Pendraken Miniatures Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
12 July 2020, 04:59:54 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
The Greeks and Persians have been released!
303310 Posts in 17754 Topics by 2247 Members
Latest Member: Adamwest
* Home Help Search Calendar Login Register
+  Pendraken Miniatures Forum
|-+  Pendraken Rules!
| |-+  Blitzkrieg Commander IV
| | |-+  BKC-IV Rule Queries
| | | |-+  Limits
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: Limits  (Read 608 times)
steveww57
Cadet

Posts: 4


« on: 27 June 2019, 04:20:06 PM »

This may be included in the rules or the forum and I cannot find it. Any direction welcome.

The limits in the army list are per 1000 points. In the earlier versions of the rules there were battlegroup limits (e.g. 9 infantry units per 1000 points, 2 HQ per 1000 points). I think that it still the intent of BKCIV, but clarification would be welcome.

As an example of not having a battlegroup limit,
German, Berlin '45
CO9
9 Volksturm
9 Conscripts
9 Luftwaffe
All in trenches.
980 points.
Breakpoint 13

This could be an interesting battlegroup to defend with!

Steve
Logged
Big Insect
Major
*
*
*
Posts: 686


« Reply #1 on: 27 June 2019, 04:56:02 PM »

I'd give it a go Steve - I suspect your Soviet opponent might just blow you to pieces with off-table artillery and air, then drop smoke and assault you with his own massed infantry, but it would be interesting to see how long it lasts  Cheesy Not unrealistic though.

You are right about the limits per 1,000 pts. The BKCIV lists work in pretty much the same way BKCII

So a figure of 1 in the limit column indicated 1 per ,000pts spent  (so your 9 Volksturm etc. are correct)
The figure with a bracket around it reflects the maximum in the army - so (3) = 3 Tigers in the entire army and is usually accompanied with a number before it - e.g. 1 (3) indicating 1 Tiger per ,000pts spent, up to a maximum of 3 Tigers in the army (regardless of the number of points spent)

... & yes we are aware that many of the CO's stats that should have (1) against them just have 1 but of course there is no point in having 2+ COs as once one has finished its Commanded Orders or blundered your turn is over automatically. But 2 COs might apply in a specific scenario or multi-player game (but I think that can be covered by players own house-rules).

What is missing in BKCIV from BKCII is the compulsory element as the stats showed in the lists a s --/--/-- with the first number being compulsory, the 2nd being the per ,000 and the latter being the maximum in the army lists.
The compulsory number was dropped as it just distorted the game and forced players to take troops that were unrepresentative, as not every formation in an army always had 6 bases of infantry (for example).

Does that help?
Cheers
Mark

NB: I am going to adjust some of the very early war armies so that there can be more HQs per ,000pts,  as this makes smaller games with earlier armies more playable. This learning has come out of some of my Spanish Civil War play-testing for the proposed Supplement (work in progress).
Logged
Big Insect
Major
*
*
*
Posts: 686


« Reply #2 on: 27 June 2019, 05:14:15 PM »

NB: you'd need to check what number of trenches (field defenses) you are allowed if you are playing a scenario game of course.
Logged
ianrs54
Playtester
General
*
Posts: 8008



WWW
« Reply #3 on: 28 June 2019, 07:59:34 AM »

Have to say I ignore the limits most of the time, and use the base line TOE. I know most divisons, particularly late war German ones bear little relation to this, but it does give a good basis as a start. Equally unless you can access the offical returns its very difficult to know what was avaliable on a particular day.

Two quick examples :-

15th Panzer, late november early december had 15 tanks, 3 of whicxh were being towed, and 5 could not shoot for various reasons.

11th Armoured - on one day in July 44 went from 300 ish oprational Shermans and Cromwells to roughly 100, Operation Goodwood.

IanS
Logged

FOG IN CHANNEL - EUROPE CUT OFF HURRAY

Muppet of the year 2019, and 2020
AJ at the Bank
Playtester
Lieutenant
*
Posts: 257


« Reply #4 on: 28 June 2019, 09:03:02 AM »

What is missing from the lists vs previous rules, are the Battlegroup Selection Rules  in each army list, that provided a maximum number of unit types per X points / Battlegroup.

E.g.
German Army, NW Europe, >Jun '44 - May '45 -

(1)
Rule was : Max 3 flamethrower units per battlegroup
Now - restriction is only per specific unit - I can have 6 units per battlegroup (3 x Pzr III and 3 x Sdkfz 251/16)

(2)
Rule was : Max 1 aircraft unit per Battlegroup
Now - restriction is only per specific unit - so now can have 2 per Battlegroup (1 x Fw-190 and 1 x Hs-129)

Probably more importantly - British NW Europe '44-'45 can now have 9 aircraft units, rather than the previous max 3!

(3)
Rule was : Max 9 infantry units per 1000 points
Now - as per Steve's example

I have no idea why these very useful maximum Battlegroup Selection Rules have been dropped (if playing historic forces - they didnt apply anyway) - perhaps because the Battlegroup Generator tool is currently redundant - and this was all overlooked?

Adam 

PS - There were no minimum requirements in BKCII
Logged

In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king.
Big Insect
Major
*
*
*
Posts: 686


« Reply #5 on: 28 June 2019, 10:49:58 AM »

In response:

E.g. German Army, NW Europe, >Jun '44 - May '45 -

(1)
Rule was : Max 3 flamethrower units per battlegroup
Now - restriction is only per specific unit - I can have 6 units per battlegroup (3 x Pzr III and 3 x Sdkfz 251/16)


> If you buy 6 flamethrowers in your battlegroup (as you say Adam - 3 x Pzr III @ 110pts and 3 x SDkfz 251/16 @ 95pts) at a total cost of 615pts; and you added a CO (CV9) @ 120pts (total 735pts so far) and 9 x Volksturm @ 20pts (the maximum cheapest Infantry you can buy) taking you up to 915pts; + 3 Lufwaffer infantry unit @ 30pts (next cheapest unit available) - you’d have an army BP of 18 units divided by 2 = 9, minus 1per 1,000pts as you are Flex.Tac.Doc. = Battle Group BP:8. But you’d have a hideously inflexible force, with no long-range shooting capability, which is really vulnerable to artillery and any sort of massed AT guns or longer-range tank guns.

(2) Rule was : Max 1 aircraft unit per Battlegroup
Now - restriction is only per specific unit - so now can have 2 per Battlegroup (1 x Fw-190 and 1 x Hs-129)


> That was BKCII – this is BKCIV – the Max 1 aircraft per Battlegroup was deemed unhistorical and an unnecessary restriction and was removed. Having both aircraft at (1) of each for a whole Battlegroup (regardless of how many ,000’s of point you spend in addition) is not a massive change in game-play terms. Your US opponent does also have Full Air Superiority so getting that number of aircraft on-table will be a challenge on an Ordered basis.

(3) Probably more importantly - British NW Europe '44-'45 can now have 9 aircraft units, rather than the previous max 3!

> To have 9 aircraft units Adam, you’d be playing a 3,000pt game. Out of that 3,000pts cost, 1,017 points would be spent on aircraft + the CO (@120pts) plus at least 1 x FAC (@45pts) – although I’d suggest you’d need the maximum FACs you can get (even with your planned Air Assaults). So, you’ve in effect spent c,1,182pts of your 3,000pts for an Army BP of ‘0’.

But again, at certain stages of the post D-Day campaign – allied air superiority was totally overwhelming.  Your German opponent could, if so desired, field up to 12 x assorted AA units in a 3,000pts game plus his CO and HQs also have AA capabilities. Not an unreasonable thing to do as the British player has air superiority. You are in effect fighting an air attack and defence game.

(3)
Rule was : Max 9 infantry units per 1000 points
Now - as per Steve's example


> And what is wrong with this change? In fact, towards the end of the war in a ‘Fall of Berlin’ type scenario, or even earlier in the war, in Greece or the Far East/China/Manchuria for example, you can end up with all infantry games (with a few Infantry support weapons and Infantry Guns). In fact, in Steve’s example, as his force is Flexible Tac.Doc he can have 3 ‘free’ Ambushes for his Volksturm, to add a bit of ‘spice’ to the game.

To be frank, I see none of the above as an issue and we come back to the point that is clearly articulated on page 74 that the Army Lists are only a guide – they are not 100% comprehensive and are a framework for building forces and need common sense applied to them. If a player turns up at a game with 9 or even 3 aircraft, then good luck to them. Their opponent might equally turn up with maximum AA. Surely you agree some degree of limitations around your games ahead of play with your opponents or you’d end up with completely mythical forces and miss-matched armies. 

Any set of rules or army list particularly in this period need common sense applied to them.
Logged
steveww57
Cadet

Posts: 4


« Reply #6 on: 28 June 2019, 11:50:43 AM »

It's me again!

Please note as far as BKC goes that I am a great believer in not just going by the lists but keeping an eye on historical TO&E modified by local circumstances. I play friendly games and often select both armies so any choices are unlikely to be contentious to me.

Another interesting issue that the limits throws up is HQs per 1000 points.

Some lists have the limit as

2 (either a single rating or a mix of two ratings)
3 (two lower and one higher rated)
4 (two lower and two higher rated)

Some examples might be:
British Africa two 7 or 8
Italian Africa two 7 and one 8
German Africa two 9
German Eastern Front two 8 or 9
German early war two 8 and two 9

So, if using the limits and playing up to 1999 points, some lists seem to have an advantage over others that feels odd to me (the early war German is one that in a historical context seems justifiable).

Steve

 

Logged
Big Insect
Major
*
*
*
Posts: 686


« Reply #7 on: 28 June 2019, 12:14:29 PM »

Hi Steve

Yes - it is something that was brought to my attention by somebody else (off-line) - it will be part of the Errata review.

I think in certain instances - as you say positively in early War German and negatively in early War Chinese (maybe) this is a fair position.

In Early War particularly, and when playing with smaller forces, these restrictions can seriously disadvantage certain armies and game-play in general. However, certain armies - maybe Italian or Winter War Soviets seem to have a less effective command structure.

Playing 1,999pts is a mechanism to encourage larger formations but in the smaller gamer, c.500pts or under and with larger infantry armies the 1 per ,000pts limit can be counter productive for HQs.

As you state, having a flexible approach to the list helps and in your previous example having a few more cheaper (lower CV HQs) in the German list to cope with the larger number of poorer quality troops might be an idea.

We have also previously played what we call 'pimping' which allows you to upgrade a Commander to a higher level for an additional cost. Personally I am not a fan of this as, unless it is linked to a scenario or a historical situation, it rides rough-shod over the intentions of the lists. However, I'd suggest down-grading is far more acceptable.

Thanks
Mark
 
Logged
AJ at the Bank
Playtester
Lieutenant
*
Posts: 257


« Reply #8 on: 28 June 2019, 05:18:00 PM »

Thanks Mark a good and helpful response to my questioning the removal of the Battlegroup Selection rules.

I think I understand - the aim is to create materially more flexibility ….but not too much....as the individual unit limits apply.

Previously, when not playing historical games, we have mostly relied upon the Battlegroup Selection rules + army limits to guide our Battlegroup selection strutural balance ....but I can see that now we will (as you suggest) agree some limitations pre-game.

Big update from BKCII to think about

Many thanks
Adam

 

« Last Edit: 28 June 2019, 06:23:24 PM by AJ at the Bank » Logged

In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king.
Pages: [1] Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!