PSC Battlegroup WWII

[MSawyer]

Hi, has anyone used the Battlegroup WWII rules from the Plastic Soldier Company? Are they any good, or should I just cherry pick elements from them for some other rules?

[fred.]

We’ve played these quite a lot. Overall they are good, they manage to combine a lot of elements of a WWII battle effectively. As with many sets quite what representative scale you are playing at is a bit blurred - tanks and troops are 1:1 so you have a few platoons on the table, but then you seem to have a lot of support stuff available - but this seems to work. The moral chit system is good, you don’t know exactly what effect casualties are having in the enemy - and it allows for special events.

The downside is that most combat resolution requires multiple dice rolls, and usually a check on a table or two. This means it can take a while to work through shooting.  It also means rolling a couple of 6s in a row is always effective. Some of these rolls really feel that they could have been combined in a 2d6 or a d20 roll.

Air attacks which are one if the moral chit special events are just too complex for the end result. These could have been abstracted significantly.

But overall it gives a good game - and the books are lovely.

[ianrs54]

Played them a lot, ignore the supply rules. Air strikes - never had a problem. The artillery can only hit it's target if it's planned but that applies to BKC as well. Overall they give a good game.

[Steve J]

They're OK, but do have some quirks such as lack of smoke from 2" mortars which, given the level of the game, is a bit strange. Some good ideas in there that could be applied to multiple rulesets if required. I prefer the simplicity of Bolt Action, but use historical OOB etc to give a better game and one which is not 'gamey'.

[fred.]

Smoke is generally abstracted into the spotting rules. But it does seem something that could have been included given the high level of detail in most parts.

What scale figures do you used for BA, one of the many bits that I didn’t like was that due to the size of the 28mm figures and their basing, it meant that half a squad could be out of range when firing. I think BA would be better with 15mm figures and double ranges.

[MSawyer]

We’ve played these quite a lot. Overall they are good, they manage to combine a lot of elements of a WWII battle effectively. As with many sets quite what representative scale you are playing at is a bit blurred - tanks and troops are 1:1 so you have a few platoons on the table, but then you seem to have a lot of support stuff available - but this seems to work. The moral chit system is good, you don’t know exactly what effect casualties are having in the enemy - and it allows for special events.

The downside is that most combat resolution requires multiple dice rolls, and usually a check on a table or two. This means it can take a while to work through shooting.  It also means rolling a couple of 6s in a row is always effective. Some of these rolls really feel that they could have been combined in a 2d6 or a d20 roll.

Air attacks which are one if the moral chit special events are just too complex for the end result. These could have been abstracted significantly.

But overall it gives a good game - and the books are lovely.

"Air attacks which are one if the moral chit special events are just too complex for the end result. These could have been abstracted significantly."

Could you elaborate on this please?

[fred.]

For air attacks you need to look up a lot of stuff - first a roll to see what aircraft arrives, then you need to understand what weapons it has, MGs, cannons, bombs or rockets. Then work out what process is needed to resolve the attack and what weapon stats you are using for that.  It’s all nice and detailed - but feels much detailed than is needed for a random event. It could just have been a little table of 1-4 MG attack 5-6 bomb attack counts as 155mm artillery (or whatever).

Do remember to resolve AA first - might save a lot of time.

Some of the above is lack of familiarity- but on a practical basis there are a lot of detail to these rules, so learning the aircraft rules are a long way down the list of priorities!

[MSawyer]

For air attacks you need to look up a lot of stuff - first a roll to see what aircraft arrives, then you need to understand what weapons it has, MGs, cannons, bombs or rockets. Then work out what process is needed to resolve the attack and what weapon stats you are using for that.  It’s all nice and detailed - but feels much detailed than is needed for a random event. It could just have been a little table of 1-4 MG attack 5-6 bomb attack counts as 155mm artillery (or whatever).

Do remember to resolve AA first - might save a lot of time.

Some of the above is lack of familiarity- but on a practical basis there are a lot of detail to these rules, so learning the aircraft rules are a long way down the list of priorities!

Oh, I see. Perhaps I will use the rules as a base to improve upon.

[fred.]

The core rules are good - I’d certainly give them a go as is.

Bits like the aircraft rules, aren’t a big deal, they perhaps happen once a game, which is why they feel over complex.