Pendraken Miniatures Forum

Pendraken Rules! => BKC-IV Rule Queries => Topic started by: AJ at the Bank on 23 June 2019, 11:27:14 AM



Title: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: AJ at the Bank on 23 June 2019, 11:27:14 AM
A rule confirmation query please -

The wording in the Tactical Doctrine table on p74 is confusing us - can you help please?

(1)
The table repeatedly refers to the use of the optional rule "Fixed Formations" throughout.
This optional rule states that, when applied, units can only be issued orders by their own formation Command Unit.

This then seems at odds with rules and penalties in the table for HQs issuing orders to units in another formation when using the Fixed Formations rule.

Is it that the table should say "When not using Fixed Formations.." ..rather than "When using Fixed Formations" for Rigid, Normal & Flexible doctrines....or have miss-understood please?

(2)
The BKCII Errata confirmed that this table should refer to 'HQs and the CO...' when referring to to issuing orders to units in other formations...and that a CO could issue an order to another formation unit(s) subject to a -1 penalty.
Is this still in effect, just missing from the table please?

Many thanks
Adam


Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: ianrs54 on 23 June 2019, 12:43:42 PM
Read it as its own Command unit, or a superior in line of command. So if not ordered by a Btn Co it can be ordered by the rgt/Brigade HQ of its own Rgt, and if that fails a Div HQ can give it a go.

Ian S


Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: AJ at the Bank on 23 June 2019, 07:00:11 PM
Sorry Ian - I don't understand your point - apologies if being thick!

Doctrine table gives rules and adjustments for when Command can order units in other formations - under Fixed Formations, units may only be issued orders by their own formation Command unit (singular).


What are we not understanding here?


Thanks
Adam


Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: ianrs54 on 24 June 2019, 10:20:37 AM
Just follow the line of command - so (its modern but will work)  WE have a Soviet Tank Division 5th Guards - and II Btn 1st Rgt wants to advance. The Btn CO has a CV 7 boosted to 8 by the recce element closest. The most advanced tank is 25 cm away from BHQ, and they are not moving on a road. So assuming it's the first order the HQ will need a 7 - base 7 + 1 for recce - 1 for distance. He rolls and scores an 8, a fail, and can issue no further orders. There is another BHQ close by, but it cant issue an order to this btn as it's not his command. The player then attempts to issue an order via the RHQ, with a CV of 8, and -2 for distance - 1 for the failed order, scoring a 6 - so successful.  However if 2nd Rgt HQ is closer the player cant use it as it is not in the line of command, and if 1st RHQ fails you would need to use the Divisional command - desperation.

One thing to remember is that if you are ordering mixed formations you can split your command rolls between smaller groups, so that say a US armoured Infantry Btn with an attached M5 company can issue an order or orders to the infantry, switch to his AT guns, and revert to his original CV, despite the orders he has issued to his riflemen. He would trhen revert to his original value to order the M5's, supposing none of the earlier attempts had failed.  BUT you cant revert to a group ordered earlier....


IanS


Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: fred. on 24 June 2019, 12:45:46 PM
Ian - what you say makes sense. But I donít think itís defined in the rules.

The Fixed Formations special rule (online) only mentions tactical doctrines in relation to Guerrillas.  It states that units can only be ordered their HQ. The doctrine rules in the book  give lots of detail about issuing commands to units outside of the fixed formation.

The Fixed Formations rules also say that Recce isnít part of a FF,  but the Recce rules are very much written to suggest that they are.

Both seem easy fixes to the FF rules.

It does seem odd to have lots of references in the rules to FF,  but then to have them as an optional rule that isnít in the main book.



Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: ianrs54 on 24 June 2019, 04:25:11 PM
Lots of posts about Recce from Mark on here. Follow those. Bear in mind I play more CWC than BKC. So long as what I put is clear I'm happy, and hope it helped.

IanS


Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: Big Insect on 24 June 2019, 04:37:58 PM
In a Fixed Formation game you have a number of variables:

1) units are bought and organised so that they have a 'fixed' command to a single HQ (or are specifically assigned to the CO). Recce can be assigned to a fixed formation, in which case they will only influence Command units within that Formation. Likewise FAOs and FACs could also be assigned to be part of a fixed formation. This is usually to represent a historical OOB. They are nor 'ordered' by the HQ in the formation, but if there is a Recce in the formation can be influenced by that Recce.

2). If a Recce has been assigned to a fixed formation, it can only influence that HQ (or other officers in that formation). However if it is assigned to the CO it can influence the CO and no other Command units in the Battle Group (other than FAOs and FACs attached to the CO). So in a fixed formation game it is advisable to have your Recce as part of a fixed formation, otherwise they can only influence independent commanders - such as the CO, FAOs and FACs (assuming the later are also not in fixed formations).

3). In a fixed formation game, if an HQ fails to order a unit(s) in his fixed formation, the CO can attempt to order that unit, but at a penalty. The CO might also choose to order other units (that have not already been ordered) out of that HQ's fixed formation, but again does so at a penalty. However, no other HQ can order any units in any other formation other than their own.  

Again, its complexity is that it is applying 'real life' battlefield logic and command to the tabletop.

Personally, I prefer Fixed Formations as a way of playing the game, as it is much more realistic (IMHO).

Thanks
Mark


Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: Big Insect on 24 June 2019, 04:51:36 PM
NB - think of Fixed Formations as lines of command - that might be helpful.

In a Fixed Formation game, I will usually have my Recce assigned to a specific formation.


Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: fred. on 24 June 2019, 07:23:43 PM

3). In a fixed formation game, if an HQ fails to order a unit(s) in his fixed formation, the CO can attempt to order that unit, but at a penalty. The CO might also choose to order other units (that have not already been ordered) out of that HQ's fixed formation, but again does so at a penalty. However, no other HQ can order any units in any other formation other than their own.  


I get the idea and concept of Fixed Formations and we tend to play that way.
But on a close reading of the rules, there are a couple of inconsistencies. What is given above is what most of us seem to be playing,  but it is different from p74 tactical doctrines.


Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: Big Insect on 24 June 2019, 07:40:36 PM
I'll double check Fred
Cheers


Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: AJ at the Bank on 24 June 2019, 08:41:37 PM
Thanks Mark - much appreciated

Still none the wiser on answer to original questions.

Fixed Formation limits who can order units to only the Command element of that formation....but the table suggests when using the FF rule Ö.others can order. Which is right please?

Is the Errata from BKCII still in play?

Thanks again
Adam


Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: Big Insect on 25 June 2019, 09:40:35 AM
Sorry AJ - I am obviously not being clear.

In a Fixed Formation game, the only Commanders that can order a unit are:

1). the HQ of that formation

2). the CO of the battle group

Does that help?

Mark



Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: ianrs54 on 25 June 2019, 09:57:26 AM
Mark you missed one,  what happens when there are 3 layers ?


Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: AJ at the Bank on 25 June 2019, 10:56:03 AM
Yes Mark - thank you.

I think then the answer to my first question, is that the notes in the table on p74 do Not apply when playing FF optional rule?


When not playing the FF rule.....does the Errata from v2 still apply please?


Thanks again Mark
A


Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: Big Insect on 25 June 2019, 11:41:20 AM
No Errata from BCKII applies to BKCIV AJ

I will double check Page 74 when I next have my rules in front of me and report back.

Are you planning to play Fixed Formation (soon)?

Mark



Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: AJ at the Bank on 25 June 2019, 02:21:31 PM
Thanks Mark

Yes - It sounds like it would be our preferred option.
However - we are stuck on how it works.

E.g. German 1944 with Flexible doctrine ....If playing FF (per write up on Optional Rule) - then sounds like units only take orders from their own formation HQ.
BTW - There is nothing in the FF rule to say that the CO can order units outside their own formation ..only that they can transfer a unit in their own formation to another formation.

Then on the Flexible doctrine table (p74) - says when using FF rule ....HQs can issue orders to units in other formations (without penalty)

Lastly- As written, the table doesnt allow COs to order other units in other formations (with or without penalty) .....this seems very odd. We suspect this is the same oversight as in BKCII...and HQs & COs have the same ability.

Thanks again
Adam

 


Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: Big Insect on 25 June 2019, 03:51:27 PM
I think the issue is what is meant by a Fixed Formation and I will clarify that.

e.g.
                  CO
                    |----- 3 x mortars
__________________________________________
HQ1         HQ2     FAO                       FAC    Recce1
  |              |           |                           |
Recce2     A/C     3x off table guns      1x aircraft
3x Tanks         

So in the Battlegroup above:
HQ1 and the 3 Tanks and Recce1 are in one fixed formation - so the 3 x tanks can be ordered by HQ1
HQ2 and the A/C (armoured car) are in another fixed formation - so the A/C can be ordered by HQ2

The 2 HQ's, FAO, FAC and Recce1 are technically in a fixed formation, with the 3 mortars under the CO and the 3 off-table guns and 1 x aircraft

Recce2 can influence HQ1
Recce 1 can influence the CO, FAC & FAO
Neither HQs can order each others units under any circumstances
The CO can order the 3 mortars at no command penalty
The CO can order units in either of the HQs fixed formation if they have not been ordered previously, but with a penalty

You can even take this one step further by placing an FAO in a Fixed Formation with an HQ and add the off-table artillery associated specifically with that FAO within that Fixed Formation.
That means that another FAO (in another HQ's fixed formation) cannot order those off-table guns. However, an FAO within the CO's fixed formation can order these, but with a penalty.

It is a logical attempt to replicate command structures and chains of command and communication lines.

If Page 74 doesn't read correctly (& I will check once I have a set of rules in front of me) it can be corrected, but the way it is outlined above is the way it is intended to be played.

Many thanks
Mark


Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: Dr Dave on 25 June 2019, 04:11:09 PM
What you've put there Mark is how I visualise commands.

Then there is the doctrine.

  - Flexible - All HQs and the CO can order anyone - in essence this means that the fixed formation doesn't exist;
  - Normal - HQ's can order each others units but at a -1 penalty;
  - Rigid - HQs can only order their own units.

Simples  :D


Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: T13A on 25 June 2019, 05:13:21 PM
Hi All

I was just about to add my tuppence worth to this one but Dr Dave beat me to it!

For what its worth I do not think that the rules as written to do with Tactical Doctrine (page 74 of the rule book) and the 'optional' (downloadable) rules regarding Fixed Formations work together.

Using the Tactical Doctrine rules for instance a British HQ (44-45) with 'normal' doctine can issue orders to a unit from another formation but at a -1 penalty, whereas a German HQ (44-45) with 'flexible doctrine' can do the same but without any penalty, exactly as Dr Dave has stated. 

Using the Fixed Formations rule an HQ can only ever issue orders to units in his own formation (which of course contradicts the above).

A 'CO' could issue orders to any unit in any formation under his command regardless of the above (that's my reading anyway).

I must admit it is this kind of ambiguity that I was hoping BKC-IV would clear up.  :(

Cheers Paul



Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: Big Insect on 25 June 2019, 10:55:53 PM
Leaving aside my deliberate error - e.g. that Recce 1 is part of HQ1's Fixed Formation (it should be Recce2 of course). I will review these points and comment when I have a rules book in front of me.

However, there is an argument that there should be no correlation between Tac.Doc and Fixed Formation, and that the 2 are completely separate and not interdependent at all.

The -1 or +1 for Tac.Doc should be applied to the Co not the HQs. Which is more the intention of the rule. Fixed Formations are deliberately designed to restrict the flexibility of command.

Paul is correct in that the CO can in effect order any unit within the Battlegroup - as this (the whole Battlegroup) is the fixed formation he commands.
However, I have chosen to apply a penalty to him commanding troops that are within the fixed (sub) formations commanded by his HQ's as a games mechanism, to prevent a specific potential abuse.

I think the suggestion below is very acceptable, but if you want flexibility, do not play fixed formations - that is why they are an optional rule.  :)

Cheers
Mark


Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: Prophaniti on 25 June 2019, 11:15:28 PM
This is an interesting thread.  Throughout my whole time playing v2 I always thought that the fixed formations were linear.  i.e. the CO's formation did not include subordinate formations in it, which made for some tricky situations with rigid command structures and also prevented the CO from ordering failed HQ units.  (Which I did think was a bit odd, even at the time.)


Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: sultanbev on 25 June 2019, 11:56:16 PM
I think we're getting formations that you create before the battle mixed up with doctrine.

Flexible doctrine means to me you can cross attach platoons from different battalions beffore you start the game, but they stick in FF under that command.
Eg you might have a 1944 panzer regiment Kampfegruppe with a CO, a Panzer Bttn HQ and a Panzer Grenadier Bttn HQ.

The Panzer battalion normally has 9 tank models, a SP flak gun model, and perhaps an engineer stand in Sdkfz 251/7
The Pz Grenadier bttn has roughly 9 infantry stands, 1x 81mm mortar stand, 1x PAK40 stand, 1x 75mm IG18 lets say.
The CO has a battery of 15cm Grilles, an engineer company of 3 engineer stands with flamethrowers, in trucks, and a couple of Flakpanzer 38t, lets say.

Now, under Flexible doctrine, you could move say 3 of the tanks to the PzGr HQ, 3 of the infnatry stands to the Panzer HQ, detach 1 panzer stand to the CO as personal HQ guard, donate the Grille from the CO to the panzergrenadier HQ, and even move the PAK40 to the Panzer HQ. You get two mixed combat battalions that way and a very small HQ kampfegruppe, probably as battle reserve.

Under the FF rule, once you've created these "mixed" battalions, they are only commandable by their immediate HQ, and perhaps, the CO at a minus. If you're not using FF rule, then it's a bit more fluid, but probably less realistic.

The same force under normal doctrine, couldn't be mixed like that. So all the tanks would be commanded by the tank HQ, all the infantry by  the infantry HQ. Under FF then, you're either commanding all tanks or all infantry (and their assocaited battalion assets). If you're not using FF, then in effect a HQ can reqeust help from a neighbouring battalion, but that is all it is, not an order, hence the proposed minus on the command roll. The CO could command any of them, but if I get it right, also at a minus.

And so on. If that helps....

Mark


Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: Dr Dave on 26 June 2019, 07:55:44 AM
The -1 or +1 for Tac.Doc should be applied to the Co not the HQs.

Sorry Mark, but which +/- 1 are you referring to here. Are you saying that a rigid doc HQ canít use +1 for all doing the same thing, or +1 from a recce bonus? It reads like the former...



Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: Big Insect on 26 June 2019, 10:30:11 AM
No no no Dave - now you are mixing up other rules mechanisms here

As Mark (Sultanbey) has so elegantly put it, think of it that the CO can command anybody but outside of his immediate reports will gain a penalty for doing so.
HQ's can only order their own direct reports.

If you put Recce within a FF under an HQ (which you can do) the Recce can only give a command bonus to that HQ and any other officers (FAO or FAC) that are also (nominally) included within his command.

There appears to be an error in the association between FF and Tac.Doc. that I will investigate and reply upon once I can access my rules book later in the week.

Cheers


Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: Big Insect on 26 June 2019, 10:34:51 AM
This is an interesting thread.  Throughout my whole time playing v2 I always thought that the fixed formations were linear.  i.e. the CO's formation did not include subordinate formations in it, which made for some tricky situations with rigid command structures and also prevented the CO from ordering failed HQ units.  (Which I did think was a bit odd, even at the time.)

I am 100% with you here Prophaniti
Which is why I wanted it changed/clarified - it seemed completely illogical that a CO could not override his HQ's.
It also then seemed important that if the formation was better trained (more flexible) it would react to this command override more favorably than a less well trained or rigid formation (hence the +/- for the Tac.Docs). It just appears their may be an error in the cross-association of the Tac.Docs with the FF optional wording.


Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: fred. on 26 June 2019, 12:47:56 PM
Leon, are you able to send Mark (Big insect)  a PDF version of the rules, it might help with easier access to what is written in the rules, vs what is intended, Especially if he is away from his physical rulebook a lot.



Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: Big Insect on 26 June 2019, 05:12:16 PM
I have a PDF copy fred - I am just not allowed to access it on my work laptop  :(

So this will have to wait, but TBF I think I am pretty clear that what i am saying is/was my intention with all this.

Thanks for the thought though  :)


Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: kustenjaeger on 26 June 2019, 05:20:47 PM
I have a PDF copy fred - I am just not allowed to access it on my work laptop  :(

So this will have to wait, but TBF I think I am pretty clear that what i am saying is/was my intention with all this.

Thanks for the thought though  :)

Thatís why I bring my iPad to the office 🙂.

Edward


Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: Big Insect on 27 June 2019, 05:35:47 PM
Right .... I have just returned home and before I even took my coat off or had a pee ("too much information") I have checked P74, as it is clearly a burning issue.

And the answer is ....

That the references to HQ in the table, should read CO.
This will be corrected in the errata and I will add a clarification note to explain what a fixed formation is, but in the OPTIONAL RULES PDF on Fixed Formations.

Off to take of coat, have a pee, change out of suit, kiss the wife and have a cup of tea!  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Mark


Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: Dr Dave on 27 June 2019, 08:02:34 PM
All done? That was too much information  :-[

And the answer is ....

That the references to HQ in the table, should read CO.

Not all of mentions of HQ change to CO surely?


Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: Big Insect on 28 June 2019, 10:54:19 AM
We are talking about the aspect of ordering units in other Formations Dave.

Not the +1 for Rigid (for example) etc.

Mark


Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: AJ at the Bank on 28 June 2019, 04:54:38 PM
OK - I think I understand the answers to my original questions now Ö..hopefully!

Is the following correct please Mark?

(1) Update the FF Optional Rule to indicate -

(a) Reece units can be included in either an HQ's or CO's  formation; Sniper units must be allocated to the CO formation (as can only be ordered by a CO) but FAOs and FACs units are not assigned to any Fixed Formation
(b) Doctrine table rules regarding ordering units outside of formation do not apply
(c) COs may order units in other formations, but will suffer a -1CV penalty when attempting to do so.


(2) Update the Doctrine Table on p74 to -

(a) Remove all references to Fixed Formation Optional Rules
(b) Confirm Doctrine impacts as follows  -

Normal : HQs and COs may issue orders to units in other formations, but subject to a -1CV penalty when attempting to do so
Rigid : HQs can only issue orders to units in their own formation, however COs may issue orders to units in other formations, suffering a -1CV penalty when attmpting to do so
Flexible : HQs and COs may issue orders to units in other formations and receive no penalty for attempting to do so


Thansk again Mark!
Adam


Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: Big Insect on 30 June 2019, 10:06:07 PM
1) - up to you Adam.
The FF info is there deliberately to ensure that IF the FF optional Rules are played they are integrated into the main rules properly

a) Recce - yes
Sniper - no - they can be allocated to an HQ led FF, or report directly to the CO*
Snipers are Independent units - so have unlimited Initiative distance, so can move in the Initiative phase without orders
* again under FF it all depends upon which formation you are looking to depict, or which scenario. If there is a Sniper attached to an HQ in the actual formation then you an attach the Sniper to the HQ.
b). NO - the CO can order units outside his formation as per page 74 (replacing the word HQ with CO) - the doctrine table applies
c). Yes, but subject to the doctrine modifiers

2).
a). your call on that Adam (see above)
b).
Normal - No - only applies to COs
Rigid - Yes
No - only COs

Thanks
Mark


Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: AJ at the Bank on 13 July 2019, 04:13:35 PM
In the normal game (no Fixed Formations played) Öis it ONLY COs who can issue orders to units in other formations then please?

Thanks
Adam


Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: Big Insect on 13 July 2019, 11:58:29 PM
No Adam ... in a none FF game there are no formations. There are Order Groups (see top P22) but these can be made up of any unit (that can be ordered) that you as a player allocate to that Commander.

Any HQ or the CO can issue order to any unit that has not already been ordered by another commander, in a none Fixed Formation Game.

The CO can order a unit that another commander (HQ) has attempted to order (but failed - and not blundered) these units will cause the CO a -1 to the CV if included in an order group - as P23 (bottom of page). This only applies to the CO. Other HQs cannot order units that have failed to be ordered.

Fixed Formation rules do not apply in a game were the Optional Fixed Formation rule is not being played.

Thanks

Mark


Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: AJ at the Bank on 14 July 2019, 11:23:24 AM
Ah - right - thanks Mark!


Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: BeeKiller on 05 August 2019, 01:09:13 AM
Hello.

I've been reading thoughtfully this post, and I've just make a summary to see if I'have understood everything. There is sth I still don't agree with the given solution:
1) when playing FF a rigid CO can not give orders to HQ units, because otherwise there would not be a difference with a normal CO
2) when playing FF a flexible CO has no cost giving orders to HQ units, because otherwise there would not be a difference with a normal CO

Find attached the 1 page PDF summary and if anything is wrong I will make a new version.

https://1drv.ms/b/s!AkV2e1-ABB-ki2IbA1lE_IoCjVea?e=beIH2l (https://1drv.ms/b/s!AkV2e1-ABB-ki2IbA1lE_IoCjVea?e=beIH2l)

Thank you very much.

Eduard


Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: Big Insect on 07 August 2019, 10:42:23 AM
Hi Beekiller

We are finalizing the Errata and clarifications - so I am not ignoring you but it will be easier to post the final Errata piece on this, once it is finalized.

Thanks
Mark


Title: Re: Tactical Doctrine & Fixed Formations
Post by: BeeKiller on 07 August 2019, 01:51:06 PM
Thank you Sir. Wainting anxiously