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

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

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

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

Ian - what you say makes sense. But I don't think it's 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 isn't 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 isn't in the main book.

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

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

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.

Quote from: Big Insect on 24 June 2019, 03:37:58 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.

I'll double check Fred
Cheers

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 ....others can order. Which is right please?

Is the Errata from BKCII still in play?

Thanks again
Adam

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

Mark you missed one,  what happens when there are 3 layers ?

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

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

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

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

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 

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

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