have more weapons teams, more infantry, or perhaps some trucks or technicals.

     

    #61910

    alan
    Participant

    Tom,

    Many thanks.  I will keep an eye on this thread to hear when the rules become available.

    Alan

    #61917
    cmnash
    cmnash
    Participant

    Finished a few Soviets off:

    Looking good Tom.

    Unfortunately I can’t get to this site at work anymore – they’ve started blocking it 

    .

    #61918
    Mike
    Mike
    Keymaster

    Finished a few Soviets off:

    Looking good Tom. Unfortunately I can’t get to this site at work anymore – they’ve started blocking it

    Mobile data?

    #62380
    NKL Aerotom
    NKL Aerotom
    Participant

    Hi all, we did a rather large play-test today, and posted an AAR with photos here:

    http://theminiaturespage.com/boards/msg.mv?id=454218

    Quite a game!

    #62381
    Mike
    Mike
    Keymaster

    I will have a look later.

    #62456
    NKL Aerotom
    NKL Aerotom
    Participant

    Cheers Mike, I thought about copy-pasting the AAR here (or perhaps I should have just posted it here in the first place?) but didn’t want to take up too many posts 🙂

     

    #62465
    Rod Robertson
    Rod Robertson
    Participant

    Ostfront:

    This looks really interesting. I will read this thread in detail throughout the week and may jump in at some point. I am cleaning up, basing and preparing to paint a Soviet Airborne company and some support vehicles right now for Cold War gaming in Europe but a few diversions to Afghanistan might be worth considering. I will have to do some research on this theatre of combat too but right now I’m mired in 1942 Russia research. I lived through the Soviet invasion at a distance but I never actually gamed it to date. I have gamed 19th Century and more contemporary warfare (2001-present) in Afghanistan but 1979-1989 is something new to me. This might be fun. I will keep an eye out for your rules when they are finished and for sale. Good luck for this project.

    Cheers and good gaming.

    Rod Robertson.

    #62466
    NKL Aerotom
    NKL Aerotom
    Participant

    Thanks Rod, we hope to have the rules out in the next few weeks, still a bit more playtesting to do, and some example images to photograph.

    The organization for the airborne company should be roughly the same as an average cold war airborne company; having 3 BMD platoons, and a company HQ with BMD. Each BMD platoon would have 3 BMD squads and a platoon HQ, and the BMD squads would each be 1 X BMD, 1 X RPG-7 grenadier, 1 X RPKS-74 gunner, 2 riflemen and a squad leader/BMD commander all with AKS-74s. I think its more the way they were used that was altered in Afghanistan. They adopted a lot of new tactics when their initial ones weren’t effective in the mountainous terrain.

    Some books I can recommend:

    The Soviet Army – Troops Organization and Equipment (from the FM series)

    The Bear went over the Mountain (a collection of combat reports from Soviet commanders in Afghanistan, complete with maps and commentaries from the Frunze military academy and the books editor)

    The Other side of the Mountain (same as above, but from the Mujahideen side – combat reports with maps and commentaries)

     

    There are a few good films on the subject as well: Afghan Breakdown, 9th Company, Cargo 300 (this is on youtube as “Груз 300”)

    Afghan breakdown and Cargo 300 don’t have English subtitles that I can find, but are still good watches, as dialogue is minimal (especially in Afghan breakdown) and they have some excellent scenes of real vehicles from the period.

    #62471

    alan
    Participant

    Another good film is Charlie Wilson’s War.

    Looking forward to the rules.  How far down will the rules break down squad organisation?  In 6mm (or thereabouts) scale gaming with individual figures is hardly practical.  I will be using Mainforce Miniatures which have 3 figures per base.

    Alan

    • This reply was modified 1 year, 10 months ago by  alan.
    #62514
    Rod Robertson
    Rod Robertson
    Participant

    Ostfront and Alan Lockhart:

    Thanks for the book and film references. I’ll have a look!

    Cheers and good gaming.

    Rod Robertson.

    #62585
    NKL Aerotom
    NKL Aerotom
    Participant

    Hi Alan, The smallest unit for infantry is the squad, which represents 5-10 men, and I usually represent them as 3 to 4 miniatures on a 15mm X 30mm base. Mortar teams also fit in this category.

    Infantry weapons teams represent 1-3 men operating a heavy weapon, so I usually represent them as 1-2 miniatures on a 15mm X 15mm base. This would be HMG teams, stinger teams, spotter teams, RPG teams, etc.

    Hope that helps!

     

    #62594

    alan
    Participant

    Tom,

     

    Sounds perfect. Will you be making the rules available as a pdf or will you have a UK supplier?

    Alan

    #62596
    NKL Aerotom
    NKL Aerotom
    Participant

    There will be a PDF and a printed version available worldwide, both through wargame vault.

    I’ve done quite a bit of work on the rules over the last few days, taken some example photos, added in pictures…

    I’m at the point where I can pretty much release them. I’ll post the link here when I do!

    And here it is:

    http://www.wargamevault.com/product/212538/Hind–Seek-SovietAfghan-War

    #62699

    alan
    Participant

    Just got the rules on Wargames  Vault.  Looking forward to giving them a good read over.

    Alan

    #62722
    NKL Aerotom
    NKL Aerotom
    Participant

    Great, let me know if you have any questions or suggestions. You can email me at:   [email protected]

    #63632

    alan
    Participant

    I forgot to mention another “must see” movie: The Beast of War.

    It is about a psychotic tank commander whose tank gets separated for the rest of the force after an attack on a village (NB Tom, it does have villagers in it 😜). It is harried by the Mujahideen through valleys trying to reach a main road and safety. I won’t spoil the ending but it is great inspirarion for scenery, although it is more 1:1 level for the purpose of a game.

    Alan

    #63634
    NKL Aerotom
    NKL Aerotom
    Participant

    Ah yes I have seen The Beast of War – twice! I watched it again recently and thoroughly enjoyed it. A nicely written story and some great scenery.

    I think Afghan Breakdown has to be my favorite film on the period – artistically shot, plenty of action and the scene with the sky full of actual hinds and hips is off the chain…

    #63654

    alan
    Participant

    Tom,

    Does Afghan Breakdown have English subtitles?

    Alan

    #63686
    NKL Aerotom
    NKL Aerotom
    Participant

    Does Afghan Breakdown have English subtitles?

    Not that I’ve found. I just watched it in Russian. There isn’t very much dialogue though so I don’t think you miss too much 🙂

    #78533

    Stephen Madjanovich
    Participant

    Played a couple games of this a few months ago now and wish to comment. I emailed and discussed the questions which arose with Tom and made sure he had no issues before I posted my thoughts.

    To be fair here is Tom’s reply followed by my original email;

     

     

    Hi Stephen, thanks for the email, I’ll dive right in;

    What is the turn sequence as to initiative?
    Players take turns working through the turn structure. It is essentially “I Go, U Go”, as in “I take my entire turn, activating all my units, then you take your entire turn, activating all your units”
    pay careful attention to the wording of the Turn Structure section on page 4:
    “Each player’s turn is structured in the following way” (turn structure)
    “After both players have had a turn, 1 game turn has passed”

    So say the soviet player gets the first turn, they will draw cards for artillery/air strikes/etc, then play asset cards if they wish, then all their unit activation, then remove any suppression markers. The Mujahideen will then take any necessary morale checks if their units have taken morale damage.

    Then the Mujahideen will take their first turn: they will roll for any units in ambush to appear, then play asset cards if they wish, then their unit activation, then they will remove any suppression markers. Finally the Soviets will take morale checks for any units that took morale damage.

    After that, 1 game turn has passed.

    Following the turn structure in this way, a unit that is suppressed II will lose all its actions in its turn, and then the suppression will be removed at the end of the turn, so suppression only ever lasts for 1 turn.

    Are mine fields generated by pregame assets marked on the table or hidden? If hidden is there any mechanisms for honesty?
    Mine fields are not “pre game” as they do not have the asterisk next to them. This means they can be played during the asset phase of the turn (so could be withheld unit a player sees fit). All assets are technically ‘pre game’ as the assets are drawn before the game, but only assets specifically marked with the asterisk are considered “pre game” in that they must be player before the game starts. Assets without the asterisk next to their name can be played in any turn during a players asset phase.

    Minefields should be represented by a marker, provided at the end of the rules. Place the marker and measure 6″ from that spot when a unit comes close – any unit that moves through this area will take damage. (note that it should read 6″ radius, not diameter – a somewhat serious typo on my behalf that I’m surprised I didn’t notice until just now!)
    The fact that minefields can turn up halfway through a game makes them hidden to begin with. They can be placed anywhere when they are used so it makes them quite flexible. Often the Mujahideen and Soviets knew roughly where an enemy would be coming through and would mine the right places, often with devastating effects.


    We didn’t see any “area effects” for automatic fire or artillery weapons (ie. mortars). Each of these could only affect one unit so in game terms had no great benefit over (for example) a long range gun.

    That’s correct, there are no area effects except for the Katyusha Strike Mujahideen asset. This is to do with the large ground scale and small size of units (5 – 10 men). No area will have more than 5 or 10 men in it, so most weapons will only be able to damage 1 unit at a time. Katyusha are the only real exception as they really rely on area bombardment.

    The main benefit of mortars are the fact they can fire over terrain, provided a friendly unit somewhere has line of sight to the target. All other weapons require line of sight.

    To attempt to reveal a dispersed unit you only have to be within 12″. We felt you should also have LOS.
    This is a good idea, but I think being close enough would alert you to the fact enemies are close. Units might hear them talking or see them from outside their regular weapons line of sight (by looking around and not just straight ahead). Units already have to spend 1 action and make a quality check in order to reveal dispersed infantry, so I feel that is enough – this could mean sending out a scout over a hill or somesuch, or taking time to clear your flanks.

    On morale table you have the effect of lose one action next turn. Should this be handled and marked as a level 1 suppression?
    Yep this is what we treat it as, and I will change the wording in the update. We just use a “suppressed” marker to show the loss of one action as they are exactly the same thing.

    Also on the morale table we felt being in cover and the effects of unbroken friendly units within X” should be positive modifiers to the table.
    This is a good idea and I will consider it. Although as you mention, its already hard enough as it is to destroy infantry…

    As for assets and the offensive/defensive nature, they are a mixed bag, so it can really depend on what you get given. This reflects the situation for a field commander – often they don’t have the right tools for the job, or have the wrong tools for the job. Some assets that might be seen as defensive like minefields can be used on the offence, to prevent enemies counter-attacking or retreating, or to hem in enemies.

    Essentially you gamble with the assets, if you want to conduct an offensive as the Mujahideen, it might be wise to dedicate your strength more to forces than assets (say 3 assets and 7 forces for a 10 strength game), although you might get lucky and get things like artillery and katyusha strikes which would be very useful for an offensive. Assets like the Civilian Village and Ambush positions are also incredibly useful for Mujahideen offensives, as are Civilians, Overhead cover, Convincing the DRA to desert, Interference, Weapons Caches and Roadside mines. As well as the Prepared firing position, I count 11 assets that could be used on the offensive, which is the majority of the Mujahideen assets. Only the AP mine, Escape Routes and Road block are primarily defensive, although both AP mines and Escape Routes could still be used on the offensive – escape routes in case anything goes wrong, and AP mines to prevent enemies escaping or counter-attacking, or to defend flanks.

    Soviet assets could also be used on the defensive just as well, although their idea of ‘defensive’ would be more of a counter-attack. Certainly AP mines, Pre-Op training, Pre-Op Foot sweeps, KHAD information, Misinformation, Pre-OP recon and Air-blocking elements could all be used on the defensive – if you know an area is going to be blocked by air, you can treat it as a safe zone in defense.

    The assets should be quite flexible, able to be used for attack, defense, counter-attack, endurance and harassment. The only asset that doesn’t really have a use in-game is the Closer Ties with locals, but it can make a difference in campaigns, and also the Reaction (Prevent Escape Routes) can be very powerful.

    The only way to “kill” a unit is to morale effect it do death. Unless we missed something it was impossible to kill infantry in any significant way.
    This is correct and it reflects modern conflict, especially in Afghanistan. Troops often describe taking fire for long periods but only taking a few casualties. Essentially to destroy a unit you need to focus fire on it, or outflank it, or both. This encourages out-flanking and movement and I hope reflects the nature of combat in Afghanistan. Its not until you get really close, surround an enemy unit and throw in grenades that you actually kill them all. Usually they retreat with some casualties or retreat with no losses (as the Mujahideen often did…)

    I would recommend reading “The other side of the mountain” and “The Bear went over the mountain” if you haven’t already, they are great reads (not really ‘books’ as such, but collections of combat reports with maps from field commanders who were really there – both on the soviet and mujahideen side).

    This type of combat I have also seen from video footage of fighting in Afghanistan in the last ~10 years – troops harry each other from range, maybe take some light casualties (or even heavy casualties), but its not until they close with grenades and close range fire that they actually wipe entire enemy units out.

    The weapons ranges given the ground scale seemed excessive.
    We use a ground scale of 1″ = 20m, and have on top of that telescoped most of the longer ranges to be shorter than they actually would be – even at 6mm scale the ranges are far shorter than they should be. Modern ranges are quite long, and I don’t feel comfortable reducing the ranges any more than they already are.

    we feel Afghanistan is so wide open the ground scale should be reduced otherwise an excessive table would have to be employed.
    Afghanistan certainly has areas that are more wide open plains, but this game suits the areas with much more terrain – mountains, dense cities or villages, areas of foliage – a combination of all 3 of these provide good games of Hind & Seek, and I would recommend using quite a bit of terrain in your games. The example terrain set-ups provide the kind of terrain we feel is suitable – at least 10 areas of High Terrain, often with Higher terrain on top, 4 -5 areas of area terrain foliage, areas of village and buildings, etc. You don’t really want units to be able to see the entire table from any area, instead you want a few valleys with firing lines down them on the table, so units could choose to move through one valley to avoid enemies on another, although you want a certain amount or inter-connectivity, so valleys can join up and units aren’t too restricted by all the high terrain. You can see in the two books I mentioned above the maps they show are almost always littered with mountainous areas – they are almost never fighting in open plains. And if there are areas that are more open, they are covered in high crops and foliage where line of sight is less than 10m (known as green zones).

    Hope that answers some of your questions, good to hear from you and I certainly have some ideas and notes for the update (as well as some mistakes and typos I spotted). I hope you guys can try again with a bit more success as it is a really fun and interesting period to game! 🙂

    Cheers,

    Tom

     

    Here is my initial email
    Tom

    Well I didn’t hear back from the guy so here is our observations as interpreted by me.

    We didn’t find the close combat rules until the last turn of our game. Removing terrain defense modifiers seemed odd but treating it as a “net” effect felt OK.
    What is the turn sequence as to initiative? Is it: all units of the winning player go first then the surviving units of the second player all have their turn? Or: One unit of the winning player has its actions, then one unit of the second player, then one unit….?

    Keeping with the above if a unit is suppressed before it has done any actions does it loose it’s actions for the turn or not until next turn?

    Keeping with the above does suppression gained in a turn is removed at the end of the turn or end of next game turn? Two issues. If a unit is suppressed and looses actions that turn we felt it should be removed at the end of the game turn as it has already felt the effects. If a unit is not affected by suppression until the following turn a mechanism for recording which turn it was suppressed on is then needed.
    Are mine fields generated by pregame assets marked on the table or hidden? If hidden is there any mechanisms for honesty?
    We didn’t see any “area effects” for automatic fire or artillery weapons (ie. mortars). Each of these could only affect one unit so in game terms had no great benefit over (for example) a long range gun.
    To attempt to reveal a dispersed unit you only have to be within 12″. We felt you should also have LOS.
    On morale table you have the effect of lose one action next turn. Should this be handled and marked as a level 1 suppression?

    Also on the morale table we felt being in cover and the effects of unbroken friendly units within X” should be positive modifiers to the table.
    Other observations;

    We only played a couple of game turns and found the following issues which we felt needed to be addressed before going any further.

    Mujahideen assets are almost all applicable to a defensive action. Similarly Soviet assets are primarily (heavily) offensive in nature. The scenario we played was Mujahideen attacking a DRA base either days before or just after the Soviets invade. I limited the game to DRA strength and insurgent forces which I felt would be available at that period (line infantry BTRs HMGs and maybe a T54 for the DRA, lee enfields, lmgs, mortars and snipers for the insurgents. It was felt additional assets should be available to cover offensive actions my insurgents and defensive operations by soviet side. Perhaps an extended asset list which is adjusted up or down for attack or defensive posture.

    Our assets turned out to be really dubious. The attacking Mujahideen had mine fields and the DRA had intel so all the units starting not dispersed at the start of the game (all anyways) started not dispersed and hidden ambush positions (none) were forced to be not dispersed!
    All but a couple of the approximately two dozen units on the board were fighting, usually just around the limits of lethal ranges (a little over or under). Only one unit had any morale effect and was not going anywhere (worse) fast. The only way to “kill” a unit is to morale effect it do death. Unless we missed something it was impossible to kill infantry in any significant way.

    The weapons ranges given the ground scale seemed excessive. Basically any units on the about 6′ long table were in range. I thought you mentioned playing on 4′ square tables. If so other than terrain effects most weapons above infantry small arms cover the table. I like the ground scale for my micro armour games but we feel Afghanistan is so wide open the ground scale should be reduced otherwise an excessive table would have to be employed.
    Please take all the above as friendly thoughts and questions from interested blind testers. I am really keen on the game and subject so am very motivated to make it work. Thank you for your efforts.

    Stephen

     

    I am hoping to revisit these rules over the holidays and hoping to see something new I missed. We never played more than 3 game turns as my opponents felt the lack of significant effect on “hit” units was not allowing the game to progress.

     

    I am curious if anyone else has played any games of this? Interest was high when it was announced and first made available. Thank you.

     

    Stephen

     

    #78833
    NKL Aerotom
    NKL Aerotom
    Participant

    Posted an example game of Hind & Seek today:

     

     

    Grab some snacks and a beverage and settle in – its 2hrs 20 minutes, including army list writing and some explanations of rules and reasoning behind them.

     

    Hope this gives you guys a good idea of how the game plays.

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 72 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.