Forums

This thread is to continue the discussion I started in the Will Battlelore be the killer of M44?. I've moved the topic here to let that thread get back on its own rails.

I don't want to repeat my posts from the other thread (though I'd repost them here if it'd make the discussion easier to follow), so I'm going to offer my ideas for special nationality rules for the Germans.

The German army in WW2 enjoyed a unique grasp of the theory and practice of 'operations'- a level of command and control between the classic duo of strategy and tactics, and which was a result of the sheer scale of 20th century warfare. This military science was the secret of the infamous 'blitzkrieg'. These rules are suggested to represent this.

'Saddle orders'
Instead of playing a command card and ordering units, a German player may choose to discard 1 command card and order no units. The player may then draw 2 cards, choose 1 to keep, and discard the other.

'Kampgruppe'
A German player may combine 2 depleted units into 1 unit. The 2 depleted units must be of the same type: infantry, armour, or artillery. Order both units. Move either or both units so that they are adjacent to each other. Add models from 1 unit to the other until: (a)the restored unit is at full strength- remove any remaining models from the other unit; or (b)there are no further models to add. In either case, the opposing player does not gain a victory medal for the removal of the depleted German unit. The newly restored unit may not move or battle after it has been restored.

If a unit with a special ability combines with a unit without that special ability, that special ability is not retained by the reformed unit- 2 units must each have the same special ability for that ability to be retained by the reformed unit.

The German player's hand capacity is reduced by 1 card for the rest of the game each and every time 2 units are recombined into 1 unit.

That's it.

EDIT. I've changed the name of this thread because it had ended up focussing on the expanded nationality rules. There are many other useful suggestions. These could be dealt with in a new thread.

[Updated on: Sat, 07 July 2007 16:38]

Here are my rules tweaked and redrafted for improved clarity. Comments appreciated.

Germans
'Saddle Orders'
Instead of playing a command card and ordering units, a German player may choose to discard 1 command card and order no units. The player may then draw 2 cards, choose 1 to keep, and discard the other.

'Kampgruppe'
A German player may form a Kampgruppe- ie. combine 2 depleted units into 1 unit. The 2 depleted units must be of the same type: infantry, armour, or artillery. If a unit with a special ability combines with a unit without that special ability, that special ability is not retained by the Kampgruppe; ie. units must each have the same special ability for that ability to be retained by the Kampfgruppe.

Order both units. Move either or both units so that they are in the same hex as each other. Remove any models in excess of the unit's full strength. The opposing player does not gain a victory medal for the removal of the depleted German unit. Neither of the 2 depleted units forming the new Kampfgruppe, nor the newly formed Kampgruppe, may move any further or battle at all in the turn in which the Kampgruppe is formed.

The German player's hand capacity is reduced by 1 card for the rest of the game each and every time a Kampgruppe is formed; NB. the German player's hand capacity may not be reduced below 3 cards through the formation of Kampgruppe.

British
'Marksmanship'
A British infantry unit may always fire at an opposing infantry unit with a minimum of 1 battle dice after battle dice reductions are applied for the defending infantry unit's terrain. Battle dice reductions due to the attacking unit's terrain may reduce this as normal; eg. British infantry in wire firing at an infantry unit in woods at 3-hex range would have 1-1=0 battle dice and would therefore be unable to fire. Bonus battle dice gained via Tactics cards are always applied on top of this; eg. the aforementioned unit would fire with 1-1+1=1 battle dice if using the 'Their Finest Hour' card.

'The 'big' push'
Instead of playing a command card and ordering units as normal, a British player may choose to play a command card as a plan. The command card is played face-down in front of the British player. The British player does not draw a new card when he plays a card as a plan. In subsequent turns, the British player may either play command cards from his hand as normal; or he may develop his plan, by playing another card face down in front of himself as above.

When the British player starts a turn with 2 planning command cards face down in front of him, he must go ahead with the plan. Both command cards are revealed, and are executed in the same turn. The British player replenishes his hand to its full value after playing his planning cards.

US Army
'Logistical superiority'
- The printed 'Medics and Mechanics' card orders 2 units instead
of 1
- 'Recon 1' to be used as a 'Medics and Mechanics' card, but can
only order units in their proper section.

'Go, go, go!'
At the start of the game, and immediately after (ie. after resbefore the card's effects are resolved) the play of the 'Their Finest Hour' card, the US Army may 'mulligan':
- the US Army player may discard as many cards as he chooses
- the US Army player then draws 1 card fewer than the number of
cards he chose to discard
- the US Army player then draws 1 extra card on the conclusion of
his next turn, to refill his hand to its normal size.

Russians
'Russian command rule'
In late-war scenarios, in which the Russian command rule is taken as not applying:
- the rule still applies
- but the command cards which the Russian player may play from
their hand now include all Tactics cards as well as those
already specified.

Playest comments
Pegasus Bridge
We ended up playing multiplayer games, so our C&C session was restricted to 1 game. Forming Kampfgruppe was the least of his worries as he ran rampage across the board in no uncertain terms. I guess he might've been making good use of Saddle Orders. I think I used Careful Preparation twice. I liked the look of it. So far, the rules might not be finished, but they didn't just break.

[Updated on: Mon, 02 April 2007 11:38]

Nice suggestions guys, love the idea of an advanced version or 'profi version' as the Germans say .


What happened to GeneCirone's idea? I kinda like it.

Russians - Manpower: Instead of playing a Command Card normally, the Russian Player may discard 1 Command Card from his hand and then place 1 Infantry Unit in any unoccupied hex on his edge of the board; the Russian Player does not draw a Command Card at the end of his turn.


Maybe a limit, by stating that the hand size cannot become lower than 2 or something.

[Updated on: Tue, 10 April 2007 10:18]

OK, so after many moons Badger and I finally got the time to sit down to some M44 and some more testing of the new Expanded Nationality rules. We decided to work on the British and German rules, and to play one of the SftF so that we could make a small contribution to the SftF rating project. So we chose Brummbar's Scenario #1525. Operation Charnwood: Phase I - Drive on Caen, a choice which took us into the realms of testing out variant rules for AT artillery as well as the Expanded Nationality rules.

Meanwhile, this post is intended as an update on these rules, so you'll find my battle report to DoW here; my SftF rating here; further comments on RD/KA! (my blog- see also the link in my sig if you hadn't noticed it) here; the discussion Brummbar and I had about his scenario and the variant AT rules in the comments section of RD/KA! here; and the M44:DoW thread where variant AT rules are being discussed in depth here.

Whew! OK, so now back to the Expanded Nationality rules. First off: the Kampfgruppe rule. Reflecting on this a bit after the comments of CanuckHero and others, I started to feel that saving a VP and losing a card was wrong, that the Kampfgruppe rule should cost a VP for the unit removed. What was nagging at me most was the idea that it was just silly to leave the Germans less operationally flexible- ie. with less cards- thanks to their use of a rule whose purpose is to represent the superiority of their operational doctrines. So I put it to Badger that the rule should now entail losing a VP without loss of a card. He agreed. The rule still hasn't been tested in action though. I guess that might just mean that it's not completely overpowering, else we'd've been using it all the time? Mebbe not.

One rule which really is shining is the British Big Push rule, adapted from the idea put forward by neil1967 back in March. Badger and I are both really enjoy playing with this rule. We find it fun to play, and powerful without being overpowering. In fact, the central concept of this rule- the use of plan cards to allow the play of 2 cards in 1 turn- is coming to dominate our thinking at the moment.

To cut a long story short: we've been finding that the German Saddle Orders rule was falling a bit flat- the ability to get a free Recon-type draw on a discard rarely seemed worth missing a turn's action. So we're beginning to think that we should adapt the planning aspect of the British Big Push rule to give the Germans the ability to play 2 cards in 1 turn, but with more flexibility than the British. We haven't fixed on a version to test yet, but I will return to post the details just as soon as we do. One point on which I was able to satisfy myself though was that this idea is well in keeping with the C&C system, since playing 2 cards in 1 turn is a crucial feature of Epic BL. Hence making the same thing happen due to planning in a WW2 game makes perfect sense to me.

Meanwhile the British Marksmanship rule too seems to be working out just fine. It seems to be just effective enough to be irritating without being overpowering. And the ability it gives the British to stand-off at a 3-hex range and whittle away at enemy infantry units in cover strikes me as exactly what the British riflemen should be feared for!

And that's it for now. I would be delighted and gratified if any fellow M44 fans were to take the time to try these rules out, and to report their findings. Go on, give it a go: you know it makes sense!

[Updated on: Sat, 02 June 2007 13:06]

Brummbär wrote on Tue, 05 June 2007 18:37

JMcL63 - With regard to the Saddle Orders I wasn't so much asking about the rule more about the terminology. Was there an actual term used during WWII to describe what you are trying to simulate or is that term something you came up with?

'Saddle Orders' is a term from my military historical reading Brummbär, one I chose as a colourful phrase to represent the specific superiority of German military doctrines in WW2. It refers to the particular way in which the German army planned and carried out their operations. The notable features were the dispersal of detailed plans to the most junior officers, and the reliance on the initiative of the field officers to assess and respond to local situations as they saw fit according to their understanding of the overall plan, and in accordance with their overall military doctrines. I don't have references handy right now, but I will see what I can dig up just as soon as I can.

Quote:

I do have a question about the Big Push rule...I am interested in trying it out but have some concerns. So if I have built a 2 card Plan and decide to execute it...can a unit ordered with one of the cards in the plan also be ordered with the other (in effect allowing the unit to move and fire twice in one turn). Also, can you execute the plan in any sequence you like (so in essence it becomes like one super card?)

You are here touching on some fundamental points about how rules based on these concepts would work Brummbär. Badger and I are only beginning to become aware of the full scope of these concepts now that we are seeing just how well neil1967's basic idea has turned out in the Big Push rule. As things stand right now, we have been playing the Big Push rule so that the cards are effectively played in parallel; ie. each unit ordered during a Big Push may only be ordered once in that turn as per usual; all the orders from both cards played in the Big Push must be issued before any of the units so ordered are moved; once the units are ordered, the turn proceeds as normal.

Quote:

It sounds very interesting and can see it adding to the game.

Thank you for those kind words Brummbär.

Quote:

Along these lines I would like to introduce a concept I have for discussion. It goes as follows... Stick with the Plan When the player plays a Assault or Attack section card at the end of his turn he may decide to Stick with the Plan. Instead of drawing another card he simply leaves the card face up in front of him and does not take another card. On his next turn he must execute orders as if he played a section card 2 levels down from what he has in front of him (ie. an Assualt executes as a Probe, an Attack executes as a Recon...thus Probes and Recons don't apply as they would be null). At the end of this turn, he now discards and takes a new card into his hand (note; the execution of a Recon does not have the same effect as the card, so the player simply discards and only draws one new card unlike the actual Recon card).

So, to 'Stick with the Plan' would be to allow you to maintain momentum in a given section if you'd already played a Section card in that section on your previous turn. The net effect would be to allow you to make use of the same Section card twice, albeit at a reduced effectiveness which makes this option viable only for the 'Order 3' and 'Order All' Section cards.

Hmm. This ability to use the same Command card TWICE strikes me as being too far outside the envelope of the core C&C system for comfort to be honest. But I do like its approach to cardplay, which leaves me thinking that it'd be a good scenario special rule to represent particularly well-prepared forces; eg. the Germans in the opening stages of the Battle of the Bulge? And even then? Hmm. I need to think some more about this one! Hope this makes sense. Cheers Brummbär.

PS. And I haven't forgotten the AT debate Brummbär. I've just been too busy to marshal my random musings into some kind of adequate analysis. Still hoping to get there before the week is out!

[Updated on: Wed, 06 June 2007 03:26]