INTRODUCTION
A couple of years ago I surveyed company-level Twentieth Century miniatures rules. There I promised to continue the survey at the squad and platoon level. In this article I do so, surveying fourteen sets of Twentieth Century squad level (one to one figure ratio) miniatures rules and boardgames.
A couple of the rules sets and games surveyed are out of print. I included them because, though no longer produced, they're worth hunting for and copies still might be found. Boardgames are included because, with minor conversion, (mainly of hexagons on the board to inches or centimeters on the table) and a bit of common sense, they constitute some of the best miniatures skirmish rules around. I don't pretend that this survey is exhaustive - there are rules sets and games out there I couldn't acquire, didn't want to pay for, or simply didn't know about.
Below is a chart describing these games and tabulating their basic features. The games are sorted roughly by historical period. There are two sets each dealing specifically with combat in World War I and Viet Nam. Several more are tied directly to World War II. A couple of the sets can be used to fight skirmishes throughout the Twentieth Century.
Several features are common to most of the games. Ground scales tend to fall below 1O yards per inch (or hexagon, for the boardgames). The time scale is typically below five minutes per turn. Movement allowances, fire ranges, etc., tend to be fixed. Combat resolution depends on rolling dice against a fire number, modified for the environment, though one of the more successful games (a boardgame) uses a combat resolution table (CRT). I originally had a column describing antitank combat and infantry combat. It was to indicate how combat results were arrived at. I took it out because all of the entries were the same!
Certain features vary considerably. What happens to a target that gets hit varies from game to game, ranging from the simple "He's dead Jim..." to the more complex "He go a minor flesh wound in the upper arm - first aid!", with differing rule mechanisms to handle the lot. Sighting, in this scale, can be and is handled in various ways. Several of the games require spotting rolls on the assumption that a failed roll means the spotter somehow didn't see the target - very reasonable. Others of the games treat things deterministically - if a clear line of sight (LOS) can be traced to the target, at the short ranges of the skirmish, the spotter would have to be blind or dead not to see the target.
Morale and command control are two of the most important features of squad level combat. Several of the games cite the works of SLA Marshall and John Keegan and their studies of small units in combat - and draw very different conclusions as to how to best represent small unit leadership on the tabletop. The older rules tend to require written orders and have the troops take reaction tests when untoward events occur. The newer rules factor command control into the leaders' abilities to get their troops to act, based on die rolling or drawn chits (doing away with written orders ... ). What the troops do becomes secondary to getting them to do anything at all. Morale rules are very widely treated at this level - one game ignores morale because in the 30 or 40 seconds (game time) a game takes to play, troops wouldn't have time to react to it. Most games treat morale as either a direct combat result or as a result of cumulative unit losses.
"The other stuff" - support weapons, mines, tanks, artillery, etc., are all included to one degree or another by most of the games, though a few restrict or eliminate certain support weapons because they're felt to be outside the game's scope.
Scenarios vary widely in their treatment. Several of the rules sets address the subject cursorily, if at all. The boardgames do the best job of the lot, generally systernizing scenario generation. They typically provide numerous generic scenario types, then vary numerous factors, including troop types, equipment, environmental conditions, etc., to detail the scenarios. These are especially useful because they provide an easy way to stop the 'meeting engagement' syndrome in which you enter from over there, I'll enter from here, and when we meet at table's center, we'll start shooting.
Campaigns are treated uniformly. At this level, the idea is to develop a "character", inserting troops into successive scenarios, to see how long they last. This is quite different from the normal sort of miniatures campaign, because instead of an infantry company, the player has, for example, a squad of troops, with names, individual characteristics, etc.
The boardgames included are all eminently playable with miniatures. Some rules mechanisms (commented on where they occur) may seem a bit unusual to the average miniatures gamer, but bear looking at. These games have certain advantages. Their production values - print and component quality - are typically better than their miniatures rules brethren. Writing style for the boardgames is typically more clear and concise than for the miniatures rules. This, I think, devolves from the general flavor of boardgames and miniatures rules. The former tend to be more legalistic and exhaustive, covering everything within a narrow focus in precise detail. The latter tend to be looser and wider in scope, giving the players more leeway to modify them as necessary. Many of the boardgames' components -- in fact all except the maps themselves, and a minority of the counters (those representing the troops, which, of course, are replaced by miniatures), are useful when playing them as miniatures games. The conversion note above, regarding equating map hexagons to inches or centimeters, is just about the only hard and fast conversion that must be made to put these boardgames on the miniatures table.
I state recommended player spans-of-control for playing these games in the notes. These are based on two concerns. First, how many troops can the player push around before the game hopelessly bogs down? Second, how much detail is there f rom the perspective of the decisions the player must make? Some of the games focus on the workings of a squad, while others focus on that of the platoon. The level of detail with which each troop is addressed reflects this.
Sequence of play is almost universally mixed-sequential. Only one side does anything at a given time, but both sides participate interactively in the execution of a turn. Two of the older rules sets, both published in the mid 1970s during the heyday of simultaneous movement, use that mechanism. Si-mov works, but is much more tedious, due to the required record keeping.
Following the chart are notes for each game keyed to the "Note" column on the chart. Descriptions of the games are included there, as well as comments on some of their more noteworthy features. One point must be made here. Complexity is not a measure of quality or success. It simply indicates how much effort is required to play the game. The more complex games tend to be the more detailed, the less complex, the simpler. Which is better is purely a matter of player taste.
1. Trench
Portraying trench warfare during WWI, also plays at a 1:40 "Divisional" figure ratio - only the 1:1 "raid" figure ratio game is described here. Most basic facets of trench warfare - artillery, trenches, gas, obstacles, etc. - are covered in a basic, but not necessarily simple, manner. Command control is not addressed beyond writing activity orders and preplotting artillery. Movement of troops is standard - fixed movement rates, penalties for crossing certain types of terrain, etc. Fire and melee combat are resolved with two die rolls - one, modified, to determine hits and the otherto determine casualties. The morale rules governing reaction are straightforward and are based on a modified die roll. These rules are beginning to show their age, but the raid game is still worth playing - the record keeping can be a burden, but if troops are kept in groups and movements are kept simple, a fast game can still be had with a company of troops on the attack.
2. Trenchfoot
Is a boardgame. Components include a 22' by 28" unmounted map representing a forward trenchline; rule and scenario foldleadership on the tabletop. The older rules tend to require written orders and have the troops take reaction tests when untoward events occur. The newer rules factor command control into the leaders' abilities to get their troops to act, based on die rolling or drawn chits (doing away with counters (four of the eight pages of rules are actually scenarios); 240 information and troop counters; 1 D6; and a bookcase box. The rules are clearly written and are aimed at the novice. Players plot orders in six turn blocks for each troop, except for the defender who initially plots for only three turns. This neatly keeps the players out of synch with one another. There are 14 orders possible, including walk, trot, run, aimed fire, reload, etc. Actual troop movement is sequential, so specific movement, aiming points, etc., don't have to be written down. This sounds convoluted, but works quickly and painlessly in play, partly because scenarios typically only contain between ten and fifteen troops per side. Long plotting leadtimes and short movement rates prevent too much interplayer reaction. Fire ranges and LOS are unlimited due to the extremely small scale. Each turn, players cast dice fo rinitiative. Moving troops may fall down. Plan on about 20% of one's moving troops to be prone at any given time. Troops can quick-fire. It is inaccurate, but can be plotted in addition to other activities. Combat is bloody, a terrain-modified fire die roll resulting in either 1D6 wounds or a kill (10 wounds kill a troop).
Melee is essentially a die-rolling contest, with modifiers. Grenades explode the turn after they're thrown and scatter based on distance thrown. Weapons include two generic types of rifles, pistols, grenades, auto rifles (BAR), and shotguns. Heavier weapons, gas, and minefields are omitted because presumably, were they present, the scenarios wouldn't take place. Barbed wire and shell-holes restrict movement and (in the latter case) provide cover. Morale exists only as a scenario-dependent die modifier. Given the time scale, more detailed morale and command control are somewhat meaningless and are omitted - the scenario will typically end before either would have a chance to affect play. Trenchfoot is easy to learn and get into. The focus is very limited, but the game succeeds admirably within its scope.
3. PanzerTroops
Is the introductory rules set and is very simple. All charts are printed in the rules. One side moves, the other fires, then the sequence is reversed. Fire is ranged, but factors are constant when within that range. A modified 2D6 roll to exceed the target's defensive value determines hits and kills. Infantry and other combat are treated similarly Defense values are terrain and movement dependent for soft targets and armor dependent for armored vehicles. Morale is checked by a simple 2D6 roll; failures are drastic and permanent. These rules sacrifice detail almost complete for the sake of playability. Player control span is very flexible, limited mostly by how many figures one can physically push about the tabletop. Rules include four pages of painting, organization, and scenario guide. Unfortunately, long unavailable.
4. Under Fire
Is very detailed. The squad leader (SL) is the focus of this game. Players typically put up to a squad of troops on the table. SLs command a variable number of troops each turn. When a troop is commanded, it may attempt to perform an action. The likelihood of a troop successfully performing an action varies with the action, the quality of the troop, and the proximity of a leader. Most activities, combat, and casualty determination are resolved with percentile dice. The rules governing casualties are extensive. Wound location (on the body) is quite important - each type of wound (there are 30 different types, detailed on a cut-out card deck) has a different effect on the troop's ability to act. That's ok, though, because there are extensive rules on field first aid! The short time scale means that a troop may take several turns to reload a small arm and artillery may take forever to be fired for effect. This is primarily an infantry game, though AFVs are included. Armor thicknesses, gun types, etc., are somewhat abstracted. Aircraft, field engineering, etc., are omitted because with the game's time scale they're meaningless. There's much detail to this game, but one's attention tends to be focused more on getting the troops to do something than on the tools with which they must work. 19 pages of platoon organizations and equipment data, and two sample scenarios (well done ... ), complete the rules. A quick reference sheet is included. These rules take some effort to play but will reward the diligent player with a very intense game.
5. Infantry Action
Uses simultaneous movement, all activity being predicated by orders written for each group of troops (troop group?), presumably of at least squad size. Each firing weapon counts as a given number of "points" scored against the target group. One die roll for each target, based upon firing points, determines the number of possible hits against that group. A final die roll for each possible hit determines if a hit was actually scored and against whom. Morale (reaction testing) is straightforward - a group fired on takes a morale check. Results range from temporary berserkness (mandatory advance) to rout. Vehicle combat is handled similarly to that for infantry, though gun calibre, armor thickness, vehicle weight, etc., are very simplified. Artillery and mines are dealt with, the former being an amalgam of mortars, artillery, and aircraft, the latter being present at play's start. A quick reference sheet ties everything together. No recommended player control span is stated; rules commentary points to company level, though. These rules are simple enough to play at that level, though the necessity for written orders and reliance in simultaneous moves will require a lot of player cooperation to make it work.
6. Tactical Commander
Suffers from a lack of organization and focus. Players are required to determine the sequence of play themselves, there being none given in the rules. There is no command control, though radio comm is addressed briefly. Armored vehicle combat is very detailed but vehicle types are not. Small arms combat, melee, weather, artillery, aircraft operations, naval support fire and landings, logistics, prisoner interrogation, and engineering are all treated to factors, modifiers, and a plethora of tables. These are summarized on two player reference cards. Vehicle and weapon data are included, though only for the US, UK, Germans and USSR. Tactical Commander contains several combat and melee examples to help tie all of the above together. Study them, for they contain the only clues as to how the rules are supposed to work as a whole. Most of the systems come down to straightforward modified die rolls. I couldn't help feeling that basically simple systems had been complicated much more than was necessary. Considerable man-to-man detail was mixed with a 25.4 meter per inch ground scale (that effectively eliminates much "nitty-gritty" ground detail) and rules addressing all manner of non-skirmish topics (naval support gunfire must seern an act of Nature during a skirmish ... ). There seems to be a lack of definition as to what these rules portray - Tactical Commander wants to be all things to all players, ranging from the armchair squadleaders up through the would-be battalion commanders, and doesn't really succeed at any of them. These rules work reasonably well if forces are limited to squad/ platoon level, but will quickly bog down if forces get too large.
7. Iron Cross
Is a boardgame. It includes an 18" by 35" unmounted map, 200 unit and information counters, and a rule/scenario booklet. The game deals with a vary narrow topic - infantry combat on the Eastern Front during 1941 and 1942. Players control squads and platoons. The countermix provides a limited pool of individual German and Soviet troops and equipment from this time period. Each has a fire, assault, and performance rating. Fire ratings reflect weaponry. Fire combat is ranged, terrain dependent, and probablistic. There are provisions for opportunity fire by non-phasing troops. Assault ratings reflect close combat ability. Assaults consist of point-blank firefights. Performance ratings reflect the likelihood that the troop will do anything at all. Most combat actions require a performance check - the player casts dice and compares the result to the troop's performance rating to see if the troop can act. Command control is only addressed to the extent that leaders can modify a troop's performance checks. Morale is modified as a combat result and is recovered automatically as turns elapse. Terrain affects movement and combat extensively. Mortar and grenade fire scatters. Field emplacements and mines are covered, mainly as "givens" to specific scenarios.
Vehicles are present but are treated rather abstractly and are the most board game-oriented part of iron Cross. There are six scenarios. They are useful, not only to playas-is, but because they provide a general structure with which to set up games. Several rules mechanisms that may seem boardgamey to the miniaturist at first work surprisingly well.
8. Sniper:
Where to begin? The Sniper series of boardgames exhaustively covers squad level combat in the 20th Century. The daunting rules length is mitigated by the fact that each game contains a common 24 page standard rulebook. Hetzer and Special Forces (SF) each also contain sixteen pages of special rules detailing subject-specific things like swimming and peaked roofs (western Europe ... ). Each game contains 400 counters (Sniper contains 600) that are primarily information markers. Each includes reference cards and two 23" by 35' unmounted two sided maps. SF also includes a reference screen, while the others have game boxes. Oh - all come with 2D6. The only components not directly usable by the miniaturist are the maps and some of the counters (the information counters will get used because they speed play by doing away with almost all of the game's recordkeeping.
Sniper details the game system and is conceptually very similar to Firefight. Players typically control one or two squads. Troops all have activation (initiative) ratings which determine who can perform actions when. Leaders make troops more likely to act. Isolated troops are much less likely to act. The system is clearly presented and works very smoothly. Fire combat consists of adding up attacking fire factors, modifying them for range and terrain, then casting 2D6 on a combat results table crossindexed with the modified fire factor. Troops can quick-fire and opportunity fire with attendant penalties. Results range from nil through panic checks of varying severity, wounds of varying severity, to KIA. Melee is resolved similarly (with different modifiers). Troops also check for panic when friendlies are hit. Panicked troops try to run to cover and hide. Once a squad takes a (secretly) predetermined number of casualties, it gets fed up and tries to leave. The rules are presented in four blocks, each building on the previous ones, giving a game playable at a number of complexity levels. Vehicle combat is well covered, but is a bit more abstract than infantry combat. Tanks can fire at one another, but their presence is typically limited to one side, and is intended to support against enemy infantry or strongpoints. Everything that could possibly affect a troop is addressed at some point. Sniper includes extensive scenario notes - very well done.
Hetzer builds on by including terrain types, equipment, and scenarios peculiar to northwestern Europe. The game system is expanded to give troops individual ability ratings that affect their activation ratings, ability to fire and melee, etc. in addition to several new scenario types, Hetzer provides a campaign system that includes a random scenario generator that actually works! The campaign system allows replacements, promotions, and variable support, all in a convincing manner.
SF wraps up much of what went before by adding extensive mine warfare rules (these do apply at this level, in ambush scenarios, etc.), weather rules, greatly expanded national characteristics rules (not more characteristics, just more nations), expanded personal ability ratings, chemical warfare, and a bunch more. Several new scenario types are provided as well.
The system as a whole allows the player to simulate almost any squad level combat imaginable in a fast playing, enjoyable game. Any one of the games will get the player firmly into the game system without the cost of several boardgames. The others merely serve to expand on that base. If you're a science fiction buff, Bug Hunter further extends the system into outer space, but that's a bit outside the scope of this article.
9. Soldiers
Is a boardgame, too. It's components include four 10" by 17" unmounted geomorphic maps, the rule book, player charts, dice, a counter tray, a bookcase box, and 300 counters. Most are information markers; the balance are individually named and characterized troop counters. Players typically control squads or platoons, The noted 20 minute turn length is something of a misnomer, because the turn (called a "Command Cycle") represents periods of activity and waiting for several squads and groups, not necessarily concurrently. Through an abstract bidding process, the players commit leaders to act. In essence, players "spend" command points to get the initiative, but must be careful because, having got the initiative, they have only their remaining unspent points, plus those assigned to their leaders, with which to issue orders. Leaders spend their command points to activate troops and groups belonging to them that are within their command range. Leaders roll on a risk table using their initiative score as a modifier to determine the level of risk their troops are willing to accept during a turn. When troops spend their activity points to move, shoot, etc., certain actions may be prohibited to them because those actions are too risky for the troops' risk level. Though sighting is deterministic, troops moving into sight of the enemy must make "alertness" rolls against their initiative ratings to determine whether they see the enemy that turn.
Ranged weapon fire tables provide hit likelihoods that are modified for terrain, etc., and are rolled against to hit. Non phasing troops can attempt reactive (opportunity) fire by rolling dice against their initiative ratings - a neat idea. Simple weapon damage tables are rolled against to determine damage against hit targets. Weapons may jam. Grenades are liable to scatter; their targets are attacked in a similar manner to fire combat. Melee is resolved by comparing modified die rolls by the attacker and the defender, with the low scoring combatant liable to wounding, killing, or capture. Combat engineering, support weapons, artillery, and entrenchments are all detailed thoroughly. Vehicles are not included, being considered outside the scope of the game.
Due to the game's basic complexity, the rules are presented in three blocks, with scenarios interspersed, to get players into the system. Several scenario types are detailed, with multiple subvariants for each. They are well thought-out and provide an extensive range of scenarios to play. This game is a studyof what the individual soldier sees/ perceives. Much of the game's activity is regulated by how enthusiastic/ bold or cautious/wary the combatants are. The bidding procedure has a weird feel to it, but forces the players to think out what they want to do, how quickly they want to do it, and how much (in lost opportunity to act) they're willing to pay to do it. Soldiers has several odd-feeling subsystems. It takes a bit of getting used to, but plays reasonably smoothly and does a good job of portraying combat in 1944/45 NW Europe.
10. Close Assault
Is yet another boardgame and addresses squad level combat during WWII. It comes with one 12' by 23" map, 240 counters (representing troops, information counters, and terrain chunks), 1 D1 0, four pages of basic rules, 24 pages of advanced rules and scenario notes, reference cards, and a game box. These rules are conceptually perhaps the simplest of the entire batch. Each squad of troops receives a number (typically three, four, or five) of sequence chits. These are placed in a common cup. Each turn the chits are drawn, one at a time. When a chit belonging to a squad is drawn, a set number of troops (typically two or three) from that squad can spend movement points on movement, firing, throwing grenades, etc. Command control is reflected by the fact that when a leader, performing an action because a chit was drawn, moves through a hex (adjacent to, in miniature terms), containing a subordinate troop, that troop can spend movement points as well. Morale is neatly addressed in that squads lose sequence chits and are liable to panic movement as they lose troops. Sighting is deterministic, but cover, firer movement, target movement, and obstructions all modify fire against sighted targets.
Extensive weapons data tables (a hallmark of S. Craig Taylor) provide fire factors, ranges, and hit numbers for most of the small arms of the UK, USA, Germany, the USSR, Italy, and Japan. Fire is executed by rolling a die less than the modified hit number for the firing weapon. Several types of fire can be conducted, including opportunity fire and tracking fire (in which one tracks a specific target). Grenades scatter when thrown and have blast radii. Melee is based on a situationally modified die roll by the attacker. Damage to troops includes suppression, stunning, wounds by body location (that modify troop performance), and, of course, KIA. Troops can have individualized characteristics - ten, in fact, - that affect their performance. Entrenchments, smoke, mines, and other peripherals are all included and detailed. Artillery, beyond light mortars and antitank guns, is not included.
Presumably, at five to ten seconds per turn, a scenario would be concluded before the first rounds landed. Armored vehicles and armored combat are treated with more detail than any of the other rules surveyed. The vehicle lists are reasonably extensive and contain an immense amount of data pertinent to the game. Th armor game could, in fact, be played without infantry if one were so inclined. Eight types of scenarios are included, with variable forces and environmental conditions. There are also provisions for migrating a character through the scenarios (this is the campaign play aspect of the game). Close Assault is simple in concept and execution, though there is a lot of die rolling - one squad or a pair of vehicles per player works well.
Unfortunately, Close Assault hasn't been available since Yaquinto Publications ceased production. I mention the game here primarily due to its extremely close relationship to Firepower, described below. If one can locate a copy of the weapon and vehicle statistics charts, Close Assault can be played under the guise of Firepower.
11. Firepower
Is a redevelopment of Close Assault moved forward in time to the post-WW II period. It comes with four geomorphic 8" by 22" mounted maps, 1 D1 0, a four page basic rules folder, a 48 page advanced rules and scenarios book, 216 counters (troops and information markers), reference cards, and a game box. All of the comments about the former game apply here, except that (as we're now in the modern era) the equipment lists have gotten weird! All manner of high-tech equipment is now available, ranging from binoculars, body armor, and claymore mines, up through NBC suits, along with clearly written rules on how they're used in the game. The vehicle lists are extensive, providing a potentially endless mix of weaponry. Organization charts and equipment lists are included for 54 of the world's nations deemed most likely to become involved in combat. The rules now cover capture and interrogation of prisoners. Six general scenario types are presented, with various force mixes and notes. The recommended span of control for a Firepower player is a squad - more will confuse the player and bog down the game.
12. Firefight
Can portray any 20th Century skirmish if weapon types are carefully interpreted, though organization and vehicle details are given only for post WWII. Player reference sheets and clear plastic blast templates greatly aid play. Command control/initiative is at the core of this game. Players typically field squads, which move based on chits drawn each turn. The number and type of chits are dependent on the squad's initiative level, which may change during the course of the game. Leaders give troops within command radii command points that allow the troops to perform actions. Actions have varying command point costs and include sighting, aiming, firing, reloading, moving, etc. Morale is simple and direct. Squads suffering casualties cast dice to see if their initiative level drops. Squads suffering lowered initiative levels cast dice to see if they panic. Sighting is accomplished via a die roll modified for distance, cover, etc. Detailed weapons tables are included, but rather than naming specific weapons, various "types" are noted, e.g., "automatic rifle A", "automatic rifle B", etc. Fire modifiers are extensive and very detailed. Grenades are varied in both type and effect and tend to scatter when thrown. Weapons of all types are subject to misfire and ammunition outage. Melee is detailed and is based on heavily modified die rolls by the combatants. Combat results range from suppression, through various types of wounds, up to KIA. Vehicles, helicopters, electronics, and mines are all covered and complement the basic rules. Options include such things as variable troop experience and characteristics.
As can be seen, these rules are very detailed and take some commitment to play. The writing style adds a bit to their complexity - it took our group several games to figure out just what the author was talking about regarding initiative. Simpler, more direct prose would've quickly decreased Firefight's complexity rating to 4. They are, however, rewarding and quite an experience to play once the system is learned.
13. Bodycount
Is unusual because the players all control US/ARVN forces - ideally squads, but platoons in a pinch. The referee runs the scenario and the VC/NVA. Interplayer communication is quite limited - the rules go so far as to recommend use of a cassette recorder with appropriate referee- supplied "static" for all inter player radio comm. The usual mines, sappers, weapons, aircraft, etc., are included; the amount of detail given them being directly proportional to their "closeness" to the troops on the ground. Troops have characteristics (aggression, discipline, endurance, etc.), that affect their performance. Movement rates vary from 'search' (slow) up through 'run' (fast). Target acquisition is based on variable sighting ranges, modified by terrain, target posture/movement, and a random die roll. Map-deployed firing units (snipers) can be spotted by the target, based on an acquisition die roll. Small arms fire and melee are both a matter of adding up various factors and dicing on a CRT. Grenades, aircraft, and artillery all scatter widely (wildly?) and can hit friendlies. Morale checks cause units to carry on, halt, or flee. Player, referee, and scenario design notes are good. A quick reference sheet helps speed play. The only player who may not like Bodycount is the referee, due to the amount of work involved in running a game - the results are, however, worth it.
14. Charlie Company.
Once again, the referee controls the NVA/VC, as well as US higher command. Players field platoons, but may handle companies. These rules are designed for campaign play, with players trying to "survive" a tour of duty of up to 12 scenarios. NVA/VC forces are limited in play by strict adherence to preplotted tactical plans and a relative lack of firepower. The US/ARVN players are limited by their general inability to locate the enemy. Firing units cast predetermined number of D6, based on firing weapons, terrain, and movement modifiers and is very simple. Hits are randomly allocated, with another die roll for each to determine effect. A table is used by the referee to deteriming VC/NVA casualties in a more simplified manner (the ref already has enough to do ... ). Fire support from elements (including aircraft) outside one's own unit is very iffy. Again, the detail with which these elements are treated varies directly with their closeness to the troops. The game contains extensive organization information, as well as a very good random scenario generator. The designer's notes provide his rationale omitting morale rules. The game plays fast and bloody, with more emphasis on activity than on minutae of equipment details. A quick reference sheet contains all pertinent charts. A good, simple, set, with potential to be more than a one night stand.
CONCLUSION
I am a firm believer that a good set of rules will try to focus the player's attention on decisions appropriate to the player's nominal command level within the rules. I wound up with mixed feelings after surveying these games. One would think that with man-to-man rules, the command focus - the nominal command level of the player - should be pretty consistent. Not so.
The more detailed of the rules make squadleaders of the player, while others let one command entire companies. This feels odd when you consider that each individual troop is accounted for. When I think of playing with a company, I begin to think in terms of squads, or at least fireteams, mounted on common bases. Company commanders don't plot the movement of individual troops - they maneuver platoons. Individually mounted squads allow those platoons to deploy in different formations. Individually mounted troops don't add anything to this, but simply increase the number of troop stands to be pushed about.
This survey doesn't try to present any single game or rules set as "the best". The various designers each have their own ideas of how a skirmish works - what factors are important, which should be detailed, and which can be ignored in the interests of ease and speed of play. All of the rules work; that is, they all allow you to recreate small unit actions on the tabletop. Which works best for you depends on which of the author's concepts of small unit combat you most closely agree with. This survey tries to give you some basic information about each of the games with which to make that determination.
Back to Table of Contents -- Courier Vol. IX No. 6
Back to Courier List of Issues
Back to Master Magazine List
© Copyright 1991 by The Courier Publishing Company.
This article appears in MagWeb.com (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web.
Other articles from military history and related magazines are available at http://www.magweb.com