Battle The First, WW II In this issue, there is a description of the engagement at Ptresk, won by the attacking forces. On a Saturday afternoon, we set up a similar encounter, with 9 offensive battalions versus 5 defending ones. This was played in 15mm, and there were three types of battalions: Armor Battalion 4 tank stands plus 1 artillery stand Infantry Battalion 3 infantry stands plus 1 artillery stand Reinforced Inf Battalion 3 infantry stands, plus 1 tank stand, plus 1 artillery stand Note that all battalions were assigned supporting long range (20 inches) artillery units. The next furthest firing weapon was the tank with a 15 inch range, and then the rifle, with a range of 10 inches. All battalions were assigned to brigades, with each brigade consisting of 3 battalions. the attacking force, with its 9 battalions, thus had 3 full brigades. The defenders, with 5 battalions, had one full-strength brigade and one under-strength brigade of 2 battalions. John Shirey was on the offense, and he was permitted one reconnaissance aircraft, which took off from his baseline, and flew over the field in a straight line, passing over as many towns as possible (there were 7 towns). At each town, if occupied, there was 60% chance the pilot reported enemy activity. The pilot proved to be reliable... the result of the flight was that John discovered that most of the towns on the western flank of the defending force were empty. And where were they? I, as defending commander, had guessed wrongly... I had placed two of my precious five battalions on the eastern half of the table. My three other battalions had been placed near the center of the field. John's objective was to occupy one of two towns, Plik or Glosk, placed on my baseline. If his forces entered either of the towns, he would be declared an instant winner. Accordingly, warned by his recon, he sent an armored brigade (3 battalions) up the western edge of the table. His other units attacked in the center. In firing and in melee, units struck one another using Attack Points (AP). Each type of stand had its own AP: Infantry 1 Tank 2 Artillery 3 Looking at the makeup, for example, of a reinforced infantry battalion, its total AP were: 3 infantry stands 3 AP 1 tank 2 1 artillery 3 This gave this battalion a total of 8 AP. The most powerful units, the armor battalions, had a total of 11 AP. The least powerful, the dinky infantry battalions, totaled 6 AP. When a battalion fired, there were a couple of steps in the procedures: (a) First, its total AP were multiplied by 10 to get a percentage probability of hit, the POH. (b) Second, it referred to the following Loss Chart. Here, as in most of my other damage charts, there were three zones of possible impact, and low dice tosses were good ones, high tosses were bad. . ------------------------------------------------------------ . Each AP counts as 1 Hit Point (HP) POH ------------------------------------------------------------ . Each AP counts as 2 HP 1/2 POH ------------------------------------------------------------ . Each AP counts as 3 HP . ------------------------------------------------------------ (c) Third, we went to the target unit's data sheet, on which were tracked the HP, and recorded the HP losses. You'll note that the boxes, i.e., numbers in parenthesis, for the attack and defense, are different. Any unit, when it loses 6 boxes, is removed from the field. But it's slightly more difficult to wipe out a defending unit, since it requires 30 points per box. The attacking force's units only required 25 points to cross out one of their six boxes. The rational behind this was that the defenders were, by definition, dug in, hence the increase in 'cross-out points' accounted, in part, for cover modifiers. In the middle of the field, one of John's armored battalions attacked my 15th Reinforced Infantry Battalion, defending the town of Mendel. In the fire phase, John's armored battalion totaled 11 AP, and, when firing, in tossing his percentage dice, he threw low... therefore each of his AP counted as 3 HP against the defending 15th. Which meant that there were 3 x 11, or 33 HP scored against the 15th. This was recorded on the 15th's data sheet, and since the total was over 30, the 15th crossed out a box. The residue of 3 HP were recorded. Having crossed out a box, the 15th was given a marker (a puff of smoke, indicating possible future disaster). Other units fired on the unfortunate 15th, and another box was crossed out. At the end of the half-bound was a Damage Assessment Phase. Here, all units which, during the half-bound, had crossed out a box, and had received a marker, tested to see if they lost a stand. The chance to lose a stand was a function of the total number of boxes the unit had lost... 20 percent, cumulative, for every box crossed out. The 15th, with 2 boxes crossed out, had a 40 percent chance to lose a stand. It did... we diced for the particular stand, and it turned out the 15th had lost its artillery. It was now left with 3 infantry stands and 1 tank stand, a total of 5 AP. Losing the artillery had cost it 3 critical AP. I should note that at the beginning of each half-bound, the non-active side diced to see (70 percent chance) if it received a reinforcement stand. If so, we then diced to determine the type of reinforcement. When it came my turn to receive a reinforcement, and an artillery stand appeared, I was reluctant to give it to the 15th, since it was obvious that the 15th was on its way out. Instead, I gave the artillery stand to one of my armor battalions. In retrospect, this was a bad decision. I never did get my infantry units, initially located on the eastern half of the table, into the battle. They were too far out. John's advancing armor battalion proved unstoppable, and around Bound #6, he reached my baseline, occupied Plik, one of my baseline towns. Battle over. Battle the Second, WW II Again, we set up a WW II battle. In perusing the magazines available on MAGWEB, I had noted a set of rules, which seemed, at first reading, to have a fairly simple, logical playing system. This was a set of rules by Mitra Costea, found in MWAN #96. The Costea article described a Japanese-British encounter, and we tried to play this scenario. The Japanese, infantry and tanks and AT guns, are all in column, making for a bridge, while their enemies, the Brits, lie in ambush. On to the field came the Japanese column... a fairly long formation. Under the rules system, one vehicle model carries one infantry 'unit', where a 'unit' is defined to be... well... actually, it's not defined as anything, but if you call it a 'company', you can't be too far wrong. The Japanese infantry 'units', these companies, for example, are composed of 9 stands, most of which have a single figure on them. One entire Japanese company, therefore, was transported by a single vehicle model, and in our scenario, with 8 companies, there were 8 vehicles, each with 9 stands aboard. Note that when these companies off-loaded, there would be 9 x 8, or 72 stands popping up. In fact, there were more than 72 stands, for there were two additional vehicles... one transporting an anti-tank gun, and one with a mortar unit aboard. In the scenario, the hidden British units had 7 infantry 'units', 7 companies, each composed of 7 stands, a total of 49 infantry stands. And, to combat the Japanese tanks, the Brits were given one tank and a couple of anti-tank guns. The game started, and a black card was drawn. Yes, this was the ol' SWORD AND FLAME sequence... draw from a 52-card deck, and if the card is red, the Brits fire or move 1 unit, and if it's black, the Japanese activate one unit. When the first black card appeared, the Japanese light tank unit of 3 tanks (a company?), which was the first unit in the column, moved ahead 12 inches, and the column was permitted to follow right behind it. When the lead unit in a column moved, it essentially 'dragged' all the other units with it. The Japanese had 12 units, and the Brits had 13 units, hence the bound lasted until at least 25 cards had been drawn, and all 25 units had been accounted for. After the Japanese light tank unit had moved, it was not permitted to move again on the bound, and so the entire column was now held up until the next bound, when the tanks would move again... this seemed sort of silly, and so, as the various black cards were drawn, all the Japanese units broke out of column, each commencing to make their own way forward. So much for obeying orders. The SWORD AND FLAME sequence has always seemed very choppy to me... it's okay for a very small skirmish action, but for a larger action, with large-scale forces, it provides very little opportunity for coordination. Note, for example, the inherent incapability of the sequence to handle a simple column formation. Another negative was that here, with a total of 25 units on the field, the bound seemed to drag on endlessly. Came 'fire time', and the Brits opened up as a red card turned up. Regular infantry stands roll one 10-sided die per figure... each of the stands in the British 7-stand companies had 2 figures on them, and so a rifle-equipped British company, one would think, would ordinarily toss 14 dice... but there's more! Each British infantry stand, if I read Costea's data correctly, was defined to carry a light machine gun, and a light machine gun stand tossed 4 dice. Which means that the British 7-stand company, when it fired, tossed 28 dice! Hits were incurred on tosses of 6 or less (60 percent chance to hit). Our author evidently had been in this quandary before... at least, I assume he knew it was a quandary... and to alleviate the results of his 'bucket of dice', he provided savings throws. This time, however, instead of 10-sided dice, grab your 6-sided dice, and a toss of 5 or 6 was a save. Why were 6-sided dice suddenly called into play? Don't ask. My definition of a "bucket-of-dice" game is to have the players toss five, perhaps six dice... but I thought that, here, the rules' tossing requirements got a wee bit out of hand. After the first devastating fire phase, we kinda gave up on the rules. There was some discussion, but those tableside agreed that the Costea rules need a lot of tweaking before they'd be ready for prime time. In his MWAN article, Costea had included a brief description of the scenario, which, according to his summary, went smoothly and with little friction. But that always seems to be the case with the rules author (a) standing table-side to guide the participants, and (b) writing a description of his own game.. I have to admit that I, too, occasionally fall prey to this syndrome... rarely will you hear me discuss an unsuccessful outing of my rules systems. Instead, all appears wonderful, all flows smoothly, all at table-side are supremely happy. Battle The Third, WW II Yes, it's WW II time again, and this time it's an attempt to develop a CROSS FIRE technique for games employing larger scale units than the squads used in the original CROSS FIRE (CF). CF is a game of ever-shifting initiative. The player with initiative (call him PI) moves and fires until one of 3 things happens: (a) His opponent sees the PI's troops moving and successfully fires at them, (b) PI's own troops fire and miss, (c) PI tries to rally one of his units and fails I tried to follow the (a), (b), (c) procedure above by setting out a number of 'platoons' on the field. Every platoon consisted of 3 stands: Unit Content POH Infantry platoon 3 infantry stands 60 Hvy weapons platoon 2 infantry stands, 1 MG stand 70 Tank platoon 3 tank stands 80 Anti-tank platoon 3 A/T stands 90 As noted above, each platoon had a POH of hitting the target, ranging from the A/T platoon, with a POH of 90 percent, to the lowly infantry platoon, and its POH of 60 percent. As casualties were incurred, and stands removed, the POH was reduced by 10 percent for every missing stand. Onto the field came the Japanese column, heading for the bridge. The entrenched Brits, seeing the column approach, reacted by firing. In the sequence, when one side 'sees' an enemy unit move, it may immediately fire with one platoon... and if it's successful, it wins the initiative and can move its own troops. Here, the British had an infantry unit perched on a ridge alongside the road. The British infantry took aim at the semi-armored transports carrying the Japanese troops and pressed their triggers. The basic POH for an infantry company firing is 60 percent, and here it was reduced by 10 percent for the cover afforded by the semi-armored vehicles... the effective POH was, therefore, 50 percent. The 50 was then referred to the Hit Chart, the usual 3-zone affair, which looked like: . ------------------------------------------------------------ . No effect. Lose the initiative POH ------------------------------------------------------------ . One target stand to rally zone Lose the initiative 1/2 POH ------------------------------------------------------------ . One target stand to the rally zone Win the initiative . ------------------------------------------------------------ Note that the maximum loss inflicted on a target is one stand. And it's not really a loss... for the stand goes to the rally zone, and may be rallied later in the game. And note that you've got to toss fairly low (below half the POH), to win the initiative... here, with a POH of 50, the British had to toss below 25 (below half of 50). The reason for the maximum loss of a single stand is that we were playing with 3-stand units... any losses, per volley, greater than a single stand, would destroy units too easily. If the number of stands in a unit was increased to, say, 5 or perhaps, 10, then the maximum losses imposed by the chart could be increased. Battle In the battle, with their POH of 50, the Brit's toss was a 47... while the target lost a stand, the British failed to win the initiative, and so the Japanese kept it. The first thing that the side with initiative can do is to move his armor forward 5 inches... this is optional, it's a 'free move', and the opposition cannot react to it. The next thing he does is to select three platoons, toss the dice and see how many of the three he can activate. He refers to the following table: 01 to 33 Activate 3 platoons 34 to 66 Activate 2 platoons 67 to 100 Activate 1 platoon The armored units in the Japanese column, therefore, with their 'free move, broke out of column, and moved up 5 inches. Then the column commander selected three units, diced, and discovered that he could activate 2 of the 3. One of the activated units could be an armored unit which had just moved up... in this manner, the armor could, if desired, get an additional move. In this case, however, the two selected units were: (a) An A/T unit, which fired with a POH of 90 at one of the British tank platoons. It succeeded, tossing low dice (below 45). One British tank to the rally zone. (b) An infantry unit which fired at British infantry in one of the vehicles. The POH was 60, less 10 for cover, and the dice toss was a rotten 74. No effect, and the Japanese lost the initiative. When the side with initiative selects its activated platoons, it must succeed with the functions desired of all of them... if any one platoon fails, the initiative immediately reverts to the opposition. In the above description, if the Japanese had chosen to fire with its infantry first, it would have immediately lost the initiative and the A/T platoon would never have gotten to fire. So now, the initiative was given back to the British. They then, first, moved an armor unit, and second, selected three platoons and diced to see how many of them could be activated. The Japanese reacted if they detected movement... and so it went. The ways to lose the initiative are three in number: (a) When a stand is rallied for a given platoon, the chance to rally it is 70 percent. If not successful, you immediately lose the initiative. (b) When your units fire and you toss above the POH of your firing units, missing the target, you immediately lose the initiative. (c) When your troops move and the enemy reacts and fires and tosses below half of his firing unit's POH, you immediately lose the initiative. What the above means is that if you've activated three platoons, and the first one fails, no matter what its function, the initiative is immediately transferred, and your other two units never get to act. The decision-making requirement... the selection of which three platoons to try to activate... is fairly critical, and as the battle shifts from one area on the table to another, leads to some interesting discussions. Although the units used in these rules are larger in scope than the squads employed in CF, this is still, in essence, a small unit game. We've tried larger scale games... British colonial and Napoleonic... but somehow, the CF procedures do not seem to gel. Back to PW Review December 1998 Table of Contents Back to PW Review List of Issues Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List © Copyright 1998 Wally Simon This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web. Other military history articles and gaming articles are available at http://www.magweb.com