tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1328749298871119665.post3681742022941668172..comments2023-09-11T08:26:12.004-07:00Comments on BlackHawkHet: Help, I'm Doing it Wrong!!! A 6mm Modern TeaserJust Jackhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03552962741823929433noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1328749298871119665.post-74251017514121658702014-11-21T20:14:32.797-08:002014-11-21T20:14:32.797-08:00Andrew,
Thanks so much for taking the time to rea...Andrew,<br /><br />Thanks so much for taking the time to read my ramblings and put together a great response, I really appreciate it. I'm going to take a look at some of your concepts, but I reading your response I realize I didn't give you all the info, and I humbly apologize...<br /><br />1) My fights are going to be a modern Imagi-nation, so not NATO vs Warsaw Pact. The opponents will be qualitatively equal (it's a civil war), so no need to model one side's superior C4ISR aspects.<br /><br />2) The test game was 'small,' and the fight's I intend to have are going to be 'large.' In this game the defender had an understrength battalion, while the attacker had 2+ battalions. In the 'real' games, there will be a minimum of three battalions per side, with hopefully a regular 5 vs. 3 ratio.<br /><br />That's the reason I'm activating by company and keeping everything so simple; I have to as I'll be playing these solo.<br /><br />One concrete thing I'm looking at based on your comments: you mentioned the Jokers, which I hadn't taken into account. I don't think I'm going to use them as turn-enders though, I think I'll use them for random events. Now I just need to figure out what those random events should be.<br /><br />Thanks for your help, I appreciate it!<br /><br />V/R,<br />JackJust Jackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03552962741823929433noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1328749298871119665.post-88701019629960999172014-11-21T05:55:03.595-08:002014-11-21T05:55:03.595-08:00Jack
Don't know much at all about modern warf...Jack<br /><br />Don't know much at all about modern warfare but am interested in Command and Control on a battlefield. Your approach is a bit 'grainy' for my taste but I can see the intent. The following are a few suggestions, which you can take in aggregate or individually, which might help<br />1) Activate by company and multiple times with stress all according to your current rules. However additionally permit individual platoons to activate (maybe once per turn, maybe twice?) independently of their company command. This uses up the card but places no stress on the Company commander. The platoon receives an automatic one (perhaps two) activation points and fires, bugs out, panics or whatever. This represents a sort of local initiative but is limited in application and still 'burns' the red or black card - which might have been ideally used to activate a company somewhere else.<br />2) Use option 1 above only for NATO. Make the Warsaw Pact activate by company regardless - their command fluidity was, as I understand it, markedly congealed.<br />3) Vary the proportions of red and black cards according to the relative sizes of the two forces and the 'competence' of the command. So start with three times as many attacker's cards as defender's (with a 3:1 force ratio) and then 'up' the proportion of the more capable command (NATO presumably).<br />4) Designate different cards for different types of activation - court cards are armour, others are everyone else. Or court cards are anything, non-court are anything other than armour (or similar). This ought to force some tricky choices on the player.<br />5) As suggestion four above but vary the activation cards according to different doctrines. So the Warsaw Pact cards might be quite regimented - Ace to 4 = Artillery only, 5-10 = Infantry only, court cards = armour only. The NATO cards would be more generic (such as Ace to 10 = anything but armour, Court Cards = anything)<br />6) Put a Joker in the pack of cards. When that turns up the turn ends and everything is reset.<br />7) Not sure how many cards you're working with or what the composition is but besides 3-6 above it is also worthwhile considering the number of cards. One per company (of the appropriate colour) per side is a starting point but then see 3 above. However whilst maintaining the proportion of red to black you could still reduce the total number of cards. So 18 WP companies are attacking 6 NATO coys. Start with 18 red cards and 6 black. NATO have a competence edge so increase their number of cards by, say, 3. Cards now 18 to 9. But limit the numbers overall so that each card becomes more valuable (because not everything can be activated each turn) so reduce each side by a third. Cards now 12 red and 6 black - NATO retains the possibility of activating every company whilst the WP doesn't . Chuck in a Joker and it becomes a very uncertain turn structure - which is probably a boon to the solo gamer.<br /><br />I really think it is worthwhile trying to differentiate the NATO/Warsaw Pact command choices to reflect the fact that they were two different systems with different ways of going about things. <br /><br />Anyway that's the first thoughts off the top of my head. See how you feel about them.<br /><br />Cheers<br /><br />Andrew<br />Rumblestriphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15458538310473447360noreply@blogger.com