[Just Jack]

That is very impressive.  My hats off to your guys there; I couldn’t afford all that 28mm, and if I could, I wouldn’t be able to get it all painted, and if I did, it wouldn’t look anywhere near as good as your toys.

I’m not sure why, but I love the look of this photo:

I love the look of mass, the drawn battle lines.  I aspire to be able to post a photo like this of my own someday, albeit in 10mm 😉

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

Kyote, put your pants back on!!!  Dammit,that’s why we can’t have nice things!

Yum, marshmallows…  Wait, what?  Marshmallow guns?  Nothing’s below you is it, Panda?  Casting aspersions on my real-world combat experiences.  It’s not like we knew they were shooting marshmallows when we started.  I should have never left Candyland 😉

Oh, Carpetland,  Good one…  You’ll pay for that, Panda.  Blue, pull your pants back down; com’ere cute little Panda.
V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

Hey, I never claimed to be perfect, and I’m certainly not above throwing stuff against the wall to see if anything sticks, if I’ve determined that is my best course of action.  Sometimes the best plan you’ve got left is to panic 😉

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

No time to write at the beach, eh?  Life is so hard Mr. Travers 😉 

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

I WAS using my mortars as much as I could 😉

I know I fired them every turn for the first 3-5, then after that only occasionally.  It’s just that 1) he had some rather unimpressive rolls (didn’t KO anyone, just pinned a unit), and 2) (and more importantly) I could keep firing my mortar and get overrun by the Polish infantry and tank, or I could not fire the mortar and bring up reinforcements, like my Pz IV and armored car, to try to drive the Poles back.

My big failing was not making a coordinated push once I had the enemy (seemingly) on the ropes; I should have slowed it down a bit and let 2nd Plt catch up to the motorcycle platoon, but the problem was that the Poles kept lighting up the motorcycle platoon, so I had to be actively engaged there.  There just weren’t enough activations in a turn to fight with the motorcycle platoon, move 2nd Plt up, and fire the mortar.  Not to mention fighting that feeling that the battle was slipping away as the Poles knocked out the armored car, then a rifle squad.  At the end I kinda panicked and just kept throwing stuff at them 😉

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

Hell, some will say they did hand me my ass!  But it was a lot of fun!

Your mention of the mortars is funny, as several guys have made comments to the affect that I should be making better use of supporting fires.  Of course I agree conceptually, but there some things affecting this:

1.  The small table means theses fights are taking place in ‘Death Ground,’ i.e., very close range, which necessarily limits some of the ability to use supporting fires.

2.  I’m a very aggressive player in any case, meaning I’m always looking to make stuff happen, to get/keep the action moving.

3.  The rules play very well into the above two: when you combine the limiting aspect of the activation roll (for a ‘normal’ roll, if I have 12 units on the table I only get to move 4 of them, if I have 8 or less units, I only get to move two of them) combined with the small table and my inherent aggressiveness means you can’t always get your supporting fires in order, which I would point out is a ‘real-life’ issue as well (identifying targets, confirm they’re not friendlies, mark targets, get rounds on target, all while taking fire and directing the actions of your line units).

I know we’re used to seeing a lot of rulesets where a player can coolly and calmly maneuver his line units in formation up to the line of departure while supporting elements are either moving into their positions, or they’re laying about ’cause they’re already there.  Then the supports begin casually firing whilst the infantry begin casually moving off in formation to assault the enemy, textbook fire and maneuver, right?

Well, that’s not these rules (and that’s a good thing); again, if you’ve got 12 units on the table, you only get to use 4 this turn.  So, maybe that’s ‘fire the mortar while three rifle squads move up,’ or maybe it’s ‘fire the mortar and move one tank and two rifle squads up,’ or maybe you can’t afford to fire the mortar because you need to have two tanks move over there to counter the enemy armor threat, then you move this motorcycle squad up because you need to reinforce that flank, and then you have to move this rifle squad over there to counter some enemy troops that are getting too near your MG (which you also didn’t get to fire).

I love the fact that you have to make do, you have to prioritize what’s most important RIGHT NOW, and you don’t get to sit around waiting for supporting fires to soften them up, because there’s an enemy, and he gets a say in it.  If you don’t act now you may not get to, because the fighting is at such close range that he’s going to make something happen if you don’t 😉

Lastly, I’d like to point out that supporting fires at higher echelon (air and arty) are accounted for in two ways:
1) I don’t really use it in-game, but you can call arty (if available in the scenario) during the game.
2) For fights with a preparatory barrage (and even defensive barrages on attackers in their assembly areas/at he LOD), this has just concluded prior to the game starting, which is one of the reasons why you see “non-standard” T/O units on the table with these rules (i.e., 7 squads and two tanks, as the two platoon equaling 9 squads and the tank platoon of 5 tanks has been whittled down a bit by the campaign, arty, air, mines, maintenance, left out of battle, higher echelon flank security, etc…).

Hope that explains why (at least) some of my tactical choices looks so goofy 😉

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

You don’t think I was too hard on the guy, do you?  I mean, he is especially sensitive, even for a Canadian 😉

And hurry up Shaun!  I assume more Operation Jupiter?  I can’t wait!

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

Well, let’s not get too carried away.  We don’t miss him, we miss getting to make fun of the glacial pace of his wargames: Attack on the MG nest, 1st Installment: Sgt Rock meets with Lt Stone to discuss the upcoming attack, quickly devolves to chatting about their wives.  2nd Installment: meet the lads in the squad and watch them play tiddlywinks.  Installment 3: the Enemy: watch Sgt Steiner stumble drunkenly down the street back to his quarters, whilst Cpl Stransky milks a cow. Installment… Well, you get the picture!  It’s his 10th post before someone actually shoots at someone else 😉

If he gets any slower I say we kick him out of the wargamer club, and he can quit fooling around and be what he was meant to be, a model railroader!

In any case, he should get his butt to work 😉

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

I’m so bad, even my hindsight’s only 20/100.

I got in games 12, 13, and 14 this past weekend, should have game 11 posted tomorrow night.

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

John,

Part of it was the set up (via how the blinds shook out, where the Poles ended up with most of their troops in the south).  Another issue was the fact the main ‘town’ portion had a narrow road running down the middle, and the Poles had placed two roadblocks on that road, so it necessarily split the battlefield, which was not a bad plan for the Poles due to their numerical superiority of the Germans (split the enemy, hold on one side and attack on the other).  Lastly, it was also the Polish plan to act very aggressively to take out the German Pz Mk IV; ‘selling their lives dearly’ is a good plan if it’s a foregone conclusion you’re going to lose and you’re just trying to delay/attrit, but the Poles weren’t thinking that, they were thinking about winning.  So they rolled big and lost big 😉

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

Thanks John.  Any gaming plans for this weekend?  I’m hoping to get games 12, 13, and 14 of the Poland campaign in.  I’m looking at finishing it at 18 fights, taking a breather with some other stuff, then moving on to France (the forces are almost finished).

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

I’ve actually got some 10mm WWI infantry lying around that I never finished basing and have never seen the table.  Someday, I suppose.  And for some reason Russian Civil War has always been attractive; I guess it’s the WWI gear without being stuck in the trenches.

And yes, the cops were called; keep the candy in your pockets and your van away from school zones…

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

Norm and Ivan – I actually did change that just a little bit 😉  I do it very closely to what was described: I’ve got black and red D6s: red D6s are orders dice and kill dice, black D6s are shock dice and ‘random event’ dice.  My difference is, instead of rolling the black dice to get a 1, which causes a random event, a roll the black dice, and if it matches the red dice (double up any number) then it’s a random event.  I’m not a statistician, but I don’t think this radically changes the outcome.  The chances of rolling the same number with 2D6 vs rolling a 1 on 1D6; I’m not even going to try, that was too long ago for me and I haven’t used it since 😉

Norm – Once you’ve triggered a random event, then you roll a D100 to determine what that event is.  I’m too lazy to look it up, but I want to say there are something like 25 different random events in the table.

Kyote – Stick with Barbarossa, WWII is where all the cool kids hang out.  Granted, Ivan pointed out you’re way too old to be a kid, but you’re not too old to hang out with the kids.  Though the cops may get called…

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

I suppose I could, but 1) I don’t like messing about with all the stuff that goes with 1:1 (HQ tanks, recovery vehicles, etc…), and 2) I want to be a General, or a Field Marshall, or something like that! 😉

Though much work remains to be done before anything like that can happen…

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

Gotcha, and I understand about being busy.

I got three games in this weekend, still writing some up, I need to finish my 20mm modern, my 20mm WWII, a bunch of 10mm Winter WWII (US, USSR, and German), a little bit of Brit 10mm for 1940, rebase my modern USMC, FFL, and WarPac infantry, finish my big mess of modern 6mm, rebase some WWII 6mm (you guys haven’t even seen those yet!).  I’m sure I’m forgetting something…

Oh, and I haven’t forgotten that I owe you the naval stuff…

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

Spurious,

The sad thing is that I’m sure I’ll end up buying more it’s a sickness.  That’s about 80 3-tank stands; Ivan’s gonna have to come up with some rules for really, really big games! 😉

I need to hurry and get these done up so I can get into some modern Brigade Commander, which is still in development/playtesting.  It’s set for one base=1 company, but with all these tanks I think I’ll play 1 base=1 unit, and have each unit a battalion of three or four actual bases, but acting only as a unit, not independently, so I can get lots of stuff on the table.  The rules can deal with about 12 units max, so I’d have around 36 stands on the table (have to go back to playing on my 6′ x 4′ table I guess).  Sounds cool, right?

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

Rod,

I have no idea when the first action will be; I’m starting to wonder if I’ll ever get the 6mm stuff into fighting shape.  And I like your idea, but that’s what I was working on with the French Legionnaires in Estonia following the break-up of the Soviet Union: the “Sirellists” (side that wants to return to Soviet-style rule) and a confederation of Baltic States who oppose such rule.  They are all former Warsaw Pact nations, and NATO throws in military assistance prior to the major fault lines forming (my FFL stuff is just the preamble to the big split), which is how I get WarPac and NATO gear on both sides of the fight.

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

Kyote – Thanks man. Yeah, it came right down to the end, turns out the Recon Company commander pushed his luck one too many times…

Ivan – To me the armored cars and light tanks (that are mine) look a lot better when they’re not burning though.  I need to work on that.  And where the heck have you been? 😉

Norm – Generally I class the fields as open, no cover or LOS issues.  However, as the war goes on and there’s inclement weather, I can see having them slow movement, making vehicles conduct bog checks.  Just thinking of all the times I had to walk through fields that seriously slowed us down (men and vehicles) due to mud that swallowed up boots and sunk vehicles in up to their axles.  Should come in very handy in Russia.

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

John – Let’s go old man, no one likes excuses.

Rodasaurus – You’re just being selfish, depriving the world!

Take care fellas.

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

Andy,

“I think if I was going to put vehicles and infantry on a single I’d want the infantry ‘in the right place’ relative to their vehicles and that might be hard if already on pennies.”
Yes, this is exactly the problem.  I suppose I can keep the ‘penny-infantry’ for something else (not sure what yet), or sell them off.

S0, lots of 6mm but not lots of games with them?  Sounds like we’re on similar career paths 😉  I don’t know when/if I’ll ever get it done…  I need to hurry up though, these are for Ivan’s upcoming “Brigade Commander.”

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

“A”, AKA, Count Belisarius,

I went to the Warbases website and was about to send them a query, along the lines of “can I get regiment-style movement trays that hold pennies, either 4, 5, or 6 per, 2mm MDF as close to 60mm x 40mm,” when I realized it’s not going to work. See, the plan is to base the infantry with their vehicles, and if I put them on a 60 x 40 base on pennies I don’t think I’m going to get 3 AFVs on there as well, but I can get vehicles and infantry on a 60 x 40 if the infantry aren’t on bases.

I suppose I could get a few for those not requiring vehicles, i.e., straight ‘leg’ infantry, airmobile, and paratroops.

Thanks for suggestion though.

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

Norm,

Thank you Sir, I’m glad you’re liking them.  Mokra did indeed have an armored train, but 1) I don’t have one, and 2) I didn’t want to deal with tackling it (it was very effective, apparently), so I shifted my kampfgruppe’s focus to other areas of the Mokra fighting.  Due to it being a divisional-sized fight, I figured there was plenty of wiggle room.

“…also halfway through the game, 3 x TKS MG arrive as Polish reinforcements (recon tank platoon).”
So, I don’t know if the boardgame is focusing on a narrow part of the fight (as I did), or it’s ‘bath-tubbing,’ but I believe there was much more in the Mokra fight in the form of Polish tanks.  At 1000 (or 1030, don’t remember off the top of my head) the entire Polish 21st Armored Regiment counterattacked and threw the Germans out of Mokra, so plenty of tanks (just wish I didn’t have to proxy, but I’ll get over it 😉 ).

As you see, I’ve been having plenty of fun with this, and there was plenty of ferocious fighting in real life to base the stuff on.

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

Mike,

I’m not sure what’s going on, but they’re still not showing up on my machine.

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

Yeah, AA vs air is difficult to balance, and it does matter how many times you can expect to see air show up.  I like Thad’s idea about the command stand representing AA capability, but that causes two problems: first, and less consequential, is that I need something to do with all my ZSUs and SA-6/9/13s 😉  More importantly, I like the idea of capability/counter, so that if a player can expect that he’ll have 2, 3, or 4 airstrikes throughout the course of the game, he could use them (1, 2, or 3 of them) for flak/SAM suppression to clear the way for later strikes, or even for his on-board helos.

The other thing about having on-board AA with limited range (read: doesn’t cover the entire table) means the player has to take that into consideration, make decisions on whom and where to move with his limited activations.  To me, that is a key mechanism of the game: you’re making the best decisions you can, knowing you can’t do everything you want.  I.e., I really want to press this tank attack, but if I keep moving them up they are going to outrun my AA umbrella, so I really need to move some AA assets forward with them, but that means I won’t be able to move this other unit.

I love the idea of very adverse consequences when a side loses its CO, and you need to figure out how rough you’re going to be on players to replace him.  I.e., a lot of games use the ‘pull another unit off the table and it becomes the CO.’  Personally I think that’s a pretty steep price to pay in a game in which you’re looking at a max of 12 maneuver/line units, though maybe I only feel this way because we haven’t yet mapped it out and I’m not sure that event (CO getting KO’ed) is likely to happen in a given game.  I know you’ve been talking about an armor overrun, but I’m still thinking about air/arty/SOF/EW, which conceivably could KO the command stand three or four times in a game (I think).

And your damn right I’m damn right about 3mm, and I’m sure Thad (the 3mm guru) will agree.  Whaddaya mean with this: “Of course, getting all the planes and helo’s would be awful tempting then”?  Awful tempting, hell, it’s kinda the point!  You could get two Hinds, two Hips, and two MiG-23s for $5.55!  And PicoArmor is fantastic to deal with; it seems I usually receive my order about thirteen minutes after I placed it.

Thad – Resolving air-to-air!?  Now we’re getting somewhere!  I’ll have tank aces and fighter aces.  I think it’s a great idea, and easy to pull off.  Assuming at least one side has fighter-bombers (let’s say my definition is multi-role aircraft, capable of being loaded out for a strike mission OR an air superiority mission, like an F-16 or F-18), he gets to choose a mission: strike, air dominance, or flak/SAM suppression.  In the air dominance mission he rolls in with 1k 1s on any bad guy aircraft that enter that turn (probably not including enemy helos as, from my limited understanding, look-down-shoot-down against helos remains a relatively difficult thing to do to this day, much less with Cold War technology).

I’m not sure I’m following you about equating recon stands with light stands.  I know that if you’re talking about a recon battalion you could have three recon company stands (treating them as ‘light’ stands vice infantry stands), but what I was getting at is the idea of recon not operating as a company, but as platoons (or even smaller, in ‘real life’), so using them in the game as ‘attachments’ or ‘capabilities,’ similar to the specialty figures in Company Command, as opposed to them being represented as an actual, company-level unit.  I think we were looking at actual units being only armor and infantry, with everything else attached out as capabilities/specialty figures (AAA, SAM, recon, ATG/ATGM, MG, mortar, field guns, etc…).

Cheers fellas.

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

Holy @#$%!!!  He actually IS a wargamer!  I seen it!  I seen tanks and guns and infantry and even some sort of flying contraption!  And a lady to make fun of stuff (at least that’s what mine does)!

Great stuff Kyote-John, now we’re cooking with gas!  Today will long be remembered in the annals of wargaming 😉

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

Ivan,

Regarding AA, I don’t know about the “company” AA being stationary.  Does it have unlimited range, can it fire multiple times per turn, can it be targeted?  ‘Aesthetically,’ so to speak, it flies in the face of everyone since WWII working on getting their AA mech/motorized to keep up with the front line, but I can live with it as a game mechanism if you can make it cool, quick, and easy.  Having a single AA unit kinda sucks in terms of counting against your unit total and having to have it if there’s an enemy air threat, and then if it gets KO’ed you’re naked, as no one is going to take more than one, right?  Or are you thinking about line units having some sort of organic/residual AA capability of their own (like MANPADs)?  If you have an AA stand, it’s kinda cool to think about running Wild Weasel/AA suppression type air missions, but that’s really getting out in left field a ways.

“Counter-battery could be an opposing asset use? Subject to a dice roll no doubt.”
Yeah, maybe just use a ‘normal’ fire mission, but it has to be assigned to the CO, not to a line unit or recon.  I’d say the CO still doesn’t need a roll to use it though, just the roll to see how effective.  Say 1K, 1-that enemy fire mission can’t be used this turn, but can be ‘recycled’ into the mix next turn, and 6-that fire mission is eliminated (if the enemy player started the game with three FMs per turn, he’s now down to 2 for the remainder of the game).

I think the recon thing was initially you’re idea, I just stole it and gave it back to you 😉

Logistics…  I’m still shaky on logistics, it’s just tough, or I just have a mental block about it.  It just seems to me that, to do it justice, you’ve really got to go all out and start tracking ammo and fuel expenditures, then have a log train, supply dumps, targeting of such by air and arty, rear area security and unit security zones, partisans/insurgents/irregular warfare elements attacking it; let’s not forget the medical aspect then, as well, and traffic jams between line units moving forward, medical units moving backwards, and log units moving laterally/every which way.

I will say that ‘cutting the head off the snake’ is certainly a Cold War to present concept, so we need to think about targeting of the command stand by air/arty/SF/electronic warfare (yes, electronic warfare, and SIGINT units or, more likely, attachments/capabilities).  So you definitely have to figure out the CO getting knocked out, and a succession plan.  Then you gotta throw in the NBC environment 😉

And go 3mm; while I  am strangely proud of my massive collection of 6mm stuff, and I’m beginning to feel like a benevolent dictator, I swear I wish I hadn’t done it.  It would be incredibly attractive, and cheap, to put together modern forces on a 2′ x 2′ or 3′ x 3′ to play these (or Company Command).  $4 gets you fifteen tanks, or five stands of three tanks to put in perspective.  A couple bucks gets you a couple aircraft or a couple helos.  VERY attractive.

Meanwhile, I’m looking at trying to put three 6mm tanks on a single base, and it’s ugly/huge.  Plus it means I need to do something else with all those 6mm troops I did on pennies…

As I stated before, these are shaping up nicely.  And that was an excellent post for Company Command’s force/scenario/war generators.

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

Rod,

“Yikes, six battles in twelve hours. The troops of KG Klink must be exhausted…”
Yeah, it’s been busy.  Of course, those are the fights that actually occurred, but they were spread across an entire 4th Panzer Division, so I suppose KG Klink didn’t have to participate in all of them, but I am playing games so I didn’t mind pushing the boys a little hard.

“The Germans must learn how to use smoke to shut down enemy ATG’s and Mortars.”
It comes down to force structures limiting what’s available, and random events (simulating an in-game artillery smokescreen) limiting my ability to use smoke.  I’ve only had mortars available in two or three fights, and even then you have to understand you are very limited with regards to what is able to activate, so you’re really in a bind (and having to constantly prioritize and make decisions, which is a big plus for me, i.e., you never get to do anything even close to all you want to do) as to what you’re going to do: do I shoot mortars, move tanks in view of ATGs, or move infantry in view of MGs, and if I shoot mortars, do I drop smoke or HE?  I’ve gone with HE.  Smoke from three 37mm or 75mm tank cannons isn’t all that effective, don’t have smoke generators (Cold War Soviet-style), or the numbers to pull that off even if they did.  So it’s take your lumps with fire and maneuver.

“…pretty much heads up frontal attack with little in the way of supporting firepower or oblique maneuver.”
and
“Is there something about these rules which forces the Germans into such frontal assaults…”
I would submit that, at this low echelon, i.e., severely zoomed in (a handful of tanks and a handful of rifle squads) on a portion of a regimental-sized battle, there’s nothing but head-on attacks.  At a higher level of play, any maneuver threatening the flanks means there’s not a fight, the threatened unit falls back rather than die in place.  At the micro in these fights, the enemy has had too many units, meaning there were no flanks, they could mount a table edge to table edge defense.  No one has yet commented on the fact that each of the games has been even (or just off even, i.e., 12 elements to 9) in terms of force numbers, there have been none of the accepted attacker favored 3-1 odds.  I did this on purpose and for two reasons: 1) in real life these fights were brutal, and the Germans actually lost a number of them (all of the ones I’ve played so far, minus the one at the frontier); and 2) as a solo gamer given the enemy more troops ‘handicaps’ (to a certain extent) to off-set (my) player control and knowledge.

“Why didn’t the Germans set up a fire-base with the Panzer IV’s and use HE and Smoke to degrade the Polish defenses.”
and
“Why not set your Pz. Gren’s riding on your panzer II’s and III’s and avoid the road as much as possible during the attack?”
Because that doesn’t match my understanding of German mechanized doctrine (though I know the Germans took to tank-riding, somewhat, later in the war).  From my reading, there’s a remarkable lack of flair or even tactics: it’s a lot of “there’s the bad guys, form line abreast on me and charge,” stopping only to fire and CONSTANTLY leaving behind their infantry (which, usually, they were supposed to be supporting).  I’m reading “Panzer Aces” right now, and that’s the story of every one of them, from Bolter to Ribbentrop to Wittman to Carius.

Regarding Pz IV’s supporting Pz IIs and IIIs, because of the force structure in the rules (which I’m a tremendous fan of), there will never be more than a single platoon of tanks on the table (eh, maybe later in the war I’ll some tank only fights?).  But I’m just getting at the idea that these fights (at least my plan for them) are infantry fights with some armor in support.

“…are these “kick in the front door” tactics yours Just Jack?”
Cant’ blame anyone but me, and I’m nothing if not simple 😉
Having said that, the rules are very limiting with regards to a player’s activations, and please don’t read that as a criticism, it’s a feature!  You have to prioritize, you will not get to do everything you want to do, so you must constantly make the best of a bad situation.  It’s beautiful!  It’s great for fog of war, without descending into utter chaos and turning the player into a spectator (in my humble opinion).

“…Rommel would applaud the moxy…”
And that’s been a bit driver in how I’ve handled the Germans.  Their motto appears to have been “in the absence of orders, when in doubt, and/or when in the face of the enemy move forward aggressively.  And sometimes it worked, and sometimes it didn’t.  And sometimes when it worked, a Sgt or Lt made an initiative-based decision at the local level, which succeeded and had a consequence all out of proportion to the forces involved or even the reason why the decision was carried out.  But sometimes, at the operational level, it was amazing and dislocated the enemy’s entire defensive plan.

“Very proactive but very dangerous too until the defenders’ positions have been fully identified.”
So, in game terms, if I’ve got a recon Lt looking at an undefended/lightly defended bridge, or a tank Sgt looking at a group of ‘standing’ enemy vehicles, or an infantry Cpl spies an isolated machine gun, they will make haste to move aggressively for that objective, even if the ‘smart’ thing to do was wait for reinforcement (though history is replete with examples of doing just that and still losing because the enemy brought up reinforcements too).

“As usual a great a report…”
Why thank you Sir, I’m always glad to hear there are folks out there enjoying these.

“…and even I will admit that the pictures are great too.”
You may be onto something there 😉  You and Kyote are depriving the world!

Take care Rod!

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

Ivan,

Regarding range, for simplicity’s sake I’d say three (and there may be anomalies): infantry fire (6″), anti-tank fire (12″), and arty (board, so long as someone has LOS to the target).  Example of a potential outlier: battalion level (80-82mm) mortars (attachment/specialty figure) are ‘infantry fire’ (wouldn’t do anything to armor), but have 12″ range.  I think MGs would be an attachment, but not an outlier as they are AP fire and should use the 6″ range (which ‘shorts’ them a little from real life, but works in terms of ‘effective’ range, I think).

Upon review of your comments about tanks as attachments, I’d say it’s not hard to pull off, it’s simply an AT capability and additional AP capability, just like ATGs, ATGMs, recoiless rifles.

“My rule of thumb for tanks is if people at the time thought they were equal, then that’s good enough. That means some wiggle room (is T72 equal to M60 tank? etc.) but that’s up to the players.”
Agreed, close enough for government work, and keeps it quick and simple.

Regarding flank attacks only getting additional shock dice, I agree with what you’re saying, it just all comes down to how decisive/dramatic you want it to be.  I have no problem with the ‘big swings,’ whereas, we all know of your ‘more than 1 kill dice’ phobia 😉  It really can go either way, with the other simply being an optional for the player, and my two cents is to go with your version and then add a caveat along the lines of “if it occurs to the player(s) that the attack is particularly violent/shocking in its execution, i.e., the target is not only being hit in the flank, but is totally surprised and outgunned, then you can add a kill die and a shock die to the attacking unit’s normal combat capability.

I agree with you on helos and AA capabilities, but what’s the best way to model AA?  I initially envisioned AA and SAMs as an attachment, placed with a line unit, that operated on reaction mechanisms (prior to the A/C attack) to defend the supported unit.  Of course, if you do that you can end up in the situation of the enemy only attacking targets without AA capabilities, and doing so with impunity as the attached AA capability only protects the supported unit.

I don’t think having AA operate independently, just because I picture stands of SAMs chasing stands of helos around the board….

You could leave AA as attachments, then have them able to react to anything within range (which is probably what you had in mind?).  My only issue there is the ‘air-tight’ defense, where everything is covered and the player’s don’t even try to use air assets for fear of them almost certainly getting swatted from the sky.  It’s a tough balance to strike, but I think the ‘normal’ 5MIN rule of only one unit (in this case, attachment) can react, and each unit/attachment can only react once per turn, probably works.  So, you’re already a genius for coming up with it, just port it over?

I’ve been thinking on arty as well, but not sure what to do (or what you’re thinking).  I love the idea of just placing them as attachments to the CO stand and/or line units.  You have three arty fire missions, so at the start of each turn the player distributes them as he sees fit.  Only the stand(s) with arty attached can call the fire missions, and they can be called on enemy unit (or area, for smoke) within LOS, regardless of range.  The CO (and maybe Recon?) can call ‘automatically,’ but line units must test (you’re regular 1 and 6 test from 5MIN and Company Command).  I wouldn’t mess around with wait times or anything; test passes, nominate the target and roll combat dice.

The only thing I don’t like about that system is that it doesn’t allow the enemy to use air or arty for counterbattery, or to have enemy armor break into your rear area and overrun your arty.

Then we get to recon.  I don’t like the idea of recon being a stand/unit, because it’s very limiting in terms of you’d have maybe one recon stand, which is a company, but in real life they’d be operating (at least as small) as platoons, thereby effectively tripling your tabletop capability.  So then I was thinking of using them as attachments, but the way we’ve been thinking (or at least I’ve been thinking) about attachments, in terms of them being physically co-located, doesn’t work either.  So, maybe recon attachments can be placed 6-12″ ahead of the supported line unit?  I.e., you have a recon attachment and a mech SAM attachment supporting a tank company/stand; the SAM is placed in base contact with the tank company, but the recon is placed 6-12” in front of the tank company.  Okay, but now what?

As I mentioned above, I could see allowing fire missions to be ‘placed’ with recon (if you think arty as described above works, and can figure out the counterbattery issue), but what other capability(ies) should recon allow?  In a lot of games it gives bonuses to spotting, but we don’t have hidden elements in this game.  I sort of like the idea that enemy units (or one enemy unit) in LOS of recon only gets to half move during its turn, but recon has to fall back as well.  This simulates recon’s screening mission to engage, force the enemy to deploy, then fall back.  I just throw that out as an example of something you might could have recon do.

“For 15mm, it does need a tiny bit more space. 4×4 with extra space for beer”
We all know that only weirdos play 15mm anyway 😉

I bought a bunch more 6mm stuff for my (upcoming) birthday, gotta lot of work ahead of me.  But I was looking at it last night with an eye towards multi-basing.  I’ll try to post pics of what I have later, but a lot of work ahead of me…

Nathaniel – I’m with you, I think it would be cool to have to deal with certain factors of logistics, so long as it was quick and easy.  Get to work Ivan!  I haven’t given any real thought to it.  Right now the only real ‘logistics’ aspect in the rules at all is the random event for low ammo.  Not sure where to go from there; I’m not really one to track ammo and fuel expenditures.

Now I believe I’ll sit back, relax, and let the brain trust weigh in.

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

Any news on the Prussian front?  I really enjoy that one, it was a big inspiration for me to get into solo gaming and start my own blog.

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

Yeah, the Polish mortars really made life difficult for my infantry in the south.  I’ve got some ‘real life’ intrusions, so no gaming today…  I’ll try to get some writing done on the last two fights I’ve done.

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

As you know, I’m with it.  I agree the ‘1 and 6’ mechanism should remain unchanged, works like a champ, good with base= ~company, mech/motor infantry can be based with vehicles and infantry together (though I probably won’t, just because mine aren’t based like that, but the beauty of the rules is that it shouldn’t matter, i.e., when mounted they are vehicle, when dismounted they are infantry, so it’s flexible enough to do it either way).

I like the asset concept, also have to figure out random events.  I agree ranges have to be limited, but 12″ for infantry anti-personnel fire seems a bit long to me.  I was thinking make their range the same as their movement, so maybe 6 inches?  Let vehicles move twice that, and their range possible equal as well?  I know it’s not the most accurate/scientific, but 1) it keeps things simple, and 2) it stays away from the maximum range a weapon can fire and more in the ‘range we’d realistically consider shooting at.’  I agree that infantry (every unit, actually) needs separate AP and AT values/ranges.  However, regarding LAW/RPGs, as those are organic to rifle companies (whereas ATGMs are not, and could be represented as ‘assets,’ AKA attachments) and very short range, maybe don’t have them as a ‘ranged’ capability, simply take them into account for close combat?

Regarding the specialist elements as platoons, the concept is fantastic.  I don’t think the list has to be that long (I think earlier we came up with MGs, mortars, ATGMs/ATGs, recon, engineers, air defense), and the only one I think is hard to to come up with some clever for (at least for me) is recon.  I do admit to being a little scared when you mentioned tank platoons as specialist elements, though it’s probably unfounded.  I’m just thinking that we’ve got ‘base elements,’ i.e., a rifle company, a mech company, a tank company, and it could get real confusing if you start talking about cross-attachment at the platoon level.  Though I freely admit I’m probably the only one thinking about this, and it probably doesn’t have to be complicated at all, just treat it like any of the other specialist elements, so I’ll be quiet about that 😉

Troop quality can work as you described above, as well as what’s in Company Command already works great.  And I’m with you on vehicle stats.  What I’ve been thinking about lately is, tanks that are ‘even,’ that is, roughly comparable in capability, say an M-1 Abrams fighting a Leopard II (bear with me), they engage each other with 1K 1S.  Now the M-1 or Leo is taking on a T-72, superior tank is 2K 2S, inferior is 1K 1S (nice and simple without getting too crazy, I think).  I also give an extra 1K 1S for flank/rear/top attack.

What’s your plan for attack helos?  On table or off-table?  I personally like on table, and I don’t think you have to worry too much about stuff like ammo expenditure as they probably won’t last that long (conventional engagements; for unconventional I’d make them off table assets I think, maybe random events).

“Can someone figure out how much ground (frontage) a modern mechanized infantry company takes up? It’ll give us an idea of how much space the table top is.”
There’s all kinds of pubs online that get into that stuff, differing by terrain, mission, and national doctrine.  If you decide to go with that I’d kind of just take an average, but, to be honest, I really wouldn’t worry about it.  I’ve been playing on a 3′ x 3′ in 10mm (just as an example for everyone to have something to look at for perspective); my plan with this would be to play on the same 3′ x 3′, but in 6mm, though I think 10mm would probably still work, with 15mm on maybe a 4′ x 4′.

There’s a start.

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

Thanks for the list Rod, I appreciate it!

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

“For the record, I am deeply offended, Jack.”
Well, you’d better be!  I think we’re on a roll here, and so now I’m off to the ‘other’ thread to see what Ivan’s up to now.

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

Thad and Ivan – You guys are absolutely right, and I apologize as I swear I actually meant to address the “eye of the beholder, call it whatever you want issue.”  I wrote “I need to really ponder your second idea.  At first is strikes me…” and I bloviated for awhile, but never came back to the second point, which was it’s purely a semantic issue, the stands represent whatever you want them to represent.  For me they will be companies 😉

Sorry, I just lost my train of thought and never got back around to where I wanted to end up (that’s what happens with a baby around!), hope I didn’t seem to frumpy, though I guess it makes me a T/OE fetishist 😉

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

Thanks Rod.  Yeah, I’m slowing down a bit, but I got a good bit of gaming in during the holidays.  I’ve played eight games so far, should have number 6 posted tomorrow.  I’m hoping to get two or three games in this weekend, but writing is the problem.  You guys better appreciate all this writing!!!! 😉

I suppose I probably have another 10 fights or so until I’m ready to fast forward to France.  I just received Skirmish Campaigns Ghost Division in the mail, so that will serve as the backbone for my France 1940 campaign.  I like the book, but there’s not much in there for armor.  I’ll have to improvise…

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

Rev – “(please imagine what word goes here)”
I can’t, that’s why I need pictures!!!

“Remember one man’s carpet is another man’s hill.”
Now that was just uncalled for.

“Can’t we just all get along?”
Welcome to the family; this is us getting along 😉

Ivan – “Photography, like the internet, is a fad anyways.”
Yeah, they’ll never last.

Kyote – And I expect that Colonel Suckerlove gets his butt kicked.

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

Hell, I won!  Nobody said it was gonna be easy 😉

[Just Jack]

But the real cool kids have cameras, and know how to use them 😉

[Just Jack]

Oh, and the next one of you @#$%ers that fails to capitalize Marines is gonna get a visit soon.

See, it’s easy to be a tough guy on the internet; it’s all I got left 😉

V/R,
Jack

[Just Jack]

“With all the sheep, I’m confident it’ll have country music.”
Now that is downright hilarious!

“What do marines listen to?”
I suppose I’m supposed to say something like, “the soothing sounds of spent brass on the street, and the gurgling of intestines on my bayonet,” but I’m pretty mellow now.  How ’bout some Toadies, Black Keys, and Jack Johnson?

“Do marines listen to music?  I suppose if some orders them to do so, I guess they would…”
If God wanted to you to be @#$%ing musical he’d a formed a @#$%ing banjo on your @#$%ing @#$%!!!  That’s what a real Marine would say 😉

V/R,
Jack

[Author]

Posts