He made up two lists and I diced for side ending up with Ivans.
Am not a big fan of the Battle Group system (for various reasons) but it certainly gives a smooth playing fast paced game especially with this 'Modern' period (if you can still term in 1983 setting as such !?) set as the annoying ammo rules are gone and small arms fire a bit more streamlined with no direct fire on infantry only suppressive fire, but with any casualty caused meaning you lose a base (ie a unit) rather than just a figure.
System does not have a firm ground scale but is essentially a light low level but not quite skirmish style tactical game.
US had nice advantage of improved optics for their M60s and Abrams which proved very useful as did getting 5 x M60s dug in on table at start in Recon force compared to a lowly 2 x T64 for Soviets.
US get 4 x Abrams in Vanguard force whilst Ivans get a full company of 10 x T80 but that equated to 12 vs 9 which is maybe not a great ratio for Soviets.
Infantry forces were similar with both sides having some AA and AT assets and couple of special units.
Some nice differences in available multi-unit orders (not really in numbers as basic 9 US vs 8 Sov) as NATO types bit more flexible in some aspects with their Platoon orders as opposed to Soviets having Company orders.
I had 2 Timed Artillery Barrages and the Yanks had 1 but we both had 2 Counter Battery 'assets' so none of these actually fell, but a nice change from WW2 set is more limitation on where these can be plotted to fall (no more pounding a set up zone).
Shooting is fairly straight forward 1D6 and 2D6 system for hits and penetration (with save rolls for cover etc) respectively which is simple and works fine alongside a basic 1D6 morale test system.
The use of limited Orders and the Chit pull Morale system are very nice however we never pulled any special chits such as Helicopter Gunships today.
Probably my biggest issue with system is the 'Everything on the Table' methodology as there are no hidden units at all and therefore every unit that a line of sight can be drawn too is a viable target (no target priorities or similar either).
Targets do have to be Spotted every single time they are targeted no matter if fired on previously (I refer to this as the Hammer Films Misty Graveyard effect) but often this is automatic if target has fired and/or moved (improved optics come into play).
Whilst it good to get all your models on the table and not have to use maps or counters or similar, it is feels rather odd (and does not really suit period imho) that absolutely nothing can be hidden so a 2 man infantry team or FOO can be targeted from get go even if in buildings/cover/dug in and inert, even if they are a tad harder to spot than a vehicle.
I did comment that it felt that we had access to contemporary drones over the battlefield with their spotting (if not attack) capabilities.
We both had mortar support and as per WW2 set the blast area is pretty large (20" diameter) so usually has several units in danger (although mostly from Pinning effect) and we both lost a couple of stands to these.
Overall system has bit more meat on its bones than 7 Days To The Rhine and Stephen prefers them to that system, I am not well enough versed in Cold War rule sets to offer an alternative so would play them warts and all and good to see the Cold War kit in action.
Only couple of pics of Stephens collection and terrain
Sounds like a different approach. Local players have enjoyed the 7 Days to the Rhine rules and also run the micro armor modern game from ghq.
ReplyDeleteThese are a similar 'style' game to 7DTTR (ie game is the thing) but they do offer bit more scope in terms of artillery and other support
DeleteNice - I had a sense these rules might be shite.
ReplyDeleteNot quite as 'smelly' as that but I struggle with some aspects for a period where not being seen is often key at least in my head.
Delete(le Duc - google is messing with me) I'm still considering Fistful of Tows 3 as a good option (1) overwatch works well (2) spotting rules are necessary and intuitive, and if you don't move...you are spotted next turn and (3) the quality system underpins everything. Basic scale is one stand per platoon, with one to one as a viable option. Honestly, I am sick of pissing about with ww3 rules that don't work and exist to sell more crap, and I ain't going back to WRG for love nor money.
Delete(le Duc again) - i believe that this short excerpt should be watched and valued by all rules-writers...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-M2hs3sXGo
DeleteBest 'Modern' set I have played is Modern Spearhead which just works at grand tactical scale it is set at but not suitable for smaller games.
DeleteThink when playing BHag or 7DTTR one just has to accept they are very much in the 'Game' realm and try to enjoy the ride rather than look for any historical basis you might wish for as not their forte.
One the best Python sketches :-)
DeleteYes - MSH is superb from what I have played, though there are many 'map betrayals'
DeleteHi. The NORTHAG rules assume the battlefield is covered in smoke and dust from smokescreens and the effect of vehicle movement and fire, so the misty effect is designed. I generally like the rules, but the British infantry organisation is bad, and by the 1989s the Chieftain wasn’t unreliable. The T64 WAS, however! I like the chit system as it introduces uncertainty to an army’s break point.
ReplyDelete1980s, not 1989. Sorry. Chieftain engine mods were working well by 1983. This was well after the 1970s “Sundance” crisis when the Chieftain force was basically off the road for a year or so. Interestingly, the T64 and Chieftain had the same engine type based on the same WWII German horizontally opposed piston aircraft engine design.
DeleteThe 'Hammer Horror Mist' is in the WW2 set as well and it certainly works as a simple way to have all the toys on table and not have to use Blinds/Hidden Markers but just does not sit right with me at times but certainly speeds game up.
DeleteWe never drew any special chits so no broken down tanks. My Dad was a BAOR Centurion and Chieftain driver (1963-1972) and said his QRIH squadron often (but not always) had as many Chieftains in workshops as operational.
I do have a childhood memory of seeing blokes in workshop pits underneath Chieftains bashing them with hammers and wrenches :-)
Ah, right, haven’t played the WWII Battlegroup set, just NORTHAG. The Chieftains were certainly having reliability issues in the early 1970s but these were fixed by 1983 (the year NORTHAG is set). I should imagine the US vehicles don’t have reliability issues (I haven’t bought the CENTAG book) but I’ve had a Chieftain catch fire and get knocked out by a Soviet opponent nominating one of them. If you saw Chieftains being worked on underneath that’ll be the suspension - you can only get at the engines through the engine deck which is on the top… (there were two engines). There’s very little you can access under a Chieftain.
Delete