02/01 Draft - Cold Playtest: Isreali v. Egyptian double-game

So, there's a point where you need to do a cold playtest with some willing victims, and Saturday I was privileged to get the full attention of a local gaming hero [retired infantry LTC, published game designer] and a gaming veteran who's been running a 10mm adaptation of the classic Panzerblitz game. This was an exciting opportunity to get feedback from people who have not even played the WWII version of the rules, "Up the Blue!" featured in the Totensonntag mega-game recently HERE.

For this playtest, I had no idea who was going to show, so I prepared for up to three additional people besides me and the Host by setting up four sides. Ken graciously loaned his micro-armor, previously seen HERE, and I managed to put together two sides that I thought would be balanced for scenarios #4 Take the High Ground and #8 Melee:

Overall, Isrealis had a Quality advantage, so fielded 6 Units to 8 Egyptian on the table, and the Isrealis had off-table Mortars for each force, while the Egyptians had Medium Artillery for each force. With a dearth of Infantry stands, the matchups went something like:

Scenario #4
Isreali Attackers: 7 Units
2 x MBT, 2 x Infantry, 2 x IFV platoons, off-table Mortars 5+ Arrival.
Egyptian Defenders: 9 Units
On Hill - Infantry w' ATGM, MBT
Reinforcing Turn 2 - 2 x MBT, 2 x APC, 2 x Infantry w'ATGM, Medium Artillery 4+ Arrival.

Scenario #8
Isreali Attackers: 6 Units
Turn 1 - 3 x MBT, off-table Mortars 5+ Arrival.
Turn 4 - 3 x Infantry [Veteran Paras] in APCs [vintage halftracks]
Egyptian Defenders: 9 Units
On Hill - 3 x MBT, Medium Artillery 4+ Arrival.
Turn 3 - 3 x MBT, Turn 6 - 2 x IFV

The rules had some pretty substantial changes from the WWII version, including: a doubling of the ground scale to 1"=100m, a new close range fire phase, moving and shooting for Infantry and Tanks, Move/Evade for Tanks, counter-battery fire, ATGMs, tossing out March & Road Movement, and some smaller tweaks of the fire table. I figured they'd play adequately, but wasn't sure how it would pan out.

Game Start - Scenario #4 to left, Scenario #8 to right.  I added a few little touches here and there just b/c Host had some cool little buildings. However, the round-ish tan patches are "flat ground" and Units in them are fired upon with a bonus due to lack of cover.


GM's view down the table. I probably should've just tossed one of the games.


#8 about turn 3. The three Isreali MBTs have cleared out two of the Egyptian MBTs that were defending the hill, the last has been covering the road and hidden by the palm grove below. Isreali casualties have been light, except one MBT got beat up with a Permanent Hit. Looks like the hill is open, but Egyptian reinforcements are entering, and the hill is a dangerous spot to occupy - open to shooting from most of the area..


#4 also about Turn 3. Isrealis rapidly moved up and dismounted Mech Infantry into the little grove to right, with their IFVs supporting close behind. The MBTs won a duel with the Egyptian MBTs that were on the right side of the hill, and have also beat up the Infantry who exposed their position by firing thier ATGMs to some good effect [but not enough]. Entering on the road at top is a substantial and dangerous reinforcement of Egyptian armor, six Units, the same size and composition as the entire remaining Isreali force!


Forgot to take pics for a while...now we're on Turn 12. The entire Table #4 force has switched over to the Scenario #8 force, giving up on their objective [which I think they'd have handily taken] to save the situation in Scenario #8. The plan being to then return and win Scenario #4 as well. This is a classic big-game battle thing to do, but requires that you've a good feel for how long it takes to kill Units and how fast you can move around. In this case, the maneuver took place around mid-game, and it isn't looking like enough time will be available.

Turn 12. The Isreali paras got dropped off at the left edge of the ridge, and their APCs immediately left. The MBTs held back, using their superior range to target Egyptian MBTs on the hill, severely damaging two of them. Two Paras managed to dig-in, one didn't have time, as a concentrated attack by three Egyptian MBT platoons hit them, supported by two IFVs. The top two platoons lasted a while, however, and inflicted some casualties back, but not eliminating any of the Egyptian Units. There were hampered by a battlefield lull, which allowed the Egyptians time to do some much-needed rallying for their attack.

The Scenario #4 Isrealis tried to help with a drive around the wood at top, coming around the right side, and eliminated an IFV platoon. They were stiff-armed by the Egyptian Infantry with their ATGMs, taking some Hits and getting their MBT platoon roughly handled. It's a strong attack moving toward the camera, with a solid defense at the top of mech infantry. 

Above, the last Isreali Para, dug-in against the back slope of the hill, is overwhelmed by the massive, combined firepower of several platoons of armor - The Egyptians have the hill!

Below, the #4 Force Isrealis shift to the left side of the woods, as the other side is just held too strongly. They aren't able to reposition themselves quickly enough to affect the destruction of the paras holding the hill edge. It is clear that no progress will be made against the Egyptian possession of the hill, so it will be a draw, with each side holding one objective. 

Good playtest! Thanks to both Host Rich and Dave for their time and talent.

It took a LOOOONNNGG time, we played for about 6 hours [which is rather a lot for a 1-hour Wargame!]. We had several long discussions about everything from turn sequence to typical weaponry of the forces, basing and the shape of the Units [all of them were 3-base units] to the subtle interactions of Units. A few quick thoughts:

• The intro of an additional Close Range shooting phase worked. It allowed me to eliminate that chart modifier, since Units at Close Range get to fire twice a turn.
• The modifier for "Ready" as a fire penalty may be dropped.
• The modifier for moving fire may be changed to one less severe.
• The turn works as a series of combats, movements, time, lost time, etc. It requires a consistent understanding of that fact, so a Unit may be under mortar fire, move and shoot, get shot at, take Hits, etc, in one turn.
• Liked the more predictable Rally mechanic - we have to assume that the platoon leaders are doing their job at least at a rudimentary level.
• Liked the Quality Tests mechanic - it and the Permanent Hit mechanic encourage people to spread their fire around more realistically. It makes it hard for Infantry to Act under fire but...pretty realistic!
• The "Move & Evade" mechanic didn't get used. Still, I can see using it in the future.
• There were plenty of options for players in all circumstances, no matter how dire the circumstances were. I like this, since it keeps players engaged even when losing.
• There are some things that just have to be decided one way or another, e.g. a combo move-shoot [or shoot-move] Action. There's no perfect way to do it - simply. Everything simple involves a limitation under certain circumstances. As I regard the turn as a series of events, and there's an Initiative mechanic to introduce additional possibilities and keep players guessing at potential decisions, I'm OK with it. The alternative is to have no moving & shooting, but over 5 minutes that doesn't seem right. So with potential swings of fortune provided by the IN and turn sequence, it seems OK. The alternative is to go back to strict Shoot OR Move, and make the turn even shorter.

I have a lot to think about, but have to say no major or truly fundamental changes in mind - the core mechanics seem fine. A bunch will get exported to the WWII game.

With this, it'll probably be my last foray into Arab-Isreali wars for a time. I don't have the books, the minis or the time to delve into what would be a new period. The interest of Steve and Ken - both of whom DO have minis for it, as well as several sets of rules each - is what propelled this particular phase of development. 

The purpose it served me was to step back and take a long-view look at 1940-2020 as the two ends of a rule design. I have a pile of 15mm WWII from my Flames of War days, and am now in a Stryker Brigade training for Decisive Action and peer combat [and got minis for it], it makes both the periods interesting. I'll jump forward to 2020 next month, as I continue to do the hobby work on my micro-armor. No idea how I'll take into account the wild swings that Tech now offers, except that it'll be abstract and not too intrusive.

So - "Shalom! to the '73 war, there's lots to atone for..."