"Anybody play BKC at 1:1?" Topic

I am seriously considering picking up BKC II when it comes out shortly and I saw on the website that "The game can be played at one of two levels: 1 base = 1 Platoon (the scale the game was designed for) or 1 base = 1 Squad or Individual Vehicle." The latter scale is the one I prefer and I was wondering if anyone had any insight into playing the game at that scale. I have read some folks say that the game doesn't "feel" right at that scale due to the command and control rules. I just wondered if anyone played it at the 1:1 scale and if it worked for them.

Also, I read a review of the game (the original, not BKC II) and it said there was an optional initiative system that replaced the IGOUGO but the reviewer didn't go into details. I am curious what that system is and if it works well or if it is optional for a reason (ie. it stinks!) I am not a fan of IGOUGO so was hoping that the optional rule was viable or modifiable. Thanks

I don't like the 1:1. It doesn't feel right because you can "knock out" a vehicular unit. This is all fine and well if you are playing the Platoon level. Not so good at 1:1.

The entire game revolves around the command / movement system. I suppose you could call it IGO UGO but not so much. Instead it is based on an unpredictable system that allows better command structures to sustain action for longer periods of time.

mjc

While BKC is broadly IGOUGO – the activation system means that not all of your units get to go.

IIRC the alternate system has each player try to activate 1 command at a time – I'm not sure anyone much plays this way – as the system adds plenty of unpredictability already.

One optional rule that is well worth using is Opportunity fire – allowing the inactive player to respond to moves. This rule may even be a core rule in BKCII

bkc is IGOIGOIGOUGOIGOIGOIGO – We tried alternate activation and it slowed things down to a crawl.

1-1 would not bother me – I can never remember what scale I am playing it at anyway.

Pat

The scale you are playing it at is arbitary as the rules don't change. But the rules feel like one base is a unit, and it wouldn't feel right (due to the abstraction involved) to have one base = one tank. I don't think it's really the C&C rules – more the combat mechanism that makes it a unit-on-unit game. If one model represents one vehicle, then you should be rolling to hit and to knock out, rather than the BKC mechanism of rolling lots of dice for hits and then saves. Also the morale effect is built into combat outcomes, whereas at 1:1 scale you would expect platoon and comany level morale rules.
I play in 1/300 scale and base my vehicles two to a base, which makes them feel even more like units.

I hope that opportunity fire is included in BKC II. Its lack is a weakness. The other BKC II rules changes all seem to be for the better.

eh? what's wrong with the op fire rules in BKC I?

Pat

Errr….there already is an OP fire in BKC!

I really don't see how arbitrarily changing the scale of what a base or tank represents could possibly change the game in any way. It would simply be a "feel" thing…

We generally played with the 1 model/base = 1 vehicle/squad ratio in 15mm. Seemed to "feel" alright to us…
We also played with the 1 = platoon in 6mm. This also "felt" okay.
But we also played with more historic TOEs rather then points… so maybe that helped with the "feeling"?

As long as you are okay with the idea that hits represent an erosion of morale or a sense of attack weight rather than the traditional 'round contacts target', there's no problem.

The army lists in the game are designed for a higher level, but they work at 1-1 as well. There will be some oddities, like how do you classify platoon command -- is it going to be represented on the table, is it going to be another squad/vehicle, is it going to be a command unit?

I also read that some people who played 1:1 doubled the movement and attack ranges to make that work better. Anybody else recommend doing that or is it not needed?

As far as the hits equaling morale erosion rather than "killing" a target, isn't one of the combat results "knocked out"? Couldn't that be interpreted as a "kill"?

I have just read through the "Lite" version of the rules and am really excited by them. I am looking forward to getting the full version when it comes out. Hopefully that will clear up some questions I have.

The figure scale doesn't change the game in any meaningful way since the mechanics don't change at all.

I had thought, at first, that it might be able to be aggregated (i.e., one model represents three identical weapon systems). But ground scale doesn't change appropriately. In other words, if you mount a tank model on a 1"x1" stand that represents 50m, with a range of 60cm, it will always be a 60cm range with a 50m frontage irrespective of the number of vehicles notionally represented by the model on the stand.

What I think it actually does is to reduce actual inventory proportionally. So, a 54-tank battalion might be represented by 18 tank models, but those models don't necessarily equate to a platoon.

I don't like the 1:1. It doesn't feel right because you can "knock out" a vehicular unit. This is all fine and well if you are playing the Platoon level. Not so good at 1:1.

I must be missing something here. How is it that knocking out a vehicle doens't feel right? Isn't that the whole idea in warefare?