Battalion Level Rules Megatest - WW2

 

In October/November I've started on my Battalion-level mega rules test for mechanised rules. I started with those rules aimed primarily at WW2. I set up the Cristot scenario from O Group and played it through with 3 different rules sets, plus my own. As previously noted many of the Coy level rules - see  https://newconverj.blogspot.com/p/rules-reviews.html - would also work at Bn, as will some of the Bde level ones in due course.

Since most of my time is being sucked up by the PhD I've just done this one omnibus, note form, post for the playthroughs. The Modern Battalion rules should be tested 1H24.

TLDR: O Group is the set to go for!

O Group

108pp soft-back, 4pp QRS

How It Played

- Germans deployed well fwd, with A/T gun trained on road and PzrSchrk team in wood by road.

- British went for a broad advance, but A Coy (W) hesitant at start.

- On E flank B Coy came under fire fm farm, laid smoke, moved across neighbouring field and into MG ambush. Never really recovered initiative as battle focussed on W

- Once A coy got act together advanced to wood line, but 3 Pl sent home by en fire. 2 Pl stormed the farm house, took flanking fire but go through, and after couple of rounds melee took farmhouse. 

- German I. Coy tried to counter but pl defeated by fire and pulled back to wood. Germans deploy res pl and MG team into wood. Firefight with farm whilst British move 1 Pl up and Carrier Pl to enfilade the wood

- Meantime Sherman/Cromwell tps move up, but hit by the A/T ambush. The 2nd troop lasts longer, Panther Pl deployed, fires and misses, and PzrShrck firing on flank gets the final kill

- German II Coy pushes fwd W of the road against minimal opposition, risking flanks of both British thrusts

- Germans bring down mortar fire on farm, but twice get OOA. British take several turns to get Fires, but finally bring down couple of turns fire on the woods, which combined with the MG fire finally starts to get KIAs and I Coy effectively wiped out. 

- Called time. ~Turn 10/16. Probably still in balance but unlikely that Brits would get 50% of Cristot in another 6 turns, esp with II Coy fwd

Pros

- really emphasises bn level

- simple die rolls (everything is 4+), rolls+DMs easily memorable

Cons

- shock->suppression->KIA takes time to build up - realistic (in some cases)?

- quite abstract rolls (but Bn)

- confusing terms (orders, unit etc)

- Index, but page numbers hidden in spine

- not 100% logical layout

Possible Improvements

- Smoke on any arty/mortar impact squares and no other firing into before or after

- 4+ for opportunity so 50:50?

- Coy morale?

- Use a Suppress markers once get to 3 shock for less clutter and to emphasise

- Redeploy of sp wpns?

- Use tanks as individuals not sections? Else put on larger bases to emphasise.

Overall

Really nice set of rules. Certainly preferred them to Chain of Command and think the way that the patrol bases works is really good and well worth stealing. The set to beat at this level? 9/10.

My Medieval Base/BOD Rules Development Test

 

Having given everybody else's medieval rules a hard time, it's time to move on to my own! I've currently got two versions - a base/bucket-of-dice set and a Fate Dice set. I've also been toying with a D10 version, but that would probably just be a variation of the base/BOD set using D10 instead of D6s to give a bit more granularity between weapon types.

Both sets of rules share an order system similar to Poleaxed, and I've just added their idea of commander "aggressiveness" ratings (as well as competency) - so a unit gets given an order and then carries it out every turn - no hanging around waiting for command points. Lots of the other mechanics are borrowed from SLS, so per Battle card based activation, King+CPs for the CinC, troop quality. Movement is base+random. The games are, as ever played on a 10cm grid. It's really just the  firing/melee/casualty/morale model that's different.

For this version firing/melee is 1D6 per base, with standard DMs, and then an armour saving throw - seems sensible/suitable for medieval. Casualties are in bases, but I tend to mark them rather than remove them just to make the clearing up simpler (although for medieval shrinking frontage may be more important to show). 

I stole the morale model from Battlegroup:NORTHAG, so your break point is the number of units in a battle, and you roll D3 for each unit lost. So on average your Morale Hits == Break Point after 50% losses, but you could do better or worse.

Set Up

Battle of Tewkesbury again, straight fight. There was some drawing of fate cards before the game, which delayed part of the Yorkist Rear, and weakened some of the Lancastrian Van.

How It Played

The battles paired off against each other. Yorkists moved forward on Attack orders, Lancastrians stayed put on Defend. Both sides loosed a few arrows and then switched out missiles for bill for the melees. This went well for the Lancastrians in the Van and Main, less well in the Rear. Currours squared off against each other, the Yorkists getting by far the better of it before the cavalry broke to recover.

After a couple of melee turns things began to shake out. The Lancastrian Rear was the first battle to go. The Yorkist centre was very dicey, but held on with a morale/control test at 50% casualties. The Yorkish Van was almost completely wiped out though.

Both Commanders were getting stuck into the action, although neither brave enough to lead from the front rank. Both took flesh wounds, but as the Lancastrian Rear melted away for a brief moment Lord Wenlock was left exposed, but managed to hasten away before the Yorkists could take him. It was then Edward that ended up exposed as he had only his MAA around him as his center Battle failed. 

The Lancastrian Courrors came racing back, aiming at Edward but their Yorkists counterparts managed an intercept and finally wiped them out.

With two battles down it was time for Edward to withdraw, protected by what was left of his Rear.

Rules Impression

OK, I know they are my rules, and there's certainly past evidence on this blog of me being harsh about my own rules, but I think these played pretty well, and better than most of the sets I've tested. Certainly give me the sort of game and the sort of decisions I want when playing Medieval. Needless to say I tinkered with various things along the way, and still more to do. Particular areas to look at are:

• Orders state post melee, and exploitation
• Effect on battles when other battles break

Both of these I can look at also in the DFate version of the game.

Conclusions

So heading in the right direction. I'll update the 1 page QRS/rules-set if anyone wants to take a look.

Never Mind the Billhooks Rules Test

 

#6 in this series of 8 (!) medieval rules play-throughs.

Presentation

32pp downloadable PDF, including 8 pages of cards/tokens and a QRS. £6 from Wargames Illustrated. Really nice looking rule set, well laid out, and good pics/tutorials.

Set-Up

Time to move on from Barnet and out of the fog, so this one was based on the Battle of Tewkesbury, 1471. Lancastrians advancing from the N against the Yorkist line in the S. No fancy tricks, just a straight head to head.

How It Played

The Lancastrians advanced in the pre-game, but the poorly led Yorkist Rear Battle loosed it's crossbow belts a bit early and the game moved into its main phase. The Lancastrians aimed to get a few rounds of missile fire in before sending in their billmen. The Lancastrian Cuorrours saw off the Yorkist horse whilst the arrows flew. 

The Yorkists ended up being first out of the blocks, swopping ranks and sending Billmen and MAA in against the Lancastrians. In the Main Battle the Lancastrian bowmen tried to hold off the Yorkists, failed, then broke in the melee and took their bill with them. The Lancastrian Van archers wisely evaded and let it be bill on bill. Draw for the first round, but then the Yorkist MAA piled in and won the melee, and again Yorkist bow and bill fled. 

The Lancastrians still weren't quite broken, and in the next turn the Currours returned and fell on the flank of the Yorkist Rear Battle. The Yorkists lost units to this and the remaining Lancastrian Bill and MAA, and for a brief moment it looked like they might pull it off, but the last bill on bill melee finally went the Yorkist way and it was all over.

Rules Impression

The rules are set up for figure removal, and 1D per figure so I changed that to base removal (well marked) and 1D per base. That probably meant the game played faster but was no bad things. Activation is by battle by random card (my favourite), with some random cards for extra actions (although annoyingly they need a dice roll and another card draw when they happen). Missile fire is a straight roll to hit based on weapon/range, and a save based on armour, no real DMs. Melee is similar  roll to hit and save. There are morale checks triggered on various things (mainly 50% casualties). Losses trigger Morale Tokens, and once you have as many as you had units it's game over ( a basic loss = 2 tokens, so effectively 50% losses).

The rules make a big thing about Disarray and Daunted states, but the post-melee rules for the loser are such that I never triggered Daunted, it was all OK or routed.

A few weapons were missing (spear, handguns) and the QRS missed some key info but otherwise everything there for a normal game, and some extra rules for  mustering, and there are points values there if you need them.

Conclusion

Really good, played a lot better than any of the other rulesets, and a lot slicker and faster than Poleaxed - although not with the same level of detail. I think I'd tweak the random events mechanism, and add the Poleaxed orders system, and maybe something like the Battlegroup:Northag system for Battle breakpoints and a few other tweaks and I could have a near ideal system. Think that might be the #7 game.

Poleaxed Rulestest

 

#4 in this series of 7 or so  medieval rules play-throughs.

Presentation

52pp "old skool" blank and white A5 booklet, no pics or diagrams, 2pp QRS. That said really nicely laid out, very clear, all the best bits of "old skool".

Set-Up

Battle of Barnet again, and again with the off-table map movement, which gave a different "starting" position for the combat.

This time the Battles stayed almost in line with the Vans making first contact, but then the Lancastrian Main bumped into the Yorkist Rear and mistook them for friends, and then the Lancastrian Rear arrived on the flank of the Yorkist Rear.

How It Played

Apologies, memory pretty hazy again. Think the Yorkists lost again.

Rules Impression

A lot better set which obviously stands the test of time. Really nice command system. Each commander has a rating (which is constant) in terms of how aggressive they are, and any order change is rolled against that with a chance that the order gets more or less aggressive. Very neat and well worth stealing. Troop classifications are almost DBA like. Movement is N x Average Dice so variable (nice). Missile Fire uses the "guaranteed N, but N+1 on a good roll" model - so no result too wild. Damage is based on Damage Point per unit, which are also related to number of ranks (as are some other results) so trying to mentally apply to my figures which aren't really rank based was fun. Melee uses a classic Figs vs Factor table. Morale and control is again moderated by leader aggressiveness. Some nice rules for commander risk but no rules for Battle or Army break - it's an old skool  fight to the death - although does give option of 50% per Army or Battle.

Overall

Very serviceable. A few things I might tweak (or steal) if I was going to play regularly but probably the best of the bunch so far.

Battle of Barnet and Days of Knights Rules Test

 

#3 in this series of 6 or 7 medieval rules play-throughs.

Presentation

52pp, of which about 30pp rules. Pdf download, 4olumn layout (of which 1 not normally used) so quite card to read the tall thin columns. Reasonably logical. 1pp QRS, which has a very dense unit stats table but not all the key rules (eg movt) you need to play! $10. 

Set-Up

The Battle of Barnet was distinguished  by being fought in think fog, with units moving around, bumping into other units from unexpected directions, and friends being mistaken for foe - with dire consequences.

To model this I set up a simple grid on PPT and had a simple set of random (D8 based) rules to move units, so they went forward, veered left or right or stayed still, and also randomised their end facing. If two units bump into each other then another roll decides whether the unit fight, mistake friend for foe (and vice versa) or just waste time sorting things out. Here's a pic from the pre-game.

Yorkists start in the S by Barnet, Lancastrians are moving S from the N!

Once two units collide only those two transfer to the table top, with others join as they meet other units, or those on the table top.

How It Played

Sorry, I'm playing catch up here and have played the scenario twice more with other rules so I can't remember much of what happened. As you can see from the map above the Yorkist Main Battle swung left and hit the Lancastrian Van, whilst the Yorkist van just stalled in the fog. Yorkist Rear and Lancastrian Main then came into contact, and then the Lancastrian rear appeared out of the fog on the Yorkist Rear's rear! I think the Lancastrian won.

Rules Impressions

Again only headlines as I've quite  a few to go through:

• Little differentiation between troop types
• Some key unit types missing, - eg handgunners, spearmen
• It was quite confusing as to what "unit" was in the rules ( a base? a group of bases?), especially  in melee and doubling in firing, and how allocate hits are then allocated to a  "group"
• Demoralisation has minimal (-1) effect and doesn't seem to stop actions (and per unit, so can split groups to avoid it)
• As mentioned above the QRS doesn't have all the key info you need 

Overall

Couldn't get o with them at all I'm afraid. Quite hard to read and follow, and the way that the rules seemed to be "base" based for everything (rather than just damage) made it all quite messy.

Bills, Bows and Bloodshed Rules Test

 

#2 in this series of 4 or 5 medieval rules play-throughs.

Presentation

32pp (? - no page numbers! no index!) stapled A4 book with glossy card covers. No diagrams, just some dense "tutorial" colour images at the end. Two copies (nice) of a 2 page QRS. VERY text heavy, not a single real table or even bullet point. Some nice info on livery colours though. Written by Barry Slemmings with Graham Towers. I picked my copy up from Barry himself at Salute. Available from him on eBay at https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/144287669442

Had to go up to the loft whilst the game was in progress, so nice overhead shot!

Set-Up

Mortimer's Cross again, just hit reset after abandoning the Flower of Chivalry game.

How It Played

Far better. The Yorkist horse and bowmen ambushed the Lancastrian left flank. The Courror's brushed aside their opposite number and rode straight on to catch Warwick with only his own personal guard. Luckily Warwick is made of stern stuff and his DMAA managed to fight the Currours. The bowmen pinned the advancing Lancastrians allowing Yorkist Bow and Bill to start inflicting casualties. On the opposite flank the Lancastrian bow crossed the river, but by the time they got to an enfilade position the game was pretty much over. Just left of them, on the "home" side of the river the Lancastrian handgunners did a reasonable job of trading shots with the Yorkist archers. The main effort came as the Lancastrians hit the Yorkist line on an ~3 unit front. They had their best success on the right, alongside the handgunners, routing the Yorkist archers and getting in  a tussle with the second line bill. The other two units though were stopped by the Yorkist archers, who then let their bill and DMAA through to finish off the weakened Lancastrians. The final move of the game saw the lone penetrating Lancastrian bill unit make contact with Edward and his retainers just outside the village, but like Warwick he fought them off and victory was claimed.

Rules Impressions

I think that Bills, Bows and Bloodshed is one of those cases of having a good ruleset struggling to get out. As mentioned above the whole thing is really just solid text, with no nicely laid out tables to help grasp/find the key points. The QRS is basically the same text as the main rules with just some of the paragraphs dropped. The core rules are fine though, pretty classic 1D per stand, roll 4-6s or whatever to hit, plus saving throw. Movement is variable, 2 x Average Dice, which I like. Morale though has 11 triggers (and if more than one roll dice multiple times and choose worse - nice!) and 55 (!) modifiers. To be fair the rules say that once you get the hang of it you'll roll the 2 x Average Dice and if they're good assume a pass, and if possibly bad do the tests, which is what I did start to do, but even so. One issue is that the rules do account for almost every situation, and have lots of Nationality modifiers. 

There are two big (huge?) omissions:

• There is no activation/command & control/ friction system. This is old school units do what you tell them unless they fail a charge morale test. A huge contrast to Flower of Chivalry that almost goes to the other extreme.
• There seem to be no victory conditions or army morale, so every game is a game to the death?

On the plus side though the rules do allow you to have mixed bill/bow units (which modern research seems to suggest was possible/common), allows bow to fire into second ranks, allows bow to risk withdrawing through the bill behind and a host of other niceties which a lot of other rules miss - so Barry certainly knows his period (as befits a long time member of the Lance and Longbow Society) and gaming.

Overall

The rules are good enough though that I'm almost tempted to do my own QRS, or I might just steal a few bits for my own rules. If I as doing a QRS I think I'd do 2 versions, one a "quick play" which just pulls out the main DMs and loses lesser weapons/Nationalities, and one with everything. They would be though JUST tables, quick and easy to read. Despite the negatives the actual rules are as good as, and probably better than most medieval I've played, but just let down really badly by presentation.

Edward's turn to fight off the attack!

Flower of Chivalry Rules Test

 

The next cycle of probably 4-5 games are all War of the Roses based, testing out various rules sets. Christmas delayed getting it all going, and probably not helped by my first choice of rules - Flower of Chivalry (FoC).

Presentation

80 page pdf by the Canadian Wargamers Group, published in 1993! The rules only take up about 6 pages, with about 18 pages of useful background and 50 odd pages of scenarios and army lists. Probably worth the £15-£22 price just for the non-rules content. Simple text, no photos, simple diagrams, pretty old-school.

Set-Up

I used Mortimer's Cross (1641) as the scenario. The FoC scenario implies that the battle was fought E-W, with the Yorkists protecting the bridge behind them to the E. However this gives little depth and the Lancastrians have to reform after exiting the woods and hills to the W and the Yorkists having the river to their backs. Recent research seems to suggest that a N-S orientation was more likely, the  Lancastrians moving N from Hereford towards the crossing, with the Yorkists defending just to the S of it, so this is what I played.

Each side had 3 battles, each with about 3 elements (missiles, bill, DMAA), which took up all my WOTR figures. That gives about 1:25 figure to man ratio, and on a 6' x 4' table each 10cm square is about 50m.

How It Played

Not very well. The Lancastrians fought off the flank charge by the Yorkist Courrors and closed with the Yorkist line. There was an extended melee but after 2-3 hours play I lost heart.

Rules Impressions

Just didn't work for me. Having to decide on a Aggressiveness and the roll for BattleLust for every Battle every turn just seemed over the top - would have worked fine as a per game decision, but then still rolling every turn? There's something in the whole idea, but not in how it was implemented. Firing was pretty simple, roll under target, and the casualties being the number rolled if successful a nice idea. Melee ditto. Morale was a roll under a %, with a -10/20% off per stand lost. So the rest of the core mechanic were fine but the explanations, particularly about the command and control just all seemed so confusing, and the activation mechanism so tedious I just lost the will to play.

Overall

Worth buying for the source information and scenarios alone, but not for the rules.

Stargrave

 

Having heard quite a lot about Frostgrave, but having minimal interest in Fantasy, when Stargrave came out I thought I ought to give it a go. I pulled together one team from a collection of Warhammer 40K (?) figures and another from my Albedo figures. I rolled up the Captains and First Mates for each and bought some crew. I had Pebble Park laid out ready for an ACP164 game, so distributed the loot around that, the two sides rolled to arrive on adjacent edges, and battle was joined.

How It Played

The Warhammer guys had the closest loot, and their Mystic leader took two of her team off to secure the two closest. The Albedo captain and his squad got into a firefight with the Warhammer 2ic which lasted most of the game - both seniors being killed. The second Albedo group legged it after the Mystic, took one of her team out as she got to the 2nd loot, and then a firefight (and spell fight) erupted around the 2nd loot and Albedo won. Their remaining team members doubled back to help the OC's party, with grenades being lobbed over the fencing being particularly effective. In the end the last human bought it, and the critters (well the two left) were victorious.

There must be loot near here somewhere...

Rules Impressions

The game really did dissolve into a series of to-the-death firefights. None of the fluidity and individual action I typically get in an ACP164 game. The basic to-hit mechanism is an opposed die roll added to broadly equal skill stats, so lots of exchanges gave no hits, and then with body armour lots of those gave no damage, and then damage could be soaked up quite a lot - so it did end up as a bit of a boring dice fest. The spells added a bit of colour but without overdoing it - so little chance of recreating Red Star's Warkaster type effects.

From what I'd heard of Frostgrave I'd hoped to find more in terms of the collaborative play, scenario design and campaign side, but every game just seems to be a fight for loot boxes.

Oh well, back up onto the shelf.

 

2nd Battle of Newbury - 27 Oct 1644 - with The Kingdom Is Ours

Heard about these rules back when they came out, and chatted to the team at a demo game at Wolverhampton just before lockdown hit. Finally picked them up last month and decided to run the 2nd Newbury scenario with them to see what the rules were like, and whether the Royalists could do any better. The ruleset is 84pp, Osprey sized, and has a downloadable 6pp QRS.

Set-Up 

Same as the last game, with the King sandwiched between Manchester and Waller.

How it Played 

Waller was a bit quicker into Speen, but rapidly lot the oomph to actually fight through and clear the town, not helped by the early loss of almost all his cavalry. The King still had a unit on the E edge of Speen at the end. As activity faded around Speen Manchester finally kicked into life. The hedges frustrated early moves on his L flank, but his Horse cleared the Foot lining the hedge N and then tried to take Shaw House but were routed by the commanded shot inside. One of Manchester's Foot came to the same end, and Shaw House remained with the King til the end. 

A sterling defence of Shaw House by some Commanded Foot

The Parliamentarian will obviously failed early as several unengaged units field the battlefield, even before being committed. Once Manchester finally made contact on his L flank both sides were down to about half a dozen units. Two Foot melees results in one of each side routing and ENDEX was called.

ENDEX - a few units back at Speen but otherwise most gone

Thoughts

All started sort of well, but then I came to the first big (well 1 regt vs 1 regt, 4 bases each) cavalry melee and found myself rolling almost a hundred dice! Cavalry and charging makes this more than normal, but even so 20-30 a combat seems pretty usual (once for hit, another for damage, 4 dice per base, doubled for charge etc). By the end of the first evening I knew things had to change - rolling that many dice is just not quick! Another issue was that although the game was "stand" based, stands too 1/4 casualties, so you had to track those too.

So I decided to divide everything by 4 - 1 dice per cav stand, 1/2 per pike, and a kill is a whole stand not a 1/4 of one. Still meant about 20 dice total for some cavalry engagements but I could live with that. The whole game then hummed along.

There were a few other issues though. 

With Foot vs Foot melee I was not only rolling 1-4 dice each, and getting 5+ seemed elusive, then getting 3+ to kill even harder, some melees went at least 6 rounds before any casualty - not fast!

Whilst I liked the random card idea they were just too random. You're meant to roll at turn end for EVERY unit, 9+ and you roll 2D10 for an event. Again way too many dice. I randomly rolled for each tertio only. And as the events are at the turn end they don't link into the narrative, so a unit that's sat in a peaceful corner of the field suddenly runs for no obvious reason.

The random activation again looked KO to start with - but with a token for every unit that's a lot to get through - depending on when the end-of-turn card comes up. So I switched to tertio activation which made more sense. But not tying the activation to a particular unit does mean you get that things where all the focus is on one part of the battle, and then end of turn comes up, and half the battlefield has done nothing.

I also didn't like the fact that routers had no effect on neighbours - other than if in own tertio when take a morale check, so minimal morale cascades. There's also no Army or Tertio morale mechanism so it's more or less a fight to the death. Quite tempted to add in Battlegroup:NORTHAG's chit system.

By the end though my mods were giving me a semi-reasonable game.

A nice fight at a wall S of Shaw House

Conclusion

Played as written I really don't think it delivers as  a "fast play" set - and I didn't even bother with the per unit record cards! As a basis for my own new set of stand-based rules it has more potential, some nice ideas to steal and hopefully make more manageable. I think ECW and probably Medieval and earlier sort of suit an "old school" stand-based mechanic at 20mm, and it would also give a greater difference to my Napoleonic games at that scale. So next time my 20mm ECW comes out it's going to be a new set of stand-based house rules, plus of course whatever other new rules come out by then!

1985 Company Megatest - Summary and Roundup

 

That's the end of the Modern Company-Level rule set test, more WW2 focussed rules to follow hopefully later in the year. Eight sets of rules played against variations of a single scenario of a meeting engagement to seize the town of Semmenstedt. The summary below is in order played, and each title links to the relevant blog post. Of course your mileage may vary and most based on a single playthrough.

Reviews Summary

Battlegroup: NORTHAG 8/10

• Pros: BR endgame system, just plays pretty well
• Cons: Over generous and IGOUGO activation system. Lookup table for hits.

Seven Days to the Rhine 7/10

• Pros: Nice activation system. Worked better than Iron Cross (may be me!)
• Cons: No HE or indirect fire.

Team Yankee 5/10

• Pros: Nothing seemed really broken.
• Cons: Very old school IGO-UGO. National "to hit" values. Long dice chains. Tank ranges seem short. Repeated "free" attempts to get your artillery on target. No real difference between ATGW and gun fire. No suppression. No friction, no spotting. 

Bolt Action - Reality Check 8.5/10

• Bolt Action plus house mods
• Pros: Bolt Action scales up reasonably well
• Cons: Need to clarify how sub-unit pins effect unit activation

3rd Generation Warfare 5/10

• Pros: Lots of nice info
• Cons: Need to buy a separate data book to play. Multiple fires, cumbersome mechanics

Cold War 3 3/10

• Pros: More nice info
• Cons: Essentially a re-engineered version of Team Yankee. Typos galore (18 per page!). Errors in QRS. Errors in data (or may be typos...)

Sandhurst Modern Infantry Battle - 6/10

• Pros: "What the pros used". 3 pages. "Official" view on what are effective ranges.
• Cons: Very slim-line, not even AT wpn and armour differences. Limited scope.

Contact Wait Out - 8.5/10

• My own in-house set
• Pros: Covered pretty much all the basis. Adding 7DTTR activation and NORTHAG Battle Rating added to it
• Cons: Might replace infantry direct fire with the suppression mechanism (so similar approach to Sandhurst). Bit too hard to kill things? 

I played Sabre Squadron a while ago, I think it would have come out at around 6/10.

Conclusions

So Contact Wait Out did way better than in the Platoon tests, and with the tweaks for Battlegroup:NORTHAG and 7DTTR is playing really well. Bolt Action needs a few more tweaks to also work really well at this scale but is a good second choice. Battlegroup:NORTHAG and 7DTTR both play OK with no major issues, but the rest were very much a mixed bag.

One thing I did note across all the games is that I started with 1 fig = 1 man and individual basing. Even with just a couple of platoons dismounted that was a lot to move, and more importantly place - particularly since most rules were at 25m - 50m per 4cm hex. So I started sabot the figures up, then decided actually I only needed ~4 figs to represent each section. Even so cramming into a couple of hexes (~100m section frontage) was hard, especially in urban areas. Next time I run a company game (and certainly for the Bn games) I think I might switch to 10cm Hexon or 10cm square grid, and use section sized stands.

For my previous megatests see:

• Platoon Megatest
• Skirmish Megatest

1985 Company MegaTest - Sandhurst Current Ops - The Modern Infantry Battle

 

I came across this during VCOW, and what's not to like about a book with Barossa training area on the cover!

Presentation

Another great book from John Curry's History of Wargaming Project range. 124pp b&w softback. The book actually has 4 rules in it , a Platoon Kriegspiel, Battalion Level (all ratios based), this one, and an IED one. There is also lots of fascinating supporting material - I wish Sandhurst had been this into wargaming when I was there - was still a dirty word then (even though Paddy Griffiths was around - never saw him, only saw David Chandler once). The Company level rules only cover 7 pages, of which 3 are the core rules and one a QRS.

Set-Up

As previous, but now had the British coming in broadly across the East edge, and the Russian's coming in broadly on the West edge.

How It Played

The Brits raced to Semmenstedt  first again, just occupying the buildings before the BMPs hit. The Chieftains had been assigned to Platoon Groups, and it was pretty much evens between them and the T64s, and likewise between the Scimitars which skited N and the BMPs - but again the Brits were left with minimal anti-armour (even a Milan was taken out by a T64) whilst the Soviets still had nearly a dozen BMP.

The Soviets made a determined push on the farm complex NE of Remilingen where the Brits had a Platoon (supported by the Scimitars), but the complex fell after two melees. In Semmenstedt the Brits managed to keep suppressing the advancing Soviets, and the BMPs were useful at suppressing them back. In the end the Russians got in and the first building fell. As the reserve platoon arrived to reinforce the assault ENDEX was called, with the British position effectively lost.

Overall it played quickly and smoothly and had one of the better narratives of the games.

Rules Impression

Your not going to get a lot of rules in 3 pages, but what's there works well. Simple movement, direct fire vs inf, and vs AFVs, and indirect fire and that's pretty much it. Half-a-dozen DMs for each. No air, no morale. There's not even armour and AP values - its just hit and destroy for anti-tank. Infantry fire is very much geared to suppress (6+ to suppress, 11+ to destroy - ie at least 2:1). Melees seem very unbloody - 10+ to kill. Simple, but like I say they play well.

What I think is most interesting about them is a) you get an "official" figure for things like effective weapon ranges, and also an insight as to what is seen as important - suppression, hitting (penetration or disablement assumed), ammunition (both for IDF and GPMG-SF, limited to 3/4 turns fire each. The rules really seem there to enable a TEWT ( Tactical Exercise Without Troops) and I'm sure they were played with lots of discussion about options and consequences. John's comments about the Army's aversion to dice are also interesting.

Overall

Not a set for regular play, and they probably leave too much out for anything but a very friendly game between good mates - certainly don't let a rules lawyer need them. But fascinating as a resource, and they gave as good a game as most of the others. Overall 6/10.

Once set left to play - mine!

1985 Company MegaTest - ColdWar3

 

Spotted this one when I was looking at something else on WargamesVault, and for only $13 thought it worth a punt.

Presentation

113 page full colour PDF for $14 from WargamesVault. Like 3rd Generation Warfare it's obviously written by someone very keen and reasonably knowledgeable on the subject. It does include all the stats you need, and there is a downloadable free 2 page QRS.

But..

Even more so than 3rd Generation Warfare lots of interesting facts and bits of detail get in the way of a clear presentation of the rules.

The rules are covered in typos. Some are consistent mis-spellings of military terms (NORTHTAG, reccee etc), but most are just simple typos. I chose a page at random and it had 12 typos on it - and that seems typical.

Worse, there are some factual errors (Chieftain with a 105mm gun?).

Even worse, some of the dice rolls and DMs are confused in sign, and different between rules and QRS. For instance the key "to hit" roll is 4+ for conscripts and 5+ for trained in the rules, but 5+ for conscripts and 4+ for trained in the QRS! The QRS in the back of the "updated" rules (issued today!) manages to miss Trained and Elite from the table entirely. Artillery to hit is based on the target team's skill level (just about makes sense with DF, but for IDF? And what happens if you have mixed targets under the template (which although mentioned lots I couldn't find), but then has DMs of +1 if target has gone to ground (so harder to hit) but +1 if using radar or airborne (which should make things easier).

Basically they are a mess.

Then I got a real sense of deja vu, with some bits of rules ringing bells. A quick check and I realised that this was basically Team Yankee. Google confirmed it, or at least that it is/was a "modern" version of Flames of War. Some of the vehicle/weapon stats are identical with TY, and all the core mechanics are the same. There are a few things streamlined (and generally improved), a few things made more cumbersome, and worse. But there is NOTHING that  I could see on the web site or in the rules that references this heritage even though both FOW and TY are mentioned (alongside other rulesets) in the introduction.

So had I known all this I doubt I'd have bought it.

And all this makes the "puff" at the start with a positive quote from an Army officer and lots of thanks to various military units and people even more embarrassing.

Set-Up

As previous, but now had the British coming in broadly across the East edge, and the Russian's coming in broadly on the West edge.

How It Played

Given all the issues this was again a bit of an abbreviated test. A bit more play than 3GW since at least all the material was there and TY was playable, even though I had to keep referring back to TY to work out what CW3 was trying to do. One change from TY is that it had "to hit" values of 3+ for WARPAC and 4+ for NATO, whereas CW3 has 4+ and 5+ respectively. That said the Chieftains rapidly finished off the T64s (both have a ROF of 2), and then only had to dodge the Saggers to start picking off the BMPs. One Scimitar also made short work of a platoon of BMPs (ROF4!). The Russians did try and launch a ground assault, with no casualties on either side on one melee, and a Soviet win on the other.

Rules Impression

Trying to move beyond the presentation issues, and without repeating the TY comments there were a few positives:

• Direct fire was slightly streamlined, at least 1 step skipped I think
• The Morale idea was nice, randomly determine a target number at the start, then hit it with nD6, but n reduces depending on how bad things are
• Some nice weapon discrimination and lots of detailed weaponry (Firecracker rounds, beehive ammo!)

Oh and side order was not spelt out at all, it just says "taking turns" or "in turn" - does that mean by side or unit, and who's first. Certainly no friction.

Taking TY and adding in the better bits of CW3 would probably give a reasonable set of rules - but I'd definitely start from TY not CW3!

Overall

Disappointing on multiple counts, a pity given the author's obvious keenness and knowledge. In its current state its barely worth 3/10.

1985 Company MegaTest - 3rd Generation Warfare

 

Spotted this set of rules a while ago, so thought I'd buy them for the playtest as they were only £10 for a Lulu paperback.

Presentation

96pp black and white Lulu paperback - A5 sized, order from https://www.3rdgenerationwarfare.co.uk/. There's a wealth of information in there along side the rules, even an APFSDS penetration graph, and some nice B&W wargame photos. Some of that mixing in though does get in the way of a clear read through the rules or when you're hunting to find something. Well written though, and almost everything covered (incl ATGW, AA, Counter battery etc) although the mottled grey background to each page can make the text hard to read. Free downloadable QRS and 6mm mods. Not bad at all though, and the overall style is something I wouldn't mind emulating for my own rules when I publish them, hadn't thought of A5 and the Lulu print is pretty nice.

Set-Up

As previous, but now had the British coming in broadly across the East edge, and the Russian's coming in broadly on the West edge.

How It Played

I got as far as the opening tank duel before I realised that there were going to be some real problems playing it, so instead I abandoned the scenario play through and just went through the motions of trying some direct AT fire, AP fire, indirect fire and assault.

Rules Impression

I had a bit of a sinking feeling when I saw the 20x20 table for armour kills, but I decided to stick with it. Moved my units ready for the first T64 vs Chieftain, went to look up the AP and Armour ratings, and realised there weren't any. ALL the stats are in another £10 book! Now a £10 book I'm reasonably happy to buy on-spec, but £20 has probably crossed the threshold into a more deliberate purchase, and given that 20x20 matrix and a few other things I could see that this wasn't a rule set I'd play again. I guessed some values but found this put penetrations at 11+. Luckily there's a snapshot of the Leopard entry on a page on the web site, so I used that as a guide, which gave a more reasonable 9+, but really had to guess things like FV432s, Scimitars and BMPs. Then came my first infantry fire and whilst a "Squad" is given an FP rating all support weapons are in the extra £10 book, and its not clear from the rules is the Squad FP includes its GPMG or not. Indirect fire, same issue - FPs in the extra book. At that point I gave up.

From what I did manage to play:

• Seems like tank guns can fire 3 times, and move twice - which seems excessive on an IGOUGO game, so most Chieftains were out in the first round
• Infantry close range fire seemed cumbersome and then very ineffective. The process is:
• Sum the FP of troops involved (which involves rolling dice for some support weapons)
• Use a table to convert FP to dice
• Roll the dice, total pips = potential hits
• Roll dice for each potential hit against a To Hit value
• If target hit roll another dice for a cover save
• If fail the cover save roll another dice and cross reference with FP on a 6 x 20 table to see if just suppressed, fallback or destroyed (although also results for destroyed and suppressed, and destroyed and fallback!)
• Arty uses same tables as infantry
• There is a morale roll, but for most NATO its an automatic pass 

Overall

OK so I didn't play a complete game, and perhaps shouldn't give a rating, but there should be a clear message on the website that you need to buy the data book to play it - or give a both books for £15 deal. What I did play though just seemed to cumbersome, and the multiple actions too powerful. Overall it would probably still be only 5/10 if I had all the data to play it.

Battle of Königslutter am Elm - 5 Jul 1984 - AAR

 

Played through the Königslutter am Elm game in 8 turns over a total of about 3-4 hours. A bit of a blood bath but a useful outing for the rules.

AAR

The Soviet 1/62 Gds Tank Regiment took the northern route from the Lappwald through Süpplingenburg to Konigslutter. They hit the minefield in front of Süpplingenburg head on, and the combination of Chieftains and Harrier ground attack managed to take out the mine-clearing tanks and lead companies. 2/62 GTR then came up, pushing through and round the wrecks of 1/62, and inflicted enough damage on 3RTR BG to push them back from Süpplingenburg, and on through Schickelsheim to join a final defence at Rottorf.

On the southern flank the MR/BMP Bn of 62GTR took the lead, and had slightly more luck with the minfields. But the RGJ BG dug into Wolsdorf and Warberg held the BMPs off until reinforced by 3/62 GTR and stonked by repeated 2S1 and BM27 missions. A BMP assault was finally needed to clear the RGJ out, who then fell back through Rabke to join the final defence of Konigslutter. By this time the RRF BG was the only capable fighting force, whilst the Soviets still had 2/62 and 3/62 going strong, and elements of M/62 and ENDEX was declared.

FRAGO Rules

It was evident pretty quickly that the Attack-Defence model that I'd used in the BAOR/Corps game didn't work too well here - mainly as most combat was ranged and so the attack/defence model meant less. I'll probably recast to Anti-Armour/Anti-Infantry next time - which is what an earlier version had.

The dice per platoon model worked well though, and happy with the attack values for most combats, and the assaults worked well. Indirect fire seemed a bit week, should at least suppress every time. Ground attack/helarm also seemed a bit weak, but air defence did its bit and took a Harrier and TOW Lynx sortie out.

I massively over-allocated the LOG/Activation tokens, both sides barely using half by turn 6. Will significantly scale down next time. From turn 6 I zeroised the tokens and went onto the A1 roll which made for more thinking about allocation but still a bit generous. The model felt good though.

The old paper Heroics and Ros buildings were better than the small 6mm ones, and the 1/1000th. Also the 6mm trees better than the 1/1000th ones. I wouldnt mind trying with some 2mm or 3mm tanks though.

The overall scale and effect was pretty much what I was after though - this felt like a Brigade game, not a company or platoon one. So iterate the rules and try again, perhaps at Bn level whilst I have Waterloo on the main table, and do another Bde game in the new year.