Returning to see an old friend "Squad Leader"

And it came to pass that I brought it down from the dark place in the loft and opened it in the presence of friends and a battle for Stalingrad suddenly emerged (see below, The Guards Counterattack - say no more): 

Familiar SL friends of a different sort (see below, berserking Russians that no morale test will diminish but a bullet can still KIA): 

Ah, home again (see below, a "possible" set-up but is it optimal? Please readers stop squabbling, consult The General to find out and see what the wise sages and prophets say):

How we laughed when my splendid well oiled German Spandau machine guns all broke (see below, I ask you of all the times to throw double six - when hoards of ravenous Russians are approaching!): 

And you know what - I did it again (see below, what is worse than two broken German Spandau, would you believe it if I told you four Spandau?): 

My friend, there is always one watching (and he had no idea what was going on because he had not played SL before) kindly calculated the odds of that happening for me (see below, but seasoned SL players expect the unusual as a matter of course): 

I knew it, sooner or later I was going to make one of the Russians go berserk (see below, at least he has an open road to cross in line of sight (LOS) of a German machine gun nest):  

Meanwhile - when rallying a broken leader don't roll a 12, especially when you have other squads in teh same hex also in a perilous state - it is all happening tonight):  

The Guards make a spectacular attack across an open space to try and get to some broken Germans (see below, what can that German squad in the building do? Save its comrades?): 

No (see below, a prime killing chance goes begging and it looks grim in Close Combat [automatic kills on broken squads]) for the broken Germans (see below, but wait what is this, read the sequence of play, rout moves before close assault - run away Fritz, which makes sense to me): 

Meanwhile the berserkers annoying run across the road (another dismal German MG roll) and successfully close combat some Germans - I knew it, it's those red counters that do it!): 

But alas the Guards are hammered by some "good German MG" dice (see below, SL can be oh such a cruel, cruel game): 

We left it there, happy to play a few turns - the Germans probably in the winners enclosure but you never, never know for sure in SL!

Simulating War: FireMove - What (terrain) is in a Square?

I posted the AAR of my latest FireMove AAR along with my to the Simulating War Yahoo Forum and received a very insightful and stimulating response from Bob MacKenzie (see full text below):

Hi Mark

I don't have access to the rules set but I will venture some comments on the terrain

Unless the rules have some way of abstracting it the terrain looks too open.  http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/b004383.pdf has some interesting graphs on maximum spotting ranges and maximum shoot in ranges. Theoretically  max LOS from any given defensive position is 300m or less (ie two of your hexes) 63% of the time. However that doesn't translate into shooting distances. 66% of engagements take place at 100m or less and 85% less than 300m. Of course it may be that the rules limit shooting to 2 hexes so take this into account?

I assume you are familiar with Army Operational Research Group report 17/52, An Analysis of Infantry Advance Rates in Battle (WO291/1159)? If not there is some info in:http://www.testofbattle.com/upload/bob/Benchmarks.htm That piece of reserch would apper to be very relevant t your game.

Cheers

Bob

Yahoo Forum: Simulating War

The research article links are interesting in themselves. From the Yahoo Discussion Forum posts I have been set to musing more on terrain. Looking back at some Squad Leader boards you can see how much low level details contained even in an "open" FireMove hex. A four hex by four hex quadrant is roughly equivalent to a one FireMove hex. Even something with predominantly "Open" terrain has a Wood, Building, Connecting Path, Hill as well as plenty of  Open  (see below):

A "Hill" hex contains Hills (naturally) of several heights, Woods, Open and even a Building plus there would even be paths linking terrain features together (see below):

A "Woods" hex has yes "Woods" but also a road/trail through the woods, a feature slope leading up rather than a hill per se, another inking of a building and clear (see below): 

Ultimately the terrain cost would be different and cover benefit would be different depending on the "side" you entered from.

US Colonel David Schroeder presented at Connections UK 2014 an interesting keynote address where he explained part of his WWI game design which took the Hexagon and broke it down into six triangles, each with their own terrain type. So the cost to enter and combat terrain benefits depended on which direction you came in from (see slide 57).

http://www.professionalwargaming.co.uk/ConnectionsKeynote.pdf http://www.professionalwargaming.co.uk/ConnectionsKeynote.pdf 

Food for thought! I am thinking that the core Hex should have a terrain type (the predominant terrain type) but each Hex has its LOS and movement cost.

A Battle to be Played: "Over and Over Again"

This is my WWII (land) project for 2013. 

It is a battle scenario based on Phillip Sabin's "Fire and Movement" game in his book Simulating War. It does not require that many figures or a particularly large board. In many ways is resembles the "portable wargaming" craze that has been sweeping the varios CoW (Conference of Wargamers) blogs (for example see Bob Cordery's blog "Wagaming Miscellany").

The scenario Phillip Sabin's poses is of interest when I think back to the mid-1990's when I was feverishly collecting (at that time exclusively 20mm) WWII toys. I was left with an awful sinking feeling that after I had painted and based them (at that time for the Command Decision rule set, a project that in itself is still "not complete" and an active never ending Work In Progress [WIP]), I still didn't or wouldn't know what to do with the "toys". Not just the mechanics of the rules (hard enough), but a sensible way to set things up. Yes there were scenario's ... but did they really make any sense? What for a battalion's purpose was a sensible sort of fight (and yes I know war is not fair).  

By this I meant "What was a realistic battle scenario" in terms of space and time?". What was a common battle the rules were meant to control and simulate. All the 'command and control' commentary in Designers Notes describing commanding Divisional strength table top formations (which I personally is over reaching Command Decision) didn't help me nor did the interesting aspect of rates of fire. I needed a simple scenario to blood myself on infantry combat.

The Scenario:

A infantry battalion is on the "attack", against a half a battalion of infantry under "hasty defensive positions", as in using cover rather than entrenchments. The attackers are a full strength whereas the defenders are deemed under strength (roughly 2:1, 13 attacking stands to the defenders 6 [all stands representing platoons]). Good or lucky intelligence has directed the attack against a sector that "should give" or "could hold" depending upon the tactics and skill of the attacker (plus a bit of "lady luck"). The defenders are trying to cover a kilometer wide frontage and can call upon an indirect fire base (medium 81mm mortar) while the attacker has the luxury of an initial artillery barrage (25pdrs or 105mm howitzers), then a mortar and indirect machine gun fire bases. The additional support assets seem to tip the odds in the attackers favour but there is a large random element of "battlefield terrain" creates a good deal of uncertainty (as it is generated new each time). The duration of the attack is deemed to be abut "two" hours which translates into about 12 x 10 minute turns. The "board" is twelve hexes wide (the kilometer "battle zone" of the defending battalion) and six hexes deep. The determination of victory is determined in an attritional manner of "unbroken" units on the enemy baseline at the end of the twelve turns. Thus it is assumed that the full battalion "should be able to dislodge" two companies out of 'hasty positions'. .

Starting from this more board-game orientated description I plan to take "the scenario" for a long walk, starting with Sabin's rules and then through the various rule-sets I possess, varying nationalities and periods (early, mid and late WW2). Initially from Simulating War the attack is envisioned to take place in 1944, Normandy/France, with a British Infantry Battalion advancing against a composite, scratch force of German Infantry, reduced from an initial battalion and supplemented by "a series drafts" of replacement sections and platoons that 'keep making up'the numbers up.

Kit to use:


The battles should be suitable for my: 1/300, 1/200, 20mm, 1/72 and 1/76 toys (but not all at the same time), heck I might even start things off with my old Squad Leader counters

Rules to Use (Initial List): 

• Fire and Movement (Phillip Sabin)
• Command Decision II/II/I
• Spearhead
• Battle Group Commander 
• CrossFire
• Great Battles of WWII
• Squad Leader

Watch this space ...
    

"Books Read over Xmas" and new Projects Spawned

Over the Xmas break I also finished reading a very interesting book (see below):

But now the real work begins as although teh content itself was interesting, it also contained seven games (which although designated board games in my eyes should be taken to the tabletop) that simply set up and beg to be played. In particular two WWII era infantry games:

• Fire and Movement (A rural infantry battle: "an attacking battalion versus two defending companies")
• Blockbusting (An urban battle: "an attacking company versus two defending platoons")

Maps can be found at: Phil Sabin's King's College Website Link
Half way down the page you will see an "Infantry Combat" Link which gives a useful PDF to Print Out

The intention is to take them to the tabletop and play them over and over again, then contrast them with some of my many existing WWII rule sets (Command Decision, Spearhead, BGC, Great Battles of WWII, Squad Leader to name but a few) to 'compare and contrast' and see what comes out in the mix. If I had a new years resolution it would have been to make more use of my WWII assets (er, I mean toys).

That's not to say I am forgoing the ancients as Strategos II, BBDBA and Phil Sabin's book on "Lost Battles" figure highly on my radar screen. 

Oh and I have also to paint the Bismarck (again) and finish off my 1/72 Mosquito and Westland Whirlwind

What (WW2 land) rules to follow?

Despite some twenty years of 'punctuated intensity' in the wargames hobby, dominated but not exclusive to the twentieth century (and again in particularly WW2) I have yet to find my ideal set of wargame rules.The concept of "set" can be expanded to include, scale of the models (20mm, 15mm, 1/300, 10mm, 1/200 etc.), the tactical/operational level of engagement the game would represent, the timescale of turn and the simulation versus game mechanics employed.

Yes I have lots of sets (in the purchased sense), but many have not made it to actions on the table-top. Those that keep coming to mind are defined as the "good", the "hopefull" and the "sinfull". All my own personal views of course, and in no way a criticism to those who enjoy a different way/taste to mine in the hobby.

Some "good experiences" of the ones played so far have been:

• Spearhead (and modified versions thereof, played with 1/300 or 1/200 kit, a fairly large sized battle of three to four battalions a side can be concluded in a club-night)
  
• The Command Decision Series (to be accurate mainly WW2 Command Decision Version 2 but Version 3 is in my possession and has been read, played originally with my 20mm kit although I am planning another go with this set using my 1/200 kit, provides a battalion/regiment intense slog-it-out feel to a night)
• Hell by Daylight (participated in various excellent 20mm Skirmish level games, always fun and leaving a feeling of authenticity in the mouth)
• Squad Leader transferred to tabletop (can work well, but mainly with those who have already played it as a board-game, it can frustrate gamers not familiar with it and the infamous Stalingrad scenarios, again with 20mm kit)

Those "hopeful" sets yet to be tasted/tested in the heat of a club battle:

• Battlefront (of which I have high hopes to use 20mm as well as my 1/200 kit)
  
• (Canadian) Great Battles of World War Two (which looks to have some great concepts, probably using 1/200 kit)
  
• Crossfire (which again looks to have good concepts and works for a good many people, a good 20mm prospect, particularly inspired by these chaps Tim Marschall and Lloydian)
  
• Megablitz (well a few 20mm tanks should stretch a fair way in the OoB here, a very high level way to run a battle. Not a case of where are my squads but what are my battalions doing?)

Those "hopeful" sets yet even to be purchased:

• Nuts! (skirmish)
• I Ain't Been Shot Mum! (Company)
• Flames of War (although very popular something tells me I shouldn't hold my breath on this one as I keep seeing it mentioned in the "points" competition sense, though their production quality seems excellent, so popular in 15mm, but a maybe for 20mm)

Ones that suited me not, as in they have "sinned" IMHO, or failed the 'wargaming environments' in which they were played in or perhaps personalities/style involved:

• Rapid Fire First Edition (which had a notorious nights of wanton death that sealed its doom at several clubs I have attended, artillery being a notorious talking point)

Nevertheless the search continues for that "perfect" set. Visual appeal is very important for me, hence my drift away from Command Decision 2 in 20mm as the models in some cases seemed almost touching (in extreme cases, platoons of tanks almost in hand to hand combat) and it didn't carry the realistic visual feel across to me.

However my recent 20mm painting may make me reconsider this due to its modelling appeal. :)