11/07/2021 at 04:18 #158749
This is mission 2 in a campaign following a British company through 1944 France. I am using 6mm forces and playing on a 3×4 grid on a A4 page. Yes, 12 squares on an page. I did this before in 2017.
Game 1 was loads of fun. I played the second game in March straight after the first game and I have already played two more games after this one so there will be more to come when I can find the time to write them up.
The UK mission is a exploiting a successful attack against a German armoured force. The battalion has broken through enemy lines. The company was held in reserve to exploit this breakthrough.
A full battle report is on the blog here:
A link to the rules I used is in the blog report.
A picture of the British forces assaulting a farmhouse:11/07/2021 at 18:12 #158763
Very nice work.12/07/2021 at 11:38 #158784ThuseldParticipant12/07/2021 at 12:46 #158785
I would like to say it only took 20 minutes. i played it over a couple of days and multiple sessions. It meant that I would stare at the board and run through all the options (not many but with so few units and squares every move is important). This could take many minutes each activation!. So I would say it should have taken about 30 minutes but it took about 1 and a half hours. These games were supposed to be quick and all about interesting tactical decisions, instead they are not quick (due to me agonising over EVERY move) but they are all about interesting tactical decisions.
I think in my other similar games with more units and more dice rolls I tend not to worry so much about each move and so those other games do take 30 minutes.
-shaun12/07/2021 at 21:57 #158800Andrew BeasleyParticipant
Thank you for posting this AAR. I’ve played a few games on a 2×2 table but not any on this size. The lack of measurement for movement is a great touch
I’ll admit was intrigued as to how you ended up as a 3×4 for the games rather than anything larger (you mention 6×9, 8×8, 5×4 etc) – it does seem to give you a good mix of terrain but stops a flank advance in my mind (I did see your game 6 but it’s not really a wide sweep).
Bob Cordery (Portable Wargames) has looked at hexes, squares and off-set squares – I’ve been a hex fan for years but looking at the off-set squares and am not sure if anything but rectangles would work at this size table.
One thing I am thinking about is moving away from IGOYGO – Bolt Action has a dice bag that determines the side to move a unit. Leads to a messy table as dice show the unit has been activated but it does read as an interesting option.
Last thing – any plans for tiles (esp with roads)? I would be bothered by bits sliding around in the box but tiles would take more storage space to give the variety you currently have…12/07/2021 at 22:59 #158802
I chose 3×4 as I have been trying to get a Collectable Card Game – Tank Commander – to work and it uses a 3×4. My original post on 3×4 games in 2017 has too much background on why 3×4. The whole post is basically going from the CCG to a playable 3×4 game.
Flank attacks can happen as there are so few units on the board. I think there were a couple in the 2017 games. But I am not sure how easy it would be for flank attacks anyway. The latter is just an excuse 🙂
The IGOYGO is interesting. I originally played a lot of Take Cover (Rapid Fire clone) that was IGOYGO. To play solo I moved to unit card activation and for small games (as the 3×4) rolling to see which side gets a unit to activate. I am right now in the process of going right back to Take Cover and playing a few games with a slightly streamlined games (cutting down on table modifiers mainly). I think there may be enough friction with the rule mechanisms and the turn sequence that it doesn’t need more random activation.
The short answer is the 3×4 provides a bunch of really difficult tactical decisions as it is easy to figure out the possibilities of different outcomes – a few units, few squares, simple rules. I am drifting towards smaller games than 2’x2′ but only due to being time poor and so lazy to set up 2’x2′ games 🙂 i am sure it is a phase. My favourite gaming is actually 20mm WW2 on half a table tennis table (4.5’x5′).
I have thought about tiles but have been too time poor to give them the treatment they would deserve. I was also considering keeping the 3×4 grid but going up scale to an A3 page (double the size!) if I was going to do tiles. But that has got me thinking that tiles for an A4 page may be not that hard after all….worth considering again anyway. You would not need to may tiles – maybe 30-40? I will ponder on this.17/07/2021 at 22:15 #159013
Excuse me, if you could tell meI’m a big fan of war games and ww2. How many tanks does it take from each side of the game to play a good game?
Yaa can make all kinds of vehicles for ww2.18/07/2021 at 12:31 #159027
For the rules I am playing, anything from 0 to 3 tanks with infantry would be a good game. This assumes infantry squad numbers are about 4-10 in total.18/07/2021 at 21:41 #159045
Thanks for the answer. I thought it would take a lot more, so I made a lot of tanks.
Sad sam završio 2 čete pz4 kratka i duga cev sivi. Žute imam 6 četa.
Predpostavljam da sam dobro pravio. 13 tenkova u četi. 3 voda po 4 tenka i jedan komanda.
Ja inače pravim vozila od djubre ta u 6mm. Karton, žica, lepak, akrilne boje.
Ako vas ne uznemiravam, da mi malo pojasnite oko količine tenkova18/07/2021 at 21:42 #159046
I’m sorry, I didn’t notice I didn’t turn on the translator.19/07/2021 at 08:27 #159067
It really depends on the rules, for my rules 0-3 tanks is enough. But I am playing on a very small space! If you were playing on a larger table with rules more suited to larger tables e.g. 3’x3′ or larger, then a company of tanks would be fine to use.22/07/2021 at 21:06 #159275
Thanks for the answer.
It’s a good idea for a bigger table.
If I understand correctly, you’re talking about 6mm.23/07/2021 at 09:15 #159304
Yes, talking about 6mm.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.