Steve over at "Sound Officer's Call" just can't stop gaming these holidays! After throwing us all out of his house he had another throw-down with micro-armor; but then again, it's something you can do with "One-Hour Wargames".
He banged out Scenario #27 "Disordered Defense" which is an asymmetric sort of scenario in that the Blue *Attacker* has only 4 Units with which to seize the crossroads at the top, while the Red *Defender* has 6 Units. However, Red starts with only 3 and then on Turn 8, halfway thru the game, he gets the other 3 Units. Thus it is 4-3 at the beginning, not much of an edge but Blue does get to set up second and go first. It is thus possible to gang up all three Blue Units on one Red, and get to 4-2 pretty quickly - with some skill and luck, of course!
I really enjoy these 4 v. 6 scenarios, as they get to the heart of the qualitative edge some armies have. I imagine the Blue team as the Germans and the Red as the Russians, for example, or the Blue being the British and the Red the Americans in AWI, or Confederates and Union, etc. A great challenge for both sides.
The start points for the 3 Red Units is as below, one on the Crossroads and two out in front, offset from the road, in Zones 1 and 2. Blue sets up second within 6" of the Southern table edge, and gets moving.
Below is the faithful setup by our Demonstration Officer, Steve. Looks like the Arabs are fielding some, uhm, tan rectangular shapes on a 3-4" base. Well, tanks anyway, I'm sure.
Turn 8, the Isrealis have beat up the Arabs holding the zone, altho one tank Unit of, well, Green Rectangular shapes, has 6 Hits including 2 Permanent Hits, so it is almost dead. Another tank unit has only two Hits. so 21 Hits on Arabs went down for 8 Hits on Isrealis. I'm guessing that the Green Arab Unit is mech infantry, and the two others tanks.
End of Game. The Arabs have headed to Damascus while the Isrealis hold the field - seems the base with 3 Hits is actually dead and awaiting the recovery crews to arrive.
OK, enough kidding around in the briefing, we will now turn it over to CPT Steve - my commentary is in A. BLUE Italics interspersed. and Steve's responses in S. Grey Italics.
"i played a game of scenario 27 and it was quick brutal and fun." The Israeli Magach MBTs (m48s) are good tanks with excellent optics and
superior crews. From the OHW standards:
- long range was extended to 24".
- advanced stabilization = move /shoot or shoot / move at half
movement.
The egyptian T55s are a first line tank in 1967 at least:.
- have a standard 12” range and 3+ Hit so are at a disadvantage against m48s
in the open desert
- A. thought: double range is a big advantage, and it is
frustrating for a gamer to be shot at helplessly. I suggest checking the history
on the effective ranges and considering allowing the same range but at 1 spot worse to Hit on the D6.
- That being said, I’ve no problem for German 88s to
outrange a 2pdr – it would just have to be a scenario consideration for the
mission – sometimes gamers have to show some emotional fortitude!
- The clash between a 4+ v. 5+ shot at long range
makes for interesting gaming. Isrealis could be 12” @3+, 24” at 4+ [if they’ve a
longer, flatter gun trajectory] while Egyptians could be 8”@ 3+, 16”@ 4+ and 24@
5+ for example, depending on the quality of their gun, optics and shooting –
easy!
The arab infantry have dedicated ATGM units allowing them a 3+ vehicle
attack against anything within 48" [A. again, could be 3+
to 24” and 4+ to 48”, etc]
Theyre mechanized so i played it basically that they move as armor and if
attacked by a "ready" unit during movement they're defending as light armor.
Stationary they defend as infantry. [A: slick! again,
great rule, would show a “dismounting to fight” doctrine and raises the great
design question of “are they like ACW cavalry in that they fight mounted or dismounted?” or strictly "mounted infantry”?
]
The Israelis trashed the egyptians by the way. 4 units of magachs against
a mixed bag of Egyptian armor and infantry. Israelis ended losing a platoon
with 3 still on table (one permanent on one platoon). Egyptians left having
their mortar/ada/HQs unit on table.
A: As long as you feel like both sides had a chance
and the decisions created an outcome with a likely different outcome with
different decisions and average dice then it’s a good game!
My immediate thoughts are that the scenario should
play well into both sides strengths / weaknesses – three Arab infantry on the
board at start should give the Isrealis a hard time. I’d see them losing a unit
in the first couple turns while gobbling up two Arab infantry. The T55s could
enter Turn 8, or two T55s plus off-board artillery could enter / be available
T8.
Also, you could go with strict NT rules ranges, and
say that 1” = 200m, so that the 12” range is 2400m, in which case you’ve made
the table twice as big. So your micro-armor base would be about 3-400m x 200m,
which seems like a good spread for a tank platoon in the open [v. artillery,
etc]. Overall, sounds like the design is halfway there already!
These are very rudimentary ideas [A: and for more
ideas, consider NT’s in both OHW and AMW/Nap books, see if they inspire
anything] i thought id share but there is great potential for
bringing these into the modern era. Game was decided in half the time.
After this exchange via email, Steve returned with:
S: Thought about this more. I'd also offer a suggestion to "ease in" to
modern era with the 1967 war vrs the 1973 war, that way we can playtest modern
stuff before adding ATGM to the battlefield.
A: sure – we’re still playtesting WWII stuff for that
matter.
No reason to change things too much for tank guns and gunnery. For the
better guns and training I offer the following:
- L7 105mm tank gun on the Israeli tanks you could just say that israeli
armored units armed w L7 gun ignore long range modifier. So any tank unit armed
w an L7 or OQF 20 lb gets to ignore the "up one" rule for long range.
- Hence
long range still 24 inches for tanks. But Israeli tanks hit on 3+ Arab tanks at
4+ at long range.
A: nice thinking. historical question [cause I know
nada about this period] does the gun give improved performance at long range
compared to the Arab gun? Or is it superior performance at all
ranges?
With units squarely divided into armor or mech companies I'd also offer the
following players choice:
- After you roll up your force composition, choose an Infantry command or
armor command.
Meaning a player who chooses an armored command must field at least 3
armor platoons (switch INF with armor and armor w infantry on the force
structure table).
- A player who has a mech Infantry command must field at least 3 infantry
platoons . In a sense you are switching tanks and infantry in the force
structure but it would look and feel right for a modern battlefield. A: This is what I am doing for WWII,
also, altho I was going to start with the switch of armor and infantry, then roll the force up.
- Mechanized infantry become 2 units when dismounted and may not rejoin their
carriers. The carriers become a light armor unit and the inf are dismounts just
like the ww2 rules. A: sounds good.
- Radio net. ANY Israeli units may call for fire. Don't need designated
spotter for off board arty. A: Roger
- Arab units can call on a shed load of artillery (18-gun battalions, and
lots of them. Arab artillery was bigger caliber than Israeli in 1967, but not
very responsive or accurate. Arabs fielded ww2 Soviet 122mm and 152mm guns.
Israeli fielded 105mm guns and 25 lbers.
A: So give the Arabs a lower priority for guns to arrive, but
if they show up they are “very heavy” as opposed to just “heavy”? Or just more
of them? From what I understand of gunnery, the weight of the shell isn’t the
only factor in how hard they hit, it has to do with how many rounds they put
down, etc., right?
One possibility would be to have all Mortars go
“UP” one hit number [for standard medium mortars, 75mm field guns, etc]. Then
Artillery in the 100+ category would be where the Hit numbers are now, and heavy
guns would get the bonus die. What do you think?
S: Arabs are soviet artillery in almost all respects. Same guns same emphasis on pre planning and same poor response time. In terms of advantages, yes their calibers are bigger, but they have a hard time coordinating and massing guns "on the fly" like a western army. I like your suggestion for artillery. My thoughts are similar: artillery coordination roll is 4+ or even 5+ but the hit numbers are 3+ if youre lucky enough to get the big guns off table. Personally soviet styled armies love mortars so id keep the mortar values the same.
Tank movement is d6+6 for all sides owed to better engines wide tracks. A:
possible.
Infantry have auto rifles like AK47 and FN FAL so there should be standard
assault rules now.
A: I’m considering making it possible for any infantry,
and certain tanks – as long as they really did it.
S: They did.
Not dramatic changes although the Arabs had huge numerical superiority in
tanks that was offset by israeli crew quality, morale, training and of course
good gunnery.
A: So the game design question is do the Arabs have
bigger game units, or more game units that aren’t as
good?
Finally:
