Quote from: Ithoriel on 08 October 2015, 10:35:50 AM
Both reduce the chance of suppression by reducing the average number of hits, no?

True, but not in the same way. 1 hit less is 1 less chance of supression. Supressing on 5+ instead of 4+ has an effect on all hits!

So pursuant to one of my points about what i'd like to see made clearer in BkCIII, I spent some time last night going through CLOSE ASSAULTS in detail, trying to put it into some sort of ordered sequence.

In my games I've DEFINITELY been doing close assault wrong.  

Anyway, here's what I extracted from the rules (I don't know how to format lists here so... ):


1. Move into base contact with enemy
a. Initiative
b. Command
c. CMD, REC, INF support, towed guns??, soft skins?? Cannot assault
d. AFVs only assault in open, unless transporting INF
e. AFVs cannot assault other AFVs
f. Directly towards target unit
g. Cannot interpenetrate suppressed units
h. Cannot assault across linear obstacle unless beginning assault move in contact with it??!!
I. Cannot pass through a gap narrower than 5cm
j. CMD units are overrun
k. Passengers immediately dismount on contact; contact is made with the passenger unit not the transport
l. Contact =
I. Bases line up centre-to-centre on nearest visible edge contacted (what if you cant?)
ii. Only one base in contact with each edge

2. Response fire during assault move
a. Assaulted unit and friends within 10cm can fire at assaulting unit
I. Not if suppressed
ii. Cannot use opportunity fire??
b. Must have LOS to assaulting unit and can fire at any point
c. Each fires individually, resolving hits before moving on to next unit (suppressions and fall backs?)
d. Hits/suppressions on transports during assault move apply to and remain with passengers??
e. Assaulting units suppressed, may stay where they are, or continue assault and fight at disadvantage (what about fall backs?  If the unit stops, does additional response fire continue?)

3. Each enemy in contact fights
a. If contact two enemy fight both as separate assaults (in turn?)
b. Soft skinned vehicles?? and soft-skins towing guns?? are knocked out immediately on contact; assault move may then continue to another unit

4. Determine support
a. Any unit with AP/AT can support (even if it it can't hurt opponent)
b. CMD, REC cannot support
c. Must be within 10cm and LOS of friendly unit in assault
d. Unit supports only one other unit per combat
e. Units in support are affected by combat

5. Close assault resolution
a. Initiative phase = resolved before start of command phase
b. Command phase = resolve once all units have completed actions in the current Order
c. Active player determines order of resolution (so each 1-on-1 assault resolves in sequence before moving on to the next?)
d. Use CA ability for the units in assault, apply modifiers (see below)
e. Roll 1 die for each attack?? (roll all dice together)
f. Unit that made assault move is always hit as if in the open on that round
g. Unit under assault is hit according to cover
h. All units are in the open on successive assault rounds
I. Allocating hits; hits are applied to a single unit as follows
I. Enemy in contact with front of base, then
ii.  Enemy in contact with flank of base (if two, randomise), then
iii. Enemy in contact with rear of base
j. Roll saves.
k. Remove knocked out units ('Do not roll for suppression or fall-back.')

6. Close assault outcome
a. If opposing units survive, compare all hits taken by all units on each side of the close assault
I. All units = units in assault and supporting units
ii. All hits = all hits taken this turn in close assault and otherwise
b. Total its equal and assault units still in contact?
I. Fight another close assault immediately
ii. Neither side counts as making an assault move
iii. Both sides are hit as if in the open
c. Total its equal and assault units not in contact?
I. Attacker consolidates
ii. Defender consolidates
d. One side greater but not double (include 0-1 split, and 1-2 split)
I. Losers in contact suppressed and retreat
ii. Losing support  units remain where they are
iii. All winning units consolidate
e. One side double or more
I. Losers in contact are knocked out
ii. Loser support units suppressed and retreat
iii. All winning units consolidate

7. Consolidate
a. Each unit moves up to 5cm in any direction and change facing
b. Cannot move to within 5cm of visible enemy unit
c. Troops on foot?? may board transport within 5cm, if that transport does not move.
d. Towed guns?? may limber up onto transport in contact, if that transport does not move.

8. Retreat
a. Move half unit move value
I. If in contact - directly away from enemy in contact
ii. If in support - directly away from nearest visible enemy involved in the close assault
b. Do not change facing
c. May move to within 5cm of any enemy unit
d. Contact?
I. Friendly unsuppressed unit – halt, that friendly unit is suppressed
ii. Friendly suppressed unit – both units knocked out
iii. Enemy non-CMD unit – knocked out
iv. Enemy CMD unit – both units knocked out (good way to kill enemy CMD!)
v. Impassable terrain – knocked out
vi. Non-dummy minefield – knocked out
vii. Off table – knocked out
viii. Unlimbered guns – knocked out
ix. Troops in fortifications – knocked out
x. Dug-in AFVs – knocked out

Condition            Modifier
Each unit assaulting the enemy      +1
Each unit in support of the assault      +1
Per infantry or engineer unit vs open AFV   +1
Each unit that is suppressed      -1
Fighting to the flank or rear (each)      -1

Do these modifiers add dice or modify the die roll??

Target         Hit
Units in the open      4, 5 or 6
Units in soft or partial cover   5 or 6
Units in hard or full cover   6


Is there an opportunity to do something about clarifying how that works, or perhaps making it a bit simpler?  

Quote from: DougM on 01 October 2015, 10:35:46 AM
OK.. here goes: BKCII/CWC/FWC

1.   Harmonise common rules to BKCII standard - so for example, close assault, recce and separation of 'soft and hard' attack makes sense regardless of period.
2.   Update the CWC rules with more recent equipment.
3.   Update FWC lists so that the 'ranges' are more complete, so for example, it includes the more recent additions to the Brigade Games SAC range, and new ranges from Dark Realm etc..  and more of the 'copyright' stuff like the Hammers Slammers range.
4.   Update FWC so that 'sci-fi' options are actually 'sci-fi' - many of the things like auto-linked weapons and rail guns already exist, but drones, nano-warfare and so on offer some interesting options. (The 'Tomorrow's War' rules are interesting in this respect).
5.   Either change the terminology so that the hits are pins/suppression (and still non-cumulative) or are cumulative from turn to turn (I know this is optional).
6.   Provide threshold values for weapons (one of the biggest complaints about the xKC series was always that enough 25mm AT guns would knock out a King Tiger, when the big wimp fans would claim they wouldn't even make the commander 'button up')

Overall, they are great rules.

I agree with all of the above.   One other item to be added to the above.   Different tactical doctrine alters the break point for formations.  The normal break point is 50%.  As written the rules currently have this done by reducing/adding to the break point by one unit per 1000 points.   This can be rather drastic for very expensive units.   Instead change it to 40$ and 60%. 
Also the current method of activating formations is fine as is and should not be changed.

Bill

Welcome Bill!   

Coupke of thoughts but nothing massive as in on the phone not a proper machine!

Close assault - could do with simplifying? It's easy enough when you get into it but it is log winded. You get the "here they come fire" instead of op fire as otherwise close assault would be very easy - no ops fire I you do it as an initiative over for instance, or if the attacked unit has already op's fired.

That said I'd remove it for simplicities sake and just let people op's fire if they're otherwise allowed - given how difficult close assault is ATM it might make winkling people out of trenches a less daunting propositions.

Morale/suppression a - good idea on changing from the 1/1000pts based bonus/penalties. It tends to make Rigid armies very hard to dent whilst Flexible ones go very very quickly. Cheaper troops means more of them means larger breakpoint to begin with, this is then pumped up with the doctrine bonus to nigh impossible levels to reach & vice versa. Not sure a percentage based system helps there. Perhaps a fixed penalty or bigger swing to 1:2000pts?

HQs as fighting units - there's good optional rules for that already, try them! I'd suggest you can do lower level HQs as "fighting command" and the CinC or regiment (or battalion depending on viewpoint) as "normal". Also, HQ/Fac/Fao in close combat - with the rules as written they're hard to kill because they just get "overrun" and bounce back. You can herd them around but can't kill them! Treat them as normal units again maybe?

Right, my two penneth is:

- Basically the rules work fine as they are IMHO. Please do not change the core mechanics.
- The layout and descriptions could be streamlined to make them easier to follow.
- Recce definitely needs clarification and some examples if it is to become a core mechanic.
- The Random Points Modifier on page 43 is fine, but the Army lists do not have them included! Pete had to put them on the BKC Forum, so they could do with going back into the book.
- Re-introduce the Campaign system from BKC. Not perfect but it works pretty well for us.
- Re-introduce some of the rules from BKC, such as MGs being able to suppress AFVs and Infantry units being able to dig-in when more than a certain distance from the enemy.
- Take a hard look at the Battlegroup Selection Limits, as in many cases you simply cannot field a 'historical' force within the 1,000pts 'limit', as they are either too cheap or too expensive.

I think they are the main things from my point of view. As expressed before, I doubt very much whether I would buy a new version of the rules as I'm quite happy with them as they are, despite the points outlined above. I know what needs addressing and have played for long enough for them not to be an issue.

For new players an improved version of the rules with many of the suggestions from other members taken on board would be a good thing

How does the 'damaged' rule work?  I know there was a discussion about porting them in from WarMaster, I've only played V 1 (I think), and didn't own the rules, and opponents didnt use it

We play the rules a lot and it's taken about a week to get through this thread on and off. So my own thoughts don't really change much as the optional rules in BKC 2 cover most of the circumstances already. (Keeping hits, changing HQ types to having full stats etc)

Update/clarify recce rules. (I believe from the SMP forum that the CWC ones were better written)

Add back in HMG's being able to suppress armour with weight of fire.

We play to vaguely historical Orbats anyway and have found so far that most of the stuff exists in the Pendraken range already, so there's an awful lot of army list entries that I never bother checking.

Transport trucks. We use them and have always left them on table, the rules state they don't count towards breakpoint, but it can be a bugger when they get caught in an artillery barrage and you're troops have to walk to the next objective or the troops suddenly disembark miles from the objective. It happens, it doesn't affect the way we play the game.

Tightening up of the wording used in the book would be helpful, I'm lucky I guess that me and my opponent tend to have the same interpretations of the rules so it's not a big issue for us but could be useful for others.

Damaging big stuff. The monster rules in Warmaster work along the lines that something with a large number of hits will reduce effectiveness if it takes half of it's hits in one turn.  It's attack stat and hits are halved (I haven't checked them all properly so that might be slightly wrong) for the remainder of the game. I think usually it's for stuff that starts with about 8 hits.

I don't know what the recce rules are - I remember them seeming weird when I played a couple of games, but the regular players didn't seem phased at all.  However why not make recce units work properly and put in some sort of blinds/spotting rules?

Give the recce units a reason.

That's one of the things recce units already do

They also allow FAO/FAC to use their LoS or can add to the CV of a HQ stand

There's blinds?

There's actually a suggestion for them, and rules in CWC in more detail, but I was actually talking about what recce can do

I'm not convinced about blinds tbh - they mainly serve just to slow things down. Between terrain and spotting and the vagaries & friction of the command system they're not a lot of use in the Commander series. Especially if they run into preplanned Fire, then it's very complex unless you just say they get auto revealed then!

It's a potential bit of chrome but it's definitely something extra and not a core mechanic. Those who like such systems are probably better serve using their own existing ideas tbh, at least without a fundamental change to the whole system.

We've used 'Blinds' in our games and for certain scenarios, they work a treat, and add another dimension to the game IMHO.

No blinds!

I've painted these figures, they're going on the table.  Grr...

From memory I use some small counters that represent the HQ unit and/or blind, which is changed to the troops etc when spotted. They don't last long on the table, but give a nice game as mentioned before.