"Fast Game Mechanics" Topic

These are just some general thoughts on my recent rules experiences. Nothing too profound but stated in hopes of drawing some enlightening comments!

I have been tinkering with my home brew Spanish Civil War rules & I have decided that I would like to play lager battles. They are scaled at 1" = 50 yards, 1 stand = 1 platoon (British usage of the word not the historical Spanish platoon) so 1 infantry company = 3 stands. I would like to play with a full brigade on each side which would mean about 50 combat stands per side plus a few command stands (commanders down to company level have stands.)

I have been using an interactive play mechanic where each command (usually a company but can be a battalion)is activated by a die roll & completes all of it actions (move & fire, fast move, intense fire, or regroup) before another command is activated. Opposing stands can perform defensive fire on the active stands. Each stand can fire separately or they can combine their fire into 1 die roll. Each player completes all of his activations before plays goes to the other side.

So it seems that this system is slower than I like for a big game. Play does not seem to go as fast as when there are separate movement & fire phases. The next version has the following sequence of play:

Each turn consists of the following phases.

Initiative Phase
Roll for Initiative

Operations Phase
First Player Air & Artillery Segment
First Player Movement Segment
Units that roll an 11 or 12 for activation may fire during the Movement Segment & then roll for another activation. Their second fire must be done during their Offensive Fire Segment
Second Player Defensive Fire Segment
First Player Offensive Fire & Close Assault Segment
Second Player Air & Artillery Segment
Second Player Movement Segment
First Player Defensive Fire Segment
Second Player Offensive Fire & Close Assault Segment

End of Turn Phase
Rally Tests- simultaneous
Move all Retreating Stands- simultaneous
Remove Artillery Templates for non-continuous barrages
Roll to remove Smoke
Check for Reinforcements- simultaneous

So last night we played the first turn of an attack by 3 battalions of Italian infantry + 4 companies of tanks & armored cars on a force of 3 battalions of an International brigade + 3 companies of tanks & armored cars. It took too long, maybe an hour. We were a bit rusty on the rules so looking things up slowed us down a little too.
Tonight we will play turn 2 with the new sequence of play & I am hopeful that it will go much faster. The active player can just start at 1 end & quickly progress through his troops whether moving or firing.

Any other speedy ideas are appreciated.

JPK

I would post photos of the game but I can't seem to sort out the procedure.

JPK

1 stand = 1 platoon, full brigade and fast play is probably not going to fit together very well

So I suggest that you work out what are the essential tactical interactions that you can't live without. Anything else could be abstracted out. For instance
- 1 attack roll per company with support
- Don't roll for activating each company, just get a certain number of activations. In reading accounts of real battles, generally only a few units are active at any one time

Actually 1 hour for the units you listed (not sure how many bases that was) with looking up rules isn't bad. Book keeping and complex modifiers can also slow the flow down.

The other question I would ask about your trial games was whether it was exciting and tense, allowed lots of interesting tactical decisions and whether tactics of the time worked well

Another point. You say "I have decided that I would like to play lager battles "
This may indeed be more fun than wargaming, but wargaming won't do so much damage to your liver.

John

I am sure if I scaled it up so that 1 stand equaled 1 company it would go fast as we have successfully played games of that size (say 20 stands per size) very quickly.
I am used to play DBx games with 50 or so stands & having them go quickly so I think it must be possible. Modern warfare is inherently more complicated as we have air strikes, indirect artillery fire, & weapons with much longer ranges to deal with. I am not about to give up yet. I think by making the game less interactive we will be able to knock out our turns much more quickly as there will fewer distractions to contend with. Allowing fire to be intermixed with movement seems to throw sand in the works.

As a big DBx fan I do like the PIP command system. No doubt that would be quicker though often it is possible to roll to activate most of a battalion at once. I know some refuse to play activation games, but I feel that the extra loss of control brings more reality to the table. If I can alot the command PIPs then the most crucial units will activate.

In any event I do think that a more set play sequence with less back & forth is speedier. We will play turn 2 of the same set up one day this week for comparison.

Reducing the lager should also speed things up.

JPK

Don't use an interactive play sequence for so much stuff, make it as simultaneous as possible. Spearhead has a pretty good turn sequence for games of the scale you are looking at.

Something I am confused about:
- you say each activated command performs all actions before a next command is activated.
- you do have a rather complicated turn sequence that seems to indicate the opposite. To me, that turn sequence seems horrible to manage when used together with an activation system.

In my experience, combat resolution also can slow things down significantly with so many stands. Keep your procedure limited to a single die per stand (vs target number), with maybe 3 to 5 modifiers at most. When using an opposed die roll system, keep modifiers limited to 3 per side, and only dependent on the status of one's own troops, such that each player can quickly figure out what to roll independent from what's shooting at him.

Also, for each rule, decide whether the rule really has an effect on the flow of the game, whether it just adds random noise, or whether it is only there to add flavour. E.g. many distinctions between troop types just add random noise to combat resolution, and rarely influence player's decisions on how to fight the battle. Also, different movement rates for various troop types are often only there for flavour, and slow things down because no-one remembers how far a specific type of stand can move during a single turn.

There is no possible way that sequence of action can yield anything "fast." Carve it all out with a big red pen and use this.

1. Both sides roll dice, high score decides if he wishes to move first or second.

2. First mover moves.

3. Second mover moves.

4. Combat, fire or close assault. If too close to the enemy it's close assault, otherwise it's fire.

There you go!

Otto

I was going to suggest
- Initiative
- Player A Fires
- Player A Moves
- Player B Fires
- Player B Moves
- Both Players rally

I don't think how long a game takes is as important as how long a game SEEMS to take. If you're having a great game and you're not dis-satisfied until afterwards when you look at the clock, then you just might have a good system there.

I rarely like activations other than IGOUGO because I find them poor representations of how armies moved and fought. However, WW2 and later can be the exceptions. Some types of activation do a good job of showing the uneven advance and retreat of forces.

A suggestion somewhat more in keeping with what you already have -

Roll for initiative
High roller goes first, alternate commands

For each command roll a d6
"6" = 3 moves
"4 & 5" = 2 moves
"1 -3" = 1 move
Fire (once)

modifiers for casualties, supressions, green or elite
fire modifiers depending on movement (as well as standard causes)

Have to agree, it looks to me that your rules need a good solid editing or three. I believe it was Hemingway who said "kill all your darlings". I have found this to be good advice for writing rules. It may be a great idea to include many unit and weapon types, and be able to have all kinds of highly detailed stuff happen, but if game play suffers then things need to be cut. Only you can say for sure which things those are. The good news is this should result in a much simpler turn sequence.

Also I would re-evaluate your activation system. If I understand correctly, each unit would go through the play sequence when it is activated. What then is the need for all the 1st Player and 2nd player actions during the turn? This confuses me. As a result, I'm not completely sure I get how your turn sequence works. Players need to be able to easily grasp the way the turn sequence works even if they don't grasp any other aspect of the game.

Hope any of this has helped. Best of luck on your project. Would love to see an AAR of your battles.

Thanks for all the responses. There are so many good ones that I can't do them all justice.

The sequence of play may look complicated but I do not feel that it is, though there must always be room for improvement & I definitely less than more. The ends is what matter, a fast satisfying large game.

For a very fast game that handles very large complex battles let me point you to A Fistful of TOWs 3.
The sequence of play consumes 39 lines!! Despite that it is one of the fastest & best micro armor games out there. I considered using it as it covers everything from WW1 up, but I find its infantry model to simple for armies that were composed of primarily infantry & it is designed to accommodate everything from WW1 takes to the US Abrahms. This causes the armor rating to be a little too "compressed" when looking at only the 1930's.
Those interested look here for a free sample:
fft3.com

The sequence of play in simple non-wordy terms is:

Decide who goes first.
Player A does his air & artillery
Player A Moves
Player B Fires
Player A Fires
Repeat Above
Clean things up at the end of the turn

I do not think that is too complicated.

In the initial sequence of play then a player would activate a formation & do all of its movement, firing, rallying, close combat, & suffer defensive fire before another unit would be activated. This while sounding simple is not time efficient. It is like painting up 1 figure in its entirety before starting on the next figure! It is of course better to paint all the "blues" on all the figures before doing all the reds, etc.

In any event I would like to play a 20th century game that allows 50+ stands per side in a quick fashion. FFT 3 does allow this but it covers too broad of a time scale to properly handle the 1930's SCW. Sorry to say that I am not a Flames of War sort of guy though it is a fast game.

JPK

Could someone please tell me how to post a picture?

JPK

As it says in the FAQ, just post the URL for the image.

The picture is on my computer. Typing in the location doesn't seem to work.

C:\Users\John\Pictures\2014-06-23 001

It will need to be hosted online (like on a site like flickr, imagr, a blog etc).

Hopefully I made my explanation clear on the sequence of play. The first (slow) system involved activating a command & completing all its actions before going to the next. The new system listed above is intended to have factory like efficiency where one moves down your line first moving everything, then taking fire, then back again firing.

The other thing I can stream line is the combat system, though the present one is not too complicated. For infantry fire it is similar to the system in Dave Brown's Panzer Grenadier. For tank fire it is like the tank system in Crossfire.
For infantry you roll 2D6, add in the firepoints of the firer plus modifiers (maximum of 5 such as short, long, proficient firer, ineffective firer, low ammo). The higher the total the better. You can pin, suppress, kill, or 1/2 kill (1 damage point.)

Now the new system I may try is as follows:
First buy some blank D6 from Amazon.

ALTERNATIVE INFANTRY COMBAT SYSTEM
Dice have the following "sides": -1, 0, 0, 1, 2, 4
Roll 1 die for each fire point the firer has (rifles =1, LMG =2, HMG = 3, etc)
Total the score on the dice. Note that 2 damage points kill a stand.
1 = Pin, 2 = Suppression, 4 = Damage Point (DP), 8+ = 2 DP
Target gets 1D6 morale saving roll to reduce damage by 1 level. Fanatic 3+, Determined 4+, Reliable 5+, Hesitant 6+. Target gets 1D6 cover saving roll to reduce damage by 1 level. Light 6+, Medium 5+, Heavy 4+.
Firing modifiers are:
Short +1 die,
Long Re-roll 1 hit,
Proficient Re-roll 1 miss,
Ineffective Re-roll 1 hit,
Intense fire +1 die,
Firer has 1 DP reduce total by -1.
A Suppression on a suppressed unit causes 1 DP.

JPK

We continued the same scenario with the following sequence of play:

Initiative Phase
Roll for Initiative
Operations Phase
First Player Air & Artillery Segment
First Player Movement Segment
Second Player Defensive Fire Segment
First Player Offensive Fire & Close Assault Segment
Second Player Air & Artillery Segment
Second Player Movement Segment
First Player Defensive Fire Segment
Second Player Offensive Fire & Close Assault Segment
End of Turn Phase
Rally Tests- simultaneous
Move all Retreating Stands- simultaneous
Check for Ammunition Resupply
Remove Order Markers- May leave Retreat, Reserve, & Rapid Advance Markers
Remove Artillery Templates for non-continuous barrages
Roll to remove Smoke
Check for Reinforcements- simultaneous

This non-interactive sequence was notably faster. We only have a sample size of 1 but I am convinced that non-interactive sequence is faster.
Next thing will be to make the combat routines uber efficient.
As a side note the Internal brigade consisting of 3 battalions plus support from a T-26 & BT-5 company squashed the Italian attack which included 4 battalions & 2 companies of CV 33/35's. The next Italian attack will get an assist from more artillery & some captured T-26's.

John Kelly

For pictures, host it somewhere online (on your website, or anywhere) and then write its internet address between [ img ] and [ /img ] (with no space between the brackets).

I think fundamantaly you may not have grasped the full reality of the game you are modeling. Large battles take a long time to fight in the real world. In attack a company will fight either 1 platoon up 3 back (bigger companies in WWII than now) or at more risk 2 up 2 back. After a couple of hour of heavy fighting you will proably start to run out of asmmo and bodies on the first platoon nd have to swap. As you are looking to fight 24 hrs a day in summer with this size you will need only 1/3 of this number fighting at any one time. Threfore the combat resolution will be to take a position over a long period which is not really a fire and combat but a weight of fire vs time and casualties. The responce rate of an army this size should be slow so simultanious moves may be possible as your moves will at this scale will have to be planned long in advace. I seem to recall that a Battalon in WWII took 20minutes to pass a point even on a road.

I would think that a bound should represent 1 hours worth of battle. Typicaly that would be about 1 mile of movement if it was not too hot. Bigger battles against fixed defences could be much less perhaps in some cases a mile overall.

Clearly thiose elements resting will not take time to play in any one bound.

Make sure you get the frontage representation correct. About 1 platoon pet 500m is optimum in defence. A company on the same frontage in attack. Again this makes sure you have a reslistic number of troops in the main attack. As far as I can tell the biggest battle in Normandy was only 3000m acraoss. The rest are spoiling attacks to fix in place.

Given this data you should have a lot less to move each time and get a credible barttle.

As regards the scale:

1 " = 50 yds
1 stand = 1 platoon
Company command radius = 3"
stand dimension is 3 cm x 3 cm
Effective rifle range = 300 yds = 6"

So a company will attack on about 400 yds.
To have mutually supporting fields of fire on defense it would be best to not have over 6" between stands so that means that a company will defend on about 16" = 800 yds

As effective rifle range is 6" typical game mechanics then requires that an infatry tactical move is 6". Double time is 6" + 1D6". No movement gives a +1 fire DRM.

JPK

Interesting discussion about the proper use of troops. Namely that not all of them can fight at once & troops need to be rotated into the front line. At one point I was using fatigue points to model that but the mechanic was a bit clunky so I dropped it.

There are ammo rules so that if you roll a 2 or 3 on 2D6 then you go low on ammo, which would require either the dispatch of an ammo truck from your on board supply dump or pulling the unit back toward a safe supply line.

Perhaps I should look again at using fatigue points.

JPK

Well I do not think that fatigue points are a necessary game mechanic. As it is units in the front line get very beat up & become "fatigued" as a result of pins, suppressions, losses, & low ammo results.

The simpler way to handle it is to create a mechanism to withdraw them from the frontline & allow them to regroup. This will also encourage players to hold back reserves that can then be rotated into the frontlines.

A "Withdraw" order will allow units to ignore pins & suppressions so long as they do not fire & end their move farther away from sighted enemy.

Then a "Regroup" order will allow them to replace lost stands with the probability of success to be determined by the morale grade of the troops. Ammo trucks can be dispatched to remove the low on ammo status.

After a couple of turns of this they can rotate back into the frontline.

JPK