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"!

Back on the Net...liking it and not!

With the combination of government mandates and fearful friends and acquaintances, there's not much live gaming going on. Tempting as it is to push it, I'm hoping that with only 0.0000375 of my state's population having the bug, in another week the situation will - still - not be statistically significant and we can get back to a  more normal pace.

So, while I'm back blogging and checking out blogs, I would prefer to be gaming live - I miss you guys, *sniff *.
:)

Meanwhile, I have wrapped up Army education and done some spring cleaning [of which more to do...]. In terms of gaming, I took a couple down from a shelf to run thru. The first is one of an embarrassingly large collection of British in North Africa WWII games. As it is one of the shortest, "Desert Duel: First Alamein" by LPS Games got its first go.  Detailed reviews [HERE] at BoardgameGeek.

I found it pretty easy to set up, and the components are pretty good - the map I rather liked, the counters were "OK".

Conveniently, the rules are to the right, part of the map. British setup has a series of boxes on the battlefield, too far apart for good mutual support [as in real life...didn't learn anything from Gazala debacle]. Below, the Germans in blue to Northwest, British in a sort of orange sand color East and South. Reinforcements fit on the turn track.

When you start getting into it, the mechanics are a mix of the usual and a few interesting bits and pieces. It is not a revolutionary design. Most units have a strength of 2-4 and attrit by losing a point or two in combat. There's a sort of quality roll that affects things [higher quality units last better]. The use of a mandatory retreat mechanic combined with a zoc rule that blocks retreats makes this feel much like other games - block with a zoc and destroy the stack.

However, this is hard to do at times - your own stacks are vulnerable when you spread out, and after destroying a stack you are scattered around the desert and can get enveloped yourself. I made several notes about changes to make based upon reading Niall Barr's "Pendulum of War" including limiting British movement somewhat. Then, got very distracted by Army education and had to eventually clean up the stalled game that was gathering dust. It and others will get investigated as I return to the desert with miniatures - soon - and look for the perfect board game to use as a campaign system.

Just last few days, I had a real hankering to return to the modern era - Army education does that to my gaming habits. I have been really eager to continue my investigation of the "First Battle" series of boardgames by Frank Chadwick, most of which are GDW from the 1980s or so. My first one is the wonderful "Team Yankee" on which I've already posted HERE, and which I plan to continue playing. It is a 1 counter = 1 vic or squad level game.

But I had a hankering to try another one, a gateway game to the series that was a convention giveaway. "Battle for Basra" is a bit stripped down, and each counter is a company instead of a single tank [!]. The higher level of play has a few changes to the TY mechanics. First, it manipulates the turn sequence to give extra advantages to the US player instead of just making all their counters "super awesome" as a mechanic. The turn sequence is:
US Shoot
US Move
US Shoot [again!]
Iraqi Shoot
Iraqi Move
In essence, all US forces can Shoot - Move - Shoot in their turn, while the Iraqis can only Shoot - Move. This seriously degrades Iraqi combat potential as they can't maneuver and attack at all. They are forced to sit and await the US onslaught, and then survivors [if any] get to fire back and retreat. Second, the turn sequence has no interaction like in TY - there is no opportunity fire at all, and all units can shoot in the proper phase without it impacting their move and vice-versa. This means all US units can Shoot up the defense, close in and finish it off at point blank range with no return fire - ever. Looks pretty grim, but here goes!

I opted for a defense in depth, putting all the infantry in a wadi that confined the US to the NW board corner. Backing them up are the T55s and BMPs w' ATGMs - they have great range and are almost a threat to the Abrams! A highway under construction [HUC] is the next line of defense, full of the rest of the infantry. The US force of Bradley's and Abrams enters in the small space and right off the bat has to blast away to get some more room! The key US decision is how to crack the defense - fast and dirty by advancing into point blank range, or carefully peeling the onion apart?


Just to try it out, I went in close, but not into the same hex. At a range of 1 hex, the infantry are nothing to fear while the Abrams attack value is doubled for under half range.

I lost a couple of Bradley platoons due to hot die rolling by the Iraqis.

Turn 2, the Abrams dashed thru the gaps, enveloped the T55s and their BMPs, and...

...ate them for breakfast and lunch!


Turn 3, the US armor crashed into the infantry holding the HUC, and ripped them apart - lots of 5-1 attacks. The Iraqi reinforcements then entered [rolled each turn for the turn number or less, classic old mechanic] and deployed.


These were then eaten for dessert! With a few BTR platoons left on the table, I called it a day for the Iraqis.


Turn Sequence mechanics...some thoughts.

The novel use of two different turn sequences for a game is a great idea - it takes into account the outstanding ability of the US forces to fire and maneuver, and do it much faster than the Iraqis. The Iraqi turn sequence, however, confined them to one tactic - wait, shoot, then scoot. Not only do they have weaker gear, but they have half the opportunity to fire, or none at all if they maneuver into range. For a company level game, that is harsh [even if realistic given the history]. I can live with them only shooting once, but I think they should be able to shoot-move, or move-shoot.

In the end, I decided to use the TY sequence of play:
A Shoots
A Moves [B opportunity fires]
A Shoots
B Shoots 
B Moves [A op fires]
B Shoots
Catch is you can only fire in one of the shoot phases, and Op Fire [in opposing turn] if you didn't move. So you can shoot in the first or last phase, then gain the Op fire and shoot again in the enemy player turn for double the shooting - but you can't maneuver, you are committed to lots of shooting - elegent! The contrast tactic is to shoot then maneuver into cover - it halves your rate of fire and a fast-moving attacker can close in on you, but you don't take much return fire.

In TY, missiles can't move and shoot at all - it is a very tactical level of play. At this higher company level I imagine they are taking turns maneuvering then loosing missiles, so I did permit it.

This time it was much harder for the U.S. I imagine them greatly fatigued from a rapid advance and running low on ammo, so relative performance is a bit closer [just...a bit]. With a possibility of moving and shooting, all the Iraqi armor had a threat range of 10-11 hexes and set up farther away. Below, I divided the Abrams and Bradley's up and sent them in close - I promptly lost two Bradley's to excellent Iraqi rolls of a '1'! A third took a temporary "Damaged" result. Yikes!


I re-thought that, and tried again, this time I held off with the Bradleys. With a defense of only '4' [the Abrams is a...14!] they need to hang back and use their 20-mike-mike to soften things up a bit. Forgot to turn the Bradley counters back over, but you get the idea. Meanwhile, the Abrams pile onto the Iraqi left flank, looking for a break-through!

And unsurprisingly, they get it!

They take a tiny bit of heat in return thanks to some great dice by the desperate Iraqi forces - two Abrams are "Damaged". Note: I also decided to give the bottom of the combat chart a minimum D result on a '1' - even if the attacker can't get 1-4 odds. I figure being shot at is stressful and wears people down, at least. I did not use the "two 'D'  and you're destroyed result for those units, however. I figure they just don't have the firepower to damage the Abrams. Thus, the "D" is more like a "Disorganized" result.


Turn 1, Iraqis move up, getting their BMP's in range with their ATGMs. They completely miss however, needing a 1-2.


US Turn 2 ends with a huge whole in the Iraqi left. On Iraqi 2, the right fist Iraqi armor knock out an Abrams with an ATGM! 

Encouraged, the Iraqi tanks advance and D one Abrams, followed up by their BMPs


U.S. Turn 3, the first fire phase counterpunch from the US ATGMs is super nasty, and most of the T55s are knocked out, along with two BMPs from the center.

Turn 3 Iraqi reinforcements arrive and move up the road. I decide to use the triangular fortification to hide behind, while moving up the slower BTRs.

Turns 4 and 5, the US trashes most of the Iraqi armor with their tanks and ATGMs and start maneuvering out of the corner in which they've been confined. The Iraqi armor shifts south to hide out of LoS behind the triangular fortrification.


Turn 6, the US rapidly advances down the center road and begins attriting the infantry in the HUC. A counter attack by Iraqi T72s is heroically executed...

...and they knock out two Abrams!  What!!!???

Their joy is short-lived, as they are all destroyed.

With nothing but weak armor destined to die to the US ATGMs, and the infantry going to get chewed up by the last tank platoon and mortars, I called it quits - but it was a much more exciting game.

So, the turn sequence...it's critical to not only shape tactics but  to make the game dynamic. Clearly, more to be said about this in another post on the First Battle series. Am particularly interested in "Blood & Thunder", an East Front WWII version that represents the culminating development of the rules, far as I can tell. And...I acquired a mint copy at a great price through Boardgame Geek!

ORIGINAL "Team Yankee", GDW First Battle Series Game, p3

Coming Soon, to a Gap near you:
https://www.rbth.com/multimedia/pictures/2016/05/06/victory-parade-rehearsal_590615

Well, hopefully Team Yankee will be able to hold the Soviet horde from the Fuldarians and the rest of the FRG. This battle continues my growing acquaintance with the First Battle Series: Team Yankee rules, and is Scenario 2: Objective Log. It is still, however, an introductory scenario and doesn't use all the rules. It does use enough new rules to challenge me, however! These include Morale [force not Unit  / Team morale], Artillery, Spotting, Entrenchments.

I played this about seven times. Various tactics did not work at all, including an indirect attack [not enough time to be subtle] and leading with a mech infantry assault on Lemm. Finally, I felt like I had learned enough to record results that were not a debacle on somebody's part!

Below, the Russky force. 2xT72, 3xT64, 2xBTR, 2xMotor Infantry Platoons, 3 entrenchments, 3 Dummy markers [the arrow]. They also have one Artillery Battery with 8 salvoes of HE. 

One Artillery Battery / Platoon means one fire mission may be called in on a hex: up to three Salvoes [attacks] may be called in successively. Ammo is typically HE, a one hex attack, but others like Smoke, FASTCAM  and ICMDP attack 4, 5 and 7 hexes respectively.

Reds must hold on to any hex within six of the marked hilltop points: #190 [book Objective Log, includes village of Lemm just South] or #214 to the North, which doesn't include Arnsdorf to the North [book Objective Gold]. So basically the US forces must make a clean sweep of the Soviets!


Below, America's heroes, Team Yankee [!!wild cheering!!]. They are sporting a lethal force of 2xM1 platoons, the battalion CO and XO also in M1s, a mounted mech infantry platoon, 2xITV and a FIST, plus Artillery Support in the form of 2 batteries with 12 Salvoes, including HE and ICMDP.

Red menace deploys. After a variety of plans, I put one mech platoon in Lemm with two BTRs to enable survivors to flee when the town fell. The other platoon I put in a string of entrenchments running from the large woods to hill #214. I am hoping that this results in an ability to use the woods as a forward or last-ditch defense against Los Terribles Yanquis!


To put some uncertainty into solo play, I took one dummy and the first T64, turned them over and randomly deployed them in the two woods. I'll unveil them when they can be useful. I also mixed up the inverted counters for the platoon in Lemm, figuring that may result in a better deployment plan than any I've found so far! Below is what TY sees as it deploys...a lot of ready Reds occupying key terrain, and all Concealed so not a target for Direct Fire.



First TY setup. I have the mech infantry ready to storm across the river and bridge with plenty of firepower in support. Russkie arrows mean the unit can Reaction Fire - note that some of them are Dummy markers, but I don't know which ones they are.

No less than 10 M1s and two ITVs are overwatching.


TY then uses their Attacker's Initiative advantage [Attacker can choose to take the first Player Turn or force the Defender to take the First Player Turn and go Second] to make the Sovs take the first Player Turn. If they open fire at the mech infantry, my overwatch will cream them. They decided to hold fire...this is an ongoing tension in this game, the decision to stay concealed or open fire


Still, once things get rolling and the mech infantry prepare an attack on the town, there's no point in the Reds holding back - the mech infantry always lose some M113 PCs and some of the teams don't bail out in time [50% chance of surviving]. I try a couple of variations, but not even smoke will help conceal you in an adjacent hex.


Finally, it is clear that simple is best. TY leads off with two troops of Abrams attacking the town - they move adjacent, reveal what is there, and are impervious to enemy fire as the Sovs do not have any ATGMs - not very realistic, but hey, this is an intro scenario featuring Artillery and I wanted to respect the scenario as written.


Above, the Abrams reveal a dummy, the Sov command team, a motor infantry team, and the two BTRs hiding in the town. Below, they make short work of all but the command team in the advancing Fire Phase [and probably destroy a lot of FRG civilian property, too].


At the end of Turn 1, Sov artillery lands on pre-determined hex, and is a miss to right of Abrams platoons. US artillery puts HE on two double-stacked hexes, hoping that there's not just dummy markers there. Some great rolling results in Pin results on the two remaining Soviet Motor Infantry teams!

Should be noted...First Battle Series likes low rolling. I prefer high rolling to be good, but that can be fixed later.

Again using the Attacker's Initiative advantage, I take TY's player turn first in Turn 2. This means TY goes twice in a row albeit one is second player turn of Turn 1, and other is first player Turn of 2. I shift the M1s against the possible Sov T64s and when flipped over, the counter is in fact the T64s - surprise! Meanwhile, the US mech infantry push into the town against the pinned Sov teams and their command team.



Sovs Reaction Fire smokes one M1. The M1s Advance Fire back, destroying two T-64s. A pretty good trade considering they were outnumbered 2-1, but they had the first shot.


Mech infantry do pretty well, destroying a Pinned Team and Pinning the Command Team. Situation is well in hand for the Burger Boys beating up the Borsch Biters in Kraut Kountry!

Sov Turn 2, the surviving T64 misses a 3-2 attack, fizzle. The Motor Infantry Command Team can't shoot when Pinned [Attack Factor 1, halved and rounded down = '0'].



Turn 3. The US tears up the remaining Sov defenders on Hill 190 and lose an M113 PC in Lemm. The Sovs sit tight at Hill 214. I reveal the Dummy marker in the large woods at top right, since the T-64s have already been revealed. I think the scenario could use a few T-72s as well as a Dummy to give the Sovs some more teeth.



TY Turn 4, they begin cracking the nut at Hill 214. The Sovs are sort of in a pickle, as any fire from them will result in some damage from overwatching US forces, like the ITVs which just barely reach but are pretty dangerous. The Sovs morale fails at 8, and they've 6 for the BN CDR [T72] and 3 each for the Motor Platoon leaders. So basically, if they lose the BN and an MP Ldr they fail morale and depart.


Given this, I decide my deployment on the hill is poor, and instead push them back into the woods on the back side. Uncertain if they will survive, but they do have a chance with their Reaction Fire, at least with the 2 T-72s the BN CO is handling. My experiment defending from the front side [below] resulted in a T72 lost for nothing.



So, Turns Sov 4 and TY 5, the US presses forward and the Sovs pull back a bit more, putting the Motor Infantry leader in an entrenchment and the two T72s retreat to a woods edge with good fields of fire into the valley the motor platoon is occupying, as well as the intersection next to them. TY leaders hang back, not wanting to get picked off and risk a Morale problem causing them to Hesitate on their attack. At the end of Turn 5, the US artillery lands on the hexes the Sovs were occupying, so good choice to retreat!



Turn 6, TY aggressively assaults the position at close range. This costs them two M1's destroyed by the T72s, and a damaged M1 also. But, they eliminate the T72s and therefore the last of the Soviet anti-tank assets. Would be nice if they had some ATGMs...but alas, not on today's TOE. With the T72's smoked, the remaining M1s start beating up the Sov motor infantry.



Finally, the last Sov unit is destroyed, leaving none within 6 hexes of either hilltop, and a clear TY victory!



Well, a grand finale to many games played, including experimenting with additional Sov forces, including ATGM assets and a platoon of three T72s. Those resulted in narrow losses for TY, mostly due to the difficulty of clearing all Sovs from the board. In the end, I decided to post on a play of the scenario as written, without additional rules or forces.


I think it is interesting that it ended just like in the book, with the US losing several tanks and an M113 personnel carrier to the Sov defenders. I bet this is what Frank C had in mind when creating the scenario, anyway! The scenario had great replay value with and without additional forces. I probably could've lasted the Sovs until Turn 7 or maybe 8 if I pushed them back into the northern woods more and made TY come after them. But the end result would be the same, I think, due to limited AT assets for the Sovs.

A few thoughts:

1) It is probably a bit TOO easy to allow the Attacker to always choose IN. I think they should roll-off, but with a bonus to the attacker [say, defender must win by 2, or 3].

2) Still a bit too easy to tell where the enemy is even with the dummy markers. True, they can be swapped around with Dummy Markers and mixed up, resulting in a solo player not knowing what, if anything is there, but there is a good chance that _something_ is there! OTOH, one can argue that there are only so many likely defensive positions and good fields of fire, so perhaps this is realistic. Still, I think I'd like to allow Units to be in the hex of the counter or an adjacent hex, further obscuring what is under the counter.

3) Artillery seems a bit slow on the draw. Even in WWII, a pre-planned barrage could be called up and falling in minutes, if not seconds. At the moment, your opponent always gets a chance to move, so you play a guessing game with them about that - plot the barrage to land ahead of them where you think they'll move, or on them in case they don't? There needs to be a sweet spot btw quick as direct fire and way to slow to affect anything except defenders holding positions or advancing infantry.
4) This is a very realistic game yet only moderately complex. The whole time you are trying to make decisions based upon covering your advance with enough firepower that the enemy dare not reveal himself until absolutely necessary. The Defender meanwhile is trying to figure out the best way to extract the most punishment by tactical ambush and counter-attack. All of which are easy to understand and do thanks to the simple but subtle turn sequence.


This emphasizes what I want in a game - realistic command decisions - and what I can live without, lots of little special rules and national characteristics that largely cancel out and muddle basic tactical thinking, anyway [talking to YOU, Flames of War!].


Between Scenarios 1 and 2, I've played over a dozen times. I think the mechanics give great replay value, and allow a decent-sized company level game to play in about 1-2 hours depending on how focused you are. There's also not much to keep one from saying that a "Unit" is a platoon of tanks / infantry instead of a single tank or team, so the system can easily scale up, I think, just add more "Damaged" results to the CRT to take into account the larger Unit.

I encourage you, Gentle Reader, to give the First Battle Series a try - it is not revolutionary, but it effectively uses classical mechanics to achieve a nice balance of fun and realism!