"Nuts! TW&T and DH - Main differences/similarities?" Topic

Hey all,

I am thinking of venturing into a new platoon scale game and have my eye on Disposible heroes. However aside from the myriad of other platoon sized games out there (Bolt Action, Rate of Fire, Rules of Engagement etc) I am thinking of going with either TW&T (Troops, Weapons & Tactics) or maybe Nuts!

Can anyone help me with the basic differences or similarities between them? I like the sound of DH for its more historical element but ease of play, and I like the dfog of war aspects to TW&T.

If none take my fancy I may just go all in with Battle Group Kursk instead! (I know the scale of the game is higher than platoon)

Cheers,

Ark3n

If your playing solo then "Nuts!" is the way to go. The system does allow for co-operative play (you and a buddy against "them") or regular head-to-head play.

You can download "Chain Reaction 3" (CR3)for free. This will give you a feeling for the system (which can take some getting use to).

CR3 here: link

Tim

NUTS! is a squad-level WW2 skirmish game which usually focuses around platoon-sized actions, based on THW's free "Chain Reaction" rule system, which eliminates many of the disadvantages of standard IGOUGO systems. (And I've played most of them, except for TW&T).

In the game each player basically plays a squad leader, and starts the game with a core squad or vehicle that is "his" for the game or the campaign. Moral/training is represented by "Reputation" levels for each figure or unit, running from 1-6, which are the target numbers for dice rolls in the game. Each figure is an individual in the game, each vehicle is crewed by individual figures (TC, Driver, Gunner, etc.)that have a role in the operation of the vehicle and make relevant dice rolls for morale, shooting, crossing obstacles, and so on.

The leader figure has some special advantages, and each figure in the core squad has a special attribute like "Crack Shot" or "Poser" which helps or hurts in certain situations, so there's a light roleplaying element that gives it a fun "Kelly's Heroes" kind of feel. The system scales well to platoon vs platoon level games, but like most skirmish games doesn't scale easily to company sized games.

The Chain Reaction system uses leadership rolls to determine who goes first (and certain dice combinations result in reinforcement rolls during the game), but during any given action phase figures will react to developments on the table based on the "Reaction" table system. Figures that see an enemy move into line of sight will take a "In Sight" test, for example to see what their reaction is – do they make aimed fire, do they take a snapshot, do they fail to react? Figures that come under fire make a "Received Fire" test to see if they shoot back, duck for cover, panic and run, etc.

Firefights are also conducted through resolution, until one side "wins" by killing the other side or forcing them to duck out of the fight. This means that figures engaged in combat *always* take some kind of action, there's never a time in the game where you're lined up to nail your opponent…but your card didn't come up in time and you stood there and got shot, or the guy playing the "leader" didn't have enough action points to let your unit move.

So there's always a good flow to the game, and you don't have total control over your figures. A

I recall one game, from the "Kampfgruppe Peiper" Battle of the Bulge campaign book in which I had a concealed US 57mm ATG, and a Panther tank was approaching down a road. As a player I planned to take the shot after the Panther turned to follow a bend in the road and take a flank shot…but the "In Sight" test for the unit meant they blew the ambush by firing on it frontally. Doh! They must have panicked and shot as soon as the scary tank approached.

Don't get me wrong, tanks *are* scary and get a good treatment in the rules as well. Believe me, you don't want to be on the receiving end of a tank assault!

The system also incorporates a campaign and mission builder system, so you can see your troops gain experience and raise their Reputation level up in the game (or they may lower their Rep if they run away!), replacements for lost figures, battle and mission builders to create a spontaneous game, etc. It also has a good solid paper "AI" system that lets you do solo and co-op games as well.

And if you use basic infantry tactics when playing, you'll do fine -- remember to fix, flank, and finish your foe! Overall, NUTS! is a great skirmish rule system that lets you play fairly accurate WW2 skirmish battles, have a lot of fun and play your game to conclusion in a couple of hours.

Oh, it's also well supported with an expanding series of campaign books, and a very active and supportive Yahoo! Group.

link

Nuts for me.It's great. In our games, a player sometimes commands a platoon.

Tom

The publishers of Troops Weapons and Tactics have a generic supplement called "Platoon Forward" that works well for solo play.
I've played most of the ones you've mentioned(plus BG Kursk), I'd say TW&T was my favorite.
The reaction system for Nuts sometimes makes me feel like the game is playing me, rather than the other way around. Disposable Heroes has a realistic tabletop range and effect scale. That's fine if that's what you're looking for, but the few games I've played there's been little reason for maneuver and lots of sitting and shooting.
TW&T is designed with a focus on "big men" and the decisions a squad and/or platoon leader might make. If you want to keep track of what each member of your squad is up to, you might find the game a bit too abstract.
Bolt Action is fun and fast paced, but it's "burger and fries." Don't expect "filet mignon." Don't get me wrong – I eat a lot of burgers…
Several of my gaming buddies still prefer Battleground WW2. It's very detailed, and is a good game for people who want to keep track of each squad member. It strains at the seams when you get more than a platoon on the table, though.
BG Kursk can be played at the platoon scale, and it might work well for you. I haven't played it enough to get a solid feel for it, but it's as good as the other games you're looking at.

I like the NUTS system and recommend that you download the CHAIN 'REACTION rules and give them a try. They aren't for everyone. My next choice would be DH. A more traditional rule set that gives a very good playable game.

Wow! That's some great reponses one and all, and quickly too. Hmm, seems like Nuts might be the way to go then. DH sounds like 'more terrain the better the game' seeing as it ends up being long range shooting then, so requiring terrain to block LOS for shooting. I like the sound of realistic ranges etc though.

Funily enough I downloaded the CR rules about a month ago, I haven't read them yet, looks like I will have to read it. I really like the sound of DH and BGK, but you guys have obviosuly plugged Nuts so well I may be swayed.

I didn't realise BGK could go down to Platoon level so well, I thought it was for the larger game. I REALLY like the sound of the morale chit rules and other aspects of it too, so many choices, NO little time to decide…

Another vote for NUTS! Can't comment on your other choices, though.

My only other observation about Nuts…
We played a series of "Winter War" scenarios with awful Soviets attacking awesome Finns. The Russian players gave up trying to do anything that would provoke a reaction from the Finns, as the chance of Russian success was so poor and the chance of a devastating Finn reaction was so good. So be careful if one side is going to have a lot of poor troops, because they're not likely to do much more than make the enemy mad.

Go with Battlegroup Kursk. It's the best WW II game out there for this sort of game. I love Fireball Forward equally well but it is set up as each base equals a squad so it's a different scale than you are looking for, I think.

I tried to read Nuts but it was so badly written I gave up. It may give a good game if you have an experienced player to help.

Ark3nubis – lots of votes for NUTS maybe, but it isn't clear from the posts that those recommending it have played TW&T or DH. On the same basis, i.e. I haven't played NUTS or DH, I heartily recommend TW&T. Suitable for actions up to platoon size with maybe a tank or two in support (above this you want IABSM instead), the card-driven system creates unpredictability (great when it works in your favour, frustrating when it doesn't), the action dice mechanism largely does away with the need for constant morale checks and the emphasis is on leadership (intelligent use of leaders is necessary to execute plans).

Play both NUTS and DH and compare. See what you like. I play both, however, I like Disposable Heroes better, although it is the"feel" of DH that I like. I haven't played TW&T.

I've tried Bolt Action, some guys in my gaming group really like it, and I'll play it when they run a game, but not really my cup of tea. Too "warhammerish" in many respects. Most of the time players move their units in base to base contact, instead of spread out in a skirmish formation -- I keep thinking, "Spread out, you're fresh meat for an MG!!" And then the special abilities method for how to give "flavor" to each nationality kind of throws me off as well.

In ranking, I'd say my favorites for 28mm WW2 skirmish are:

1. NUTS
2. Battleground WW2
3. Disposable Heroes

There's aspects of BA I think work really well; the random order dice pulling, the suppression, and I like the nitty gritty roll to hit then roll against the experience of the target. However I don't really like the generalisation of things like armour rating and strength (effectively the 40K av 10, 11, 12 etc) and armour penetration both rolled into general classes of light, medium, heavy etc. Also having movement of 6"-12", yet rifles shooting is 24". 2 turns and potentially all units are in on each other.

Wrote a WWII Platoon game a few years ago that sounds a bit like DH, with elements of BA, and had the command structure of BKC. I worked hard on relative RoF between the main weapons within squads etc for balance and historical representation. I also had AFV armour as a value a tenth of the thickness (so Pnz IV front armour of 80mm would be AV8 and so on) Also apart from SMGs, bazookas etc all ranged weapons were unlimited range, but with an effective shorter range and pretty much suppressive fire only after that range. It makes tactical choices important.

Scale was One man = 1 man, 1 vehicle = 1 vehicle, so this scale with the above approach to the rules is the sort of game I am after really. I'll get probably one system to start with and go from there.

Thanks again, TMP at it's best, A+ all round. Ark

Why not get them both and decide for yourself?

Personally I find the THW series of "roll for 10 minutes to do anything" more than a bit tedious. I recommend you look at DH or I Ain't Been Shot Mum!

DH has individualy based minis as opposed to IABSM's multi basing and I will say that IABSM is a Company Level game influenced by the Kriegsspiel approach and is not a 'points' game.

Why not just have the link to the PDF?

It does. As soon as you completed your order the link appeared inside your order. Easy to miss. The email is an add on in case you miss it, which I did twice when setting it up.
Just send me your email and I'll send you a set. Easier than you going back in.

twohourwargames@yahoo.com

With regards to Nuts!:

A lot of gamers have a house rule limiting the number of reactions. This prevents long stretches of die rolling while everyone lese sits around (tho I haven't ever seen it much and I play a fair amount of Nuts and the Vietnam version FNG).

The main flaw i see in Nuts games is not with the rules but the players. They always want to refight the Bulge. nuts works great with a squad per player. In my opinion it really bogs down with more troops on the table than that. Vehicles should also be limited – one or two per side at most. If you have 10 tanks on the table it will be a sloooooowww day.

Bolt Action: I read them and was unimpressed. They would make a decent convention game (easy to teach, short ranges). Here's a rules summary:

link

Rules of Engagement might be worth a look too. Summary here:

link

Ed has kindly pointed out to me that I might have had an old version of Nuts! and I found he is correct. I'll have to get a new copy and read through it. You certainly can't deny it's popularity!

When you say DH, do you mean the basic rules or Point Blank, which is a more comparable level to Nuts? Both are good IMHO, the Chain Reaction system is great for solo, but takes getting used to, as you don't have a lot of control over troops.

Once you get used to the Chain Reaction system it is really fun – the minis seem to take on a life of their own.

What is the newest version of Nuts!

Have played quite a few games of Disposable Heroes & Coffin for Seven Brothers. Really like this system. Very cleanly written, solid mechanics and well supported by the authors via a Yahoo group.

Due to its age, quite a 'family' of products has grown up around DH. The excellent moderns set 'Search Out, Close With and Destroy' plays at the same platoon level as DH while 'Point Blank' brings the scale of play down to the individual and the team.

DH has plenty to offer, including an approach to armour that really emphasises interdependence of infantry and vehicles. Provides a good combined arms game.

That said, ever since Battlegroup Kursk hit our group we have been working this game hard… Great fun, great flavour and very complete. Part of the appeal is the the very professional package, yes, but the mechanics are also smart. While BGK does not have an exclusive support forum, there is terrific support none the less via The Guild Wargamers forum.

The Battlegroup family will play at several levels, but we tend to stay at the platoon and higher.

I have a strong attraction to and respect for the older 2HR Wargames titles. Some very talented contributors have helped with scenario books and campaign materials for a few of the 2Hr titles and that alone makes them worth the cost.
Played them some and worked at introducing them to our club. Had a very hard time finding converts. Ultimately, it is the 'conversion rate' that I judge a game by; if I can't get folk to play, the game isn't going to be very useful to me. This has just as much to do with my local group as it does with the game itself.

Just to throw this into the mix- TFL are about to release Chain of Command, which are at the TW&T level- not sure if Rich sees them as a replacement.

Thanks Last Hussar, I've viewed the vids and tutorials, CoC looks good. Between CoC and TW&T what more could a gamer want…

I've had a quick read through the CR3 rules, will need to read again to really get the grasp of it. As far as Nuts! goes, can any of you highlight the reactions that enemy units perform (I'm thinking of solo play here) is it they either attack, Duck back run away sort of thing? I'm just intrigued as to how enemy unit's reactions can be 'reasonably modelled' by a rolling a dice and consulting a list, as sone of you have mentioned before.

Cheers,

Ark3n