All,
I've been longing to get in a modern 6mm game, and on Wednesday I got my shot. But it didn't 'work.' I was using some homegrown rules based on card-based activation tied to D6 rolls for activation points and very simple movement and combat mechanisms. I set up a standard 'attack-defend' scenario with about a 3 to 1 force ratio. It took me an hour and a half to get through most of 1 turn, and it just didn't feel right.
For the cerebral amongst you that have nothing but time on your hands, I beg you to take a look at the blog where I've got into much more detail. I welcome any insights into modern gaming, comments on my rules, comments on my force mix ideas, etc... The only thing I'm not interested in is "you should try XXX rules!" I already know that, if I can't make these rules work, I'm heading to Cold War Commander.
Here's a few pics:
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-D6SsOtHxbVk/VG0zfOesrbI/AAAAAAAAGug/91i4o3F1GvE/s1600/P1160145.JPG)
The table, 4' x 6', attacker will enter the board at left, trying to force a crossing of the river at far right.
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2ATg2zXOm2w/VG0zj5Gi47I/AAAAAAAAGuo/1dFmli0h7m4/s1600/P1160148.JPG)
The attacker's tank battalion (the bottom two companies are T-80s I bought off TMP Marketplace from Mark, AKA "Grossman").
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-bzAiUxRn-8k/VG01HjPOa_I/AAAAAAAAGvo/19YpiF9YGDU/s1600/P1160155.JPG)
The defender's Mech Company and some supporting assets (recon, arty, and air defense), OT-64s from Mark (and I have a lot more than this!).
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-eFb8dbQHIR4/VG03fDp9pfI/AAAAAAAAGxE/fbhyamU6dt8/s1600/P1160170.JPG)
The game started with the attacker's 1st Tank Company moving up and engaging one of the defender's tank platoons defending a small village.
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1ZFswVd2UJ4/VG05o7D_ZDI/AAAAAAAAGyY/bLBxl-BsE7E/s1600/P1160181.JPG)
Two of the attacker's recce platoons shot up the center to engage another defender's tank platoon in the ville at the crossroads.
Well, if you've got the time and can help (it's a long post with lots of rambling), please take a look at the blog:
http://blackhawkhet.blogspot.com/2014/11/help-im-doing-it-wrong-6mm-modern-teaser.html
V/R,
Jack
sorry Jack (I know is the one thing you do not want to hear, so I will write to you) but cold war commander is really, really recommendable. Said that, I know your point, because you want a feedback of your rules. I am far away to be an expert in modern warfare, but I will take a look to your blog (It has been some time that I am not lurking your site and does is not good for me),
regards Jack!
The begining:
- I did not read Ivan C2 system neither bolted rulesets. But your explanation seems to be ok, easy and good for solo playing.
- The idea of scenario at first sight is good. Clearly attacker, and clearly defender roles. Also objective clear: pass the river. Maybe seems too many units so they could be long scenario.
- 6mm gives another perspective of wargame, the weapons range limited could be not only for physical dsitance, bit by lack of visibility (terrain is not flat, well maybe in holland...). Good point (I think) using range weapons in 6mm
What I understood from your game (please correct me if I understood something wrong):
- Problem 1: It seems what is wrong for you is the mechanisim of stress penality in the whole company. The ideas seems good but what happens on the battlefield leads to odd situation with penalities to the whole company. - Sum up: activation system unreliable in some situations.
- Problem 2: multiple activations during a turn. Does not seems to work in solo playing.
- Problem 3: I understand that again the randomize factores of cards + 1D6 consume defenders with bad luck and unbalance the game to the attacker loosing the interest for solo playing. As the game was a long game, the sensation of something went wrong was more and more intense while passing the time.
My thoughts:
- Do not abandon the 6mm scale they are a great scale! (maybe only beaten by 10mm I know I am quite fanatical with 10mm).
- Do not know about modern wargaming because I game not too much that period, but in other historical periods my experience with deep table is not good. I am with you about going for width battlefield when palytesting rules.
- About activation: seems the jamming in your game was focused in the activation system (cards + 1D6 rolls). Maybe you could change the dice sided of one side (for example attacker could have more cards but throw 1D4, or 1D6-2 having a minimum of 1). That makes sense to you?
- About activation, when I solo play I use the following system:
a deck of 1 card for each element (base) of gaming, with black one side and red another side. So I taking cards the games goes randomize. If a element has two movement or has priority there are two cards iof the same element in the deck. That system is not very original and it is OK. But I found that is really interesting adding one or two "jocker cards" to the deck, when jocker appear then the turn finished, all the cards are returned to the deck and start again. This way could happen situations when a unit could move twice simulating the fog of battle, advancing, incompetence, decision of the low rank soldiers in the middle of the battle, etc...
Maybe you could keep your game activation but introduce a joker card, that refresh and gives the chance of mulitiple activations.
- I will recommend you that if you are playtesting make very simple and short games, with few figures, and if it goes right, then made another a little bigger, and so on.
Hope it helps, I am not used to your ruleset and modern warfare (and you are an expert in both), but I try to give you my 2 cents,
Jack,
currently deep into gaming Sumerians just now so bear in mind that for me, at the moment, "Moderns" are the likes of the Assyrians :)
However, I am trying to devise my own rules for my 6mm Sumerians so I have some idea of your frustrations.
Some first thoughts:
There are an awful lot of individual models on the table for a playtest. Table and figures look really good by the way.
If that's going to be a standard size game there are a lot of individual models on the attacking side which will slow down play, no way round that that I can see without changing the nature of the game.
3:1 odds against a defender who appears to have no defences (minefields, bunkers, pre-registered artillery, etc) is basically a meeting engagement with the odds stacked against the defender. Though I may be misunderstanding the scenario?
I'd stick with one activation per unit per turn, given that you have the added mechanic of the die roll.
One mechanism I'd like to suggest is opportunity fire. Units that have been activated but have not moved, fired or rallied may be placed on Overwatch and may fire once at any valid enemy target that moves or fires. Overwatch fire is simultaneous with the firing by the active unit. This is intended to deal with the "2/3 of the company does nothing" dilemma.
Hope at least one of those is useful!
JChaos and Ithoriel,
Thank you both so much for taking the time to read through my post and make recommendations, I really appreciate it. JChaos, you explained my problems better than I did! I'm going with two things you guys mentioned:
1) I'm going to keep each company to 1 activation per turn.
2) I'm adding Overwatch as a potential action (so now it can be shoot, move, rally, overwatch).
I wrote a lot more over on my blog if you're interested:
http://blackhawkhet.blogspot.com/2014/11/on-road-to-doing-it-right-6mm-modern.html
I probably won't get back to the 6mm games this weekend, I've got a full schedule of French Foreign Legion in Estonia!
Again, I can't say thanks enough!
V/R,
Jack
All makes sense after reading your report Jack.
Why thank you, Lemmey.
And stand by, my Legionaires have taken some casualties and need replacements, so Sgt (or maybe Lt) Lemois is about to join them in Estonia!
V/R,
Jack