Question - Minimum unit number required to be fielded in a force

Started by Roy, 03 October 2020, 11:10:26 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Roy

Does CWC have the same 'minimum must be fielded' (in regard infantry per 1000 pts - can't remember it being other troop types in addition) as BKC?

If anyone could provide an answer, I'd be grateful.  :)

Reason I ask, I've started messing around with 15mm UAR and Israelis, mainly using Herkybird's What a Tanker homebrew rules and Solo AI mechanics, but would love to get back into playing some form of the Commander rules (which I first started playing solo with, using BKC). I'm going to add some infantry, but was hoping to limit the amount of bases to as few as possible.

Using a pdf belonging Battlefront's Flames of War - Fate of a Nation (1967), I've drafted up a small UAR force along these lines (I've not gone for the full paper strength of the OOB, just used 'elements of')

UAR Kuteybh Debahh (Tank Battalion) - Debabh (Tank) Company:
Naqayeeb HQ tank - 1x T-55
Muleghzim Combat Platoon - 2x T-55 1x T-54
Divisional Support Platoons -
Meshah Meykaneykeyh (Mechanised) Company -
Muleghzim Infantry Platoon - 3x 4-man AK-47 Assualt Rifle teams (inc. x1 RPG-2 anti-tank grenade launcher) 1x BTR-152 transporter
Self-propelled Anti-tank Company - 2x SU-100M

I was hoping to be able to cobble together a CWC force out of the above - which I'm planning on collecting for, and home-modifying the, What a Tanker rules set / Herkybird's Arab Israeli Wars add-on. 


Lord Kermit of Birkenhead

It will, but doubt you will be shouted at if you follow an OOB.
FOG IN CHANNEL - EUROPE CUT OFF
Lord Kermit of Birkenhead
Muppet of the year 2019, 2020 and 2021

Ithoriel

As far as my group is concerned, for any game, you can field any force you want providing your opponent agrees.

If you are playing solo and can't get your opponent to agree you have bigger problems than what the rules say. :) :) :)

You may wind up with a somewhat unbalanced game but that will show you what to tweak for the next game.

'Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men.' - Douglas Bader
Growing old is mandatory, growing up is entirely optional!

Roy

Thank you. Will just be me playing solo, but the OCD sometimes takes hold and I can get obsessive about complying with rules books  :-[ :'(




Big Insect

Originally the purpose of the minimums (if I understand correctly) was to allow players to compete against opponents in a way that meant they couldn't create 'super' formations (whatever they might have consisted of) and as such it was felt that having a minimum number of infantry bases per 1000 points was a way to do that.

My own view (which will be reflected in CWCII) is that this just didn't work in reality - so we will be dropping it.

The restrictions on the numbers of a particular troop/unit type per 1000 points will remain - as that is a really helpful way to moderate the balance in a list - especially what I'd call a "club-night" list were players are using a lower number of points and are very often playing Scenario games or straight 'Encounter' type games.

To be honest I mostly play OOBs anyway, and scenarios and where the points minimums in a scenario or in a "club night" game mean you cannot deploy the full formation, then I opt for an approach that reduces all units on a proportionate basis across the formation, with a bias that the more expensive units are removed 1st.

Hope that helps. But OOBs are by and far the best way to obtain a balanced all-arms force and at the same time keep the game playable.

In FWC however I am likely to retain and even increase (in some cases) the numbers of compulsory units in a list ... as FWC allows for some very weird distortions in formations that can seriously bias a particular list. E.G. an army of all flyers when your opponent cannot have any AA ... a one-sided game-over game (not much fun)

Hope that makes sense?

Mark

'He could have lived a risk-free, moneyed life, but he preferred to whittle away his fortune on warfare.' Xenophon, The Anabasis

This communication has been written by a dyslexic person. If you have any trouble with the meaning of any of the sentences or words, please do not be afraid to ask for clarification. Remember that dyslexics are often high-level conceptualisers who provide "out of the box" thinking.

Steve J

QuoteIn FWC however I am likely to retain and even increase (in some cases) the numbers of compulsory units in a list ... as FWC allows for some very weird distortions in formations that can seriously bias a particular list. E.G. an army of all flyers when your opponent cannot have any AA ... a one-sided game-over game (not much fun)

I remember Nik Harwood mentioning to me that he felt Pete Jones was the least happy with these rules, for the reason mentioned above. On the old forum there was an AAR where, IIRC, the defenders were on an island surrounded by water with the attacker having no amphibious ability! Certainly no fun to be had there :(.
http://wwiiwargaming.blogspot.co.uk/

2017 Paint-Off - 2 x Winner!

Ithoriel

The "x per thousand" limits were very useful for those of us whose games are never historical refights, whose units are entirely fictional and whose opponents are more at home with Eldar and Space Marines than anything WW2.
Growing old is mandatory, growing up is entirely optional!

fred.

Quote from: Ithoriel on 04 October 2020, 09:16:51 PM
The "x per thousand" limits were very useful for those of us whose games are never historical refights, whose units are entirely fictional and whose opponents are more at home with Eldar and Space Marines than anything WW2.

Good point, and also helpful when you are doing stuff outside of your main knowledge areas, it gives you guidance on the common stuff, and the rare stuff. The BKC lists are just stats (which is good, as it allows lots of info) but you have to have some idea what stuff is, and how common it was to know what is a sensible list. The limits help with this. When you know the detail, or want to do a particular battle you can easily ignore the limits.
2011 Painting Competition - Winner!
2012 Painting Competition - 2 x Runner-Up
2016 Painting Competition - Runner-Up!
2017 Paint-Off - 3 x Winner!

My wife's creations: Jewellery and decorations with sparkle and shine at http://www.Etsy.com/uk/shop/ISCHIOCrafts

Big Insect

All the BKCIV list do generally have an x-per 1000pts factor to them. Just as you say Fred it is helpful for players who are new to the period of the force they are looking to play with.

There is an argument that it can however mitigate against certain formations - such as the ANZAC armoured car 'heavy' formations in WW2 (so much beloved by Flames of Wars players) but these are generally a rarity. One day (no-doubt) some programing wizard will produce a list calculator that will hold all the various known OOBs of all Cold War formations and so you can just punch a key and up pops a 3,000 point Soviet Rifle Regiment list (heavily depleted of course as I struggle to get most of mine down much below 6,000 pts at best).

FWC is another matter and probably one for another thread but I agree that the scenarios need to be adjusted - and the lists upgraded as there are most certainly a few 'killer' lists in the current batch (including at least one that I wrote  ???

Mark
'He could have lived a risk-free, moneyed life, but he preferred to whittle away his fortune on warfare.' Xenophon, The Anabasis

This communication has been written by a dyslexic person. If you have any trouble with the meaning of any of the sentences or words, please do not be afraid to ask for clarification. Remember that dyslexics are often high-level conceptualisers who provide "out of the box" thinking.

Lord Kermit of Birkenhead

Mark you thinking about the spread sheet I wrote for Crisis Point 1 or 2 - you can pick an army and several points levels.
FOG IN CHANNEL - EUROPE CUT OFF
Lord Kermit of Birkenhead
Muppet of the year 2019, 2020 and 2021

Big Insect

'He could have lived a risk-free, moneyed life, but he preferred to whittle away his fortune on warfare.' Xenophon, The Anabasis

This communication has been written by a dyslexic person. If you have any trouble with the meaning of any of the sentences or words, please do not be afraid to ask for clarification. Remember that dyslexics are often high-level conceptualisers who provide "out of the box" thinking.

Lord Kermit of Birkenhead

FOG IN CHANNEL - EUROPE CUT OFF
Lord Kermit of Birkenhead
Muppet of the year 2019, 2020 and 2021

Roy

Mainly just trying to find a second use out of what I've already bought in 15mm for What a Tanker. Since I posted the original post in this thread, I have learned that there are rules for limited use of troops and anti-tank guns in those rules, but I still fancy giving CWC a go and using Charles Stewart Grant's Programmed Wargames Scenarios.

Thank you  :)

toxicpixie

Quote from: Steve J on 04 October 2020, 09:07:45 PM
I remember Nik Harwood mentioning to me that he felt Pete Jones was the least happy with these rules, for the reason mentioned above. On the old forum there was an AAR where, IIRC, the defenders were on an island surrounded by water with the attacker having no amphibious ability! Certainly no fun to be had there :(.

IIRC the most infamous may have been composed of invisible, invulnerable grav powered recce calling in impossible amounts of support fire whilst teleporting around the table :D

That might well be representative of future war (or a possible version of it) but it was certainly Not Much Fun ;)
I provide a cheap, quick painting service to get you table top quality figures ready to roll - www.facebook.com/jtppainting

Shedman

Quote from: toxicpixie on 05 October 2020, 03:59:33 PM
IIRC the most infamous may have been composed of invisible, invulnerable grav powered recce calling in impossible amounts of support fire whilst teleporting around the table :D

You are of course referring to the Kraytonians aka the Kray Twins or intelligent Terrapin lifeforms

In their "historical setting" against the Pax Arcadian (Human) forces they are easily defeated by swarms of smart missiles