Home Forums WWII Rules that are..

Viewing 21 posts - 1 through 21 (of 21 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #77359
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    ..one infantry stand is a squad or half-squad, while vehicle stands are one vehicle (basically, the same scale as Squad Leader).

    I am familiar with: Flames of war, Crossfire, any game I wrote myself, Firefly.

    Anything else to suggest that you can personally recommend?

    #77361
    Avatar photoWhirlwind
    Participant

    WRG 1925-1950.

    #77362
    Avatar photoDon Glewwe
    Participant

    Isn’t IABSM that way?

    #77364
    Avatar photozippyfusenet
    Participant

    Jagdpanzer, which was intended for play with micro-armor:

    http://jagdpanzer.com/firstEdition.htm

     

    You'll shoot your eye out, kid!

    #77368
    Avatar photoMartinR
    Participant

    WRG 1925 to 50 was the first (and arguably one of the best).

    Cambrai to Sinai used section sized stands but was classic 1970s bloatware.

    Among more modern sets, Fireball Forward and Iron Cross. FF is basically Squad leader using CF mechanisms and is excellent.

    "Mistakes in the initial deployment cannot be rectified" - Helmuth von Moltke

    #77375
    Avatar photoNot Connard Sage
    Participant

     

    WRG 1925 to 50 was the first (and arguably one of the best). Cambrai to Sinai used section sized stands but was classic 1970s bloatware.

    I have not heard of C to S, but the “bloatware” comment made me literally laugh out loud and I’m grinning as I write.

    Newbury Rules. That’s all you need to know about C2S. All of their rules were the same. I’m sure someone, somewhere, must have played a game with them. They’re probably still playing the same game, if death hasn’t provided a merciful release 🙂

     

    Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.

    #77377
    Avatar photoShaun Travers
    Participant

    I got Cambrai to Sinai when it first came out.  They are individual figure-based, not 1 stand = 1 squad A friend and I played it once.  The keyword is “once”.  And Martin, I thought I have mentioned a few times that I have completely managed to forget about  these rules, until you bring them up on some thread or other 😉

    Rules that have not been mentioned and ones I have seen positive reviews of are:

    Mein Panzer

    Micro Squad: The 1:1 Scale Game- WWII, 2nd Edition

    Panzer Miniatures Rules

    Schwere Kompanie

    Tigers and Stalins

     

    Here is the list of all the rules I knew about in 2015 that are 1:1 vehicles and 1:squad (it includes those previously mentioned in this thread, the  occasional one may be just out of period but may easily be used for WW2):

    CrossFire
    Fireball Forward!
    Overlord
    Ambush Blitz
    Combat Action Commander
    FireFly
    Flames of War
    GI Commander
    Grey Storm Red Steel
    Jagdpanzer
    Jagdpanzer Second Edition
    Mein Panzer
    Micro Squad: The 1:1 Scale Game- WWII, 2nd Edition
    Panzer Miniatures Rules
    Panzer Tactics
    Panzer Truppe
    Panzer War
    Panzer Warfare
    Schwere Kompanie
    Storming the Reich
    Tank Battles in Miniature 1
    Tank Battles in Miniature 2
    Tank Battles in Miniature 3
    Tank Battles in Miniature 4
    Tank Battles in Miniature 5
    Tank Charts
    Tigers and Stalins
    War Game Rules 1925-1950 1st
    War Game Rules 1925-1950 2nd
    A Leader of Men
    Manoeuvre Group
    HellFire
    Combined Arms
    Micro Melee
    Fields of Honor
    Metal Storm
    Mechanised Warfare Rules
    Dunn Kempfe
    MicroTank Warfare
    Hell and Fateful Decisions
    Armies in Crisis
    A clear and present madness

     

    #77447
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    Boom, the master list!

    I was familiar with WRG, not sure why I forgot about it on the list.
    I think we want a little more “meat” to the tank/anti-tank mechanics though.

    #77481
    Avatar photoJohn D Salt
    Participant

    Boom, the master list!
    I was familiar with WRG, not sure why I forgot about it on the list.

    Mr. Picky points out that the WRG rules (and as far as I can recall Firefly and Combined Arms as well) use elements of team, rather than section, strength.

    I think we want a little more “meat” to the tank/anti-tank mechanics though.

    What sort of meat did you have in mind?

    Oh, and I am horrified to discover that “Cambrai to Sinai” have appeared in a second edition. IIRC Newbury Rules it was who coined the wretched term “Fast-Play Rules”, to draw attention away from the fact that most of their rules were played in geological time. Before Newbury Rules, “Fast-Play Rules” were called “Rules”.

    All the best,

    John.

    #77494
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    Thats what I meant when I mentioned squad or half-squad in the original post 🙂

    As far as tank combat, something a little more detailed than WRG but not quite as hairy as Firefly probably, if that makes sense?

    #77505
    Avatar photoMartinR
    Participant

    I got Cambrai to Sinai when it first came out. They are individual figure-based, not 1 stand = 1 squad A friend and I played it once. The keyword is “once”. And Martin, I thought I have mentioned a few times that I have completely managed to forget about these rules, until you bring them up on some thread or other 😉 

    I only mention C2S as I still recall the crushing disappointment when I realised they were unplayable. I don’t recall them being 1:1 though, the infantry manouvered and fought in sections, which was why I bought them in the first place – to avoid fiddling around with massive 12 element WRG platoons.

    IABSM and Rapid Fire similar, although in principle they are played with single based figures, the troops manouvre an fight in groups, which can just as well be represented as elements (which is what I did rather than rebase everyone!).

     

    "Mistakes in the initial deployment cannot be rectified" - Helmuth von Moltke

    #77520
    Avatar photoShaun Travers
    Participant

    Hello Martin,

    You got me to open the Cambrai to Sinai rules for the first time in 30+ years.  There are two scales you can play the rules at:  1:80 and 1:300.  At 1:80 figures are individual, at 1:300 a section is two bases.  Firing is done at 1:80 by picking a firing group of 1 or more figures (up to a section) and adding up combat factors.  The target can be 1 or more figures.   Not quite like IABSM/RF where, as you indicate, a single unit of figures fires. At 1:300 any number of bases fires at a single base only, also adding up combat factors for the firing bases.  While I really only looked at the first few pages for scale, unit definitions and also the infantry firing procedure pages, I did notice the rules are often split into at 1:80 follow this process; at 1:300 follow this one instead.

    #77628
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    Ironically, Command Decision always felt like it wanted to be at this scale, what with tanks taking “damage” and firing individual guns, despite ostensibly being platoons.

    And now you guys are making me want to see these Cambrai to Sinai rules just to see what all the terror is about 🙂

    #77650
    Avatar photoMartinR
    Participant

    Dear me, it sounds like I’ve had C2S false memory syndrome! Im half tempted to go and look in the loft for them as I don’t recall there being two different game scales at all? Perhaps Pandora Box is best left unopened 🙂

    "Mistakes in the initial deployment cannot be rectified" - Helmuth von Moltke

    #77651
    Avatar photoNot Connard Sage
    Participant

    A random page from Newbury ancients rules (I wasn’t daft enought to buy C2S). Don’t say you weren’t warned Tim 😉

     

    Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.

    #77661
    Avatar photoShaun Travers
    Participant

    Martin,  I had forgotten that there was two different scales in the Cambrai to Sinai rules as well. I had no idea until I went looking and it is everywhere in the rules.  It just goes to show how much you can forget if you put your mind to it, or even if you don’t!

    I see that the ancient rules are formatted the same as Cambrai to Sinai – from a distance you would not know which set of rules they were from.

    #77731
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    The whole “rule 18.4” structure is super 80’s.

    I tried writing like that once, because I kinda like it, it makes referencing easy, but it’s a massive amount of work to pull off.

    #77733
    Avatar photoNot Connard Sage
    Participant

    The whole “rule 18.4” structure is super 80’s. I tried writing like that once, because I kinda like it, it makes referencing easy, but it’s a massive amount of work to pull off.

    Rules shouldn’t need that much cross-referencing. How many are on that single page, I’ve got well over a dozen?

     

    On. A. Single. Page.

    Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.

    #77734
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    I was more thinking in terms of players discussing it or asking questions.

    At least that sample page has reasonable spacing 🙂 I have some older games that are just ungainly walls of words that never end.

    #77736
    Avatar photoNot Connard Sage
    Participant

    I was more thinking in terms of players discussing it or asking questions. At least that sample page has reasonable spacing 🙂 I have some older games that are just ungainly walls of words that never end.

     

    The type is about 9 point in the original, the page size is A4. There are 42 pages of rules. Every page contains cross-referencing – including the explanatory section at the beginning.

     

    It gets a bit…overwhelming.

    🙂

    Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.

    #77738
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    You can tell you’re off to a good start with the introduction requires you to cross-reference something later in the book.

Viewing 21 posts - 1 through 21 (of 21 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.