Modern 1980s War Games: The Structured Turn Sequence

    Will it be "Fire then Move" Gentlemen...

 www.asisbiz.com/Battles/Barbarossa/images/German-Tank-column-on-the-move-Russia-01.jpg

    ...or Move then Fire?? 

While it is simple and addictive, I don't like the "Alpha Strike" aspect of Ogre / GEV. It is true that the technology envisioned in the game allows for constant movement and firing, much like the modern M1 Abrams has - but better one would think as it is 2085. Therefore much of the vehicular combat would be more like a naval engagement, with constant movement while firing on the move. However, in terms of game play, you get to move and fire without taking any fire. In terms of the technology, one would assume that if nothing else there would be a simultaneous combat between the moving player and the units he attacks, and sometimes one will miss on the CRT while the other hits, which takes into account one side hitting the other first.

Modern warfare does have a certain element of Alpha to it, no doubt, but the Alpha Strike has to do with combat effectiveness, the combination of training and technology. It isn't caused by a turn sequence that allows you to move and shoot before the defense shoots back. The general consensus would be that defenders are lying in wait and can shoot back first. Of course, if they are otherwise engaged by a unit - and their attention is focused there - or they are focused on movement, they may not be ready to shoot first.  

So, altho we can't always give the defender a shoot-first, we should always give them a shoot-first possibility, IMHO. This represents the defending unit has spent time preparing for an enemy advance, and will generally be ready for it. In my modern combat games, I call this "Ready" and it functions like a "saved" Action that is spent later. It's not a new concept, but the game that inspired me the most would be Andy Chamber's "Starship Troopers" published by Mongoose Publishing..

It's the same old problem: Move OR Shoot?  Move AND Shoot?  Shoot AND Move? When does the opponent get to shoot?  IGO-UGO or integrated turn? Or, splice the turn sequence by activity type, like like so many 1980s classics by John Hill, Frank Chadwick, et al. Well, does it make it easier to play with the old 80s style turn sequences?  My thought is so, but let's talk about that...

                    Just looking at this pic gets my blood up to play this game again!

ORIGINAL "SQUAD LEADER" (1977-ish) has a classic example of this highly structured, segmented by activity type of Turn Sequence, comprising 2 player turns of about 5 minutes with the following phases:

1. Rally Phase [also, artillery requests begin here]

2. Prep Fire Phase [also, artillery requests from last turn arrive]

3. Movement Phase

4. Defensive Fire Phase [also, artillery requests from last turn arrive]

5. Advancing Fire Phase

6. Rout Phase

7. Advance Phase

8. Close Combat Phase [also, artillery requests continue]

Eight Phases!  These  phases regulate your plans to, essentially:

PREPARE your troops, lay down preparatory fire to suppress the enemy, move [receive defensive fire], fire any units which moved - or have not moved or fired yet, ALL units of BOTH sides that have been 'broken' by fire run away to cover, and then the phasing player advances any of his units one hex including into an enemy hex - if that occurs, there is close combat. 

Your opponent then gets to be the Phasing Player and has the same sequence to do the same back to you.

It is essentially an "IGO-UGO" turn with an integrated move/shoot sequence [that incorporates Defensive Fire] followed by Close Combat.

FRANK CHADWICK modern game Turn Sequences
Main reason this fellow gets a section of his own is that I have a number of his games, and his 80s Turn Sequence evolves in various ways over the 30-year span of the rules - interesting!

1981. 15mm Traveller Miniatures: "Striker"

This one is actually a lot like "Squad Leader" but it is not as well explained. While much briefer, the rules are not as clear as SL, IMHO. The scale is 1mm=1m [or 1/1000] and represents 30seconds of activity. The turn sequence is:

1. Command Phase. Both sides decide command functions for their Leaders – Lead, Order, Rally - and issue any orders, or request IF Fire Missions for next Turn [or later].
2. P1 Move Phase. P1 moves his units [P2 OpFires DF units that didn’t Move last Turn ].
3. P1 Fire Phase. 
• P2 Fires. P2 IF arrives; P2 then Fires DF Units that didn’t Move last turn. 
• P1 Fires DF Units.
4. Melee Phase
5. P2 Move Phase. P2 moves his units [P1 OpFires DF units that didn’t Move last Turn ].
6. P2 Fire Phase. 
• P1 Fires. P1 IF arrives; P1 then Fires DF Units that didn’t move last Turn.
• P2 Fires DF Units.
7. Melee Phase
8. Panic Morale Check Phase. Both player’s Units check for Panic as needed.

I like how the turn starts with leader actions that will shape the turn.  Aside from that, it is an IGO-UGO move-shoot-melee sequence, with shared Command, Melee and Morale Check phases.

1987. First Battle modern era: "Team Yankee"
I really like this board game, altho I have not played it thoroughly.  It is certainly an enjoyable intro to modern combat, which is more than most modern combat games can say!  Nice balance of realism and playability. I have a few posts of it here [click]. It turned out to be the first of a series of games off the same design, and they ended up being name the First Battle system. For a nice overview and review of the system, go to BoardgameGeek here [click]. A hex is 200m and a full game turn is about 5 minutes [not defined].

Game Turns [GT] consist of two Player Turns [PT] with Artillery at the beginning and end. 

Artillery Fire Mission Requests. [P1 and P2]

Player Turns

P1 Prep Fire.

P1 Movement with 2P Reaction Fire [RF; 2P RF units sacrificed their move in e].

P1 Advancing Fire.

P2 Prep Fire.

P2 Movement with 1P Reaction Fire [1P RF units sacrificed their move in b].

P2 Advancing Fire.

Artillery Fire Mission[s] Arrive. [P1 and P2]
One interesting twist on this Turn Sequence is that the side given "Initiative" by the scenario - usually the attacker - can choose to be Player 1 or Player 2 each turn. This can allow him to go twice in a row. Altho he must grant the same to the opponent first, deciding on the timing can make up for it. An advanced rule adds a simple command control rule at the start of each player turn but it isn't a "phase".

1991. First Battle modern era: "Battle for Basra"

This free game takes the "Team Yankee" design and bumps it up to a counter being a company instead of a single vehicle or team. Also, the Turn Sequence gets a little twist, giving the US a Move-Shoot-Move turn, but the Iraqis a Shoot-Move turn. This gives the US two gears - forward and shoot, and shoot and retreat - while the Iraqis are confined to reverse gear - shoot and retreat. There's zero chance of a counter-attack with them, pretty much. While a very interesting exercise in Turn Sequence design, I found it too easy to beat up the Iraqis and opted to use the TY sequence instead!

1991. First Battle moderns - WWII to the Gulf War: "The Sands of War"

This has the same Turn Sequence from TY, but adds an actual Command Phase at the start of each player turn. The CC rules are also fleshed out, and units out of Command Control are basically halved in effectiveness. I assume the rules for the 1990 Battlefield Europe are almost identical.

The Sands of War ups the TY design to one counter is a platoon [instead of one vic or a team], and a turn is 15 minutes. I think that's a bit long - feels more like 5-10 minutes. This game starts with WWII 1940 scenarios and takes the player through several more middle east wars including the Irab-Isreali Wars, Iran-Iraq War and ends with the Gulf War in 1991. Perfect vehicle to study not only weapon systems from 1940-1990 but the rule mechanics for them! 

1991. First Battle WWII: "Blood and Thunder"

This is the full maturation of this set of rules, far as I can tell. The rules are almost identical to TSoW but the assault / same-hex combat rules are thought out in much more detail - I like them a bit better, altho they add a bit more math, they are much more reasonable.

2012. "Command Decision: Test of Battle"

This is actually a miniatures game, and seems to be the last word in this lengthy series of Command Decision rules.  Here, the Turn Sequence renames a few things and puts the Command Phase at the...end?  Unusual!

1. Artillery Phase: artillery requests and results
2. Movement: 
• Prep Fire is declared sequentially then resolved simultaneously.
• Side A then Side B moves.
3. Opportunity Fire: DF and IF are both resolved simultaneously.
4. General Fire: Remaining Fire is resolved simultaneously.
5. Command & Morale: Order and Overwatch markers are placed. Morale checks are resolved.

Overall, it is the same sequence, except that Prep Fire doesn't have its own phase, and is incorporated into Movement. Opportunity Fire is then not incorporated into movement but part of a second / final / advancing Fire Phase, which wraps up the Fires. With a Game Turn of 30 minutes and one vic a platoon, all fire is simultaneous due to the long amount of combat possible [intermittently]. Would be interesting to hear his thoughts on this sequence!  Overall, it is a turn 60 times longer than Striker, with many possible outcomes at the operational level.

The main question for me is: 

"Do these structured Turn Sequences make it easier for me to remember what to do and when?"

Some additional thoughts on the Turn Sequence

1) It needs to allow a logical plan to flow in one turn, UNLESS it is imperative or realistic for the opponent to react part way thru the plan, e.g. OpFire. Most of these sequences seem like they will aid you in doing so, altho they can also restrict your reactions because they are less fluid. Overall, I think they not only help a new player to "organize his thoughts and plan" but show a plan developing on the battlefield.
2) In Modern Combat, the logical plan is "Fire, then Maneuver". The intent of the Fire is to suppress the defense - preferably entirely - and allow the Maneuvering force to approach unscathed to make its attack, preferably on the flank or rear. This means that the logical sequence for a modern fight has to be:
Artillery, Preparatory Direct Fire, Movement, [Defense Fire], Advancing Fire [at reduced effect]. All of these follow this pattern with Direct Fire, but the artillery is in various spots, often in a following turn. Easy to house-rule and fiddle with since the Artillery is in a designated phase.

I found Team Yankee and Basra smooth enough in the several games I played here [CLICK]. However, I've put more thought and research into modern combat since then, so it is definitely time for another playtest - but this time with my newly acquired "The Sands of War"!