"It's the flanks, stupid" Topic

This thread TMP link got me thinking about another thing I've seen in modern scenarios.

I have played some and read some here on TMP. You have a nice set of company or platoon rules. The attacker gets the mission of exiting off the defender's table edge. The defender sets up. Then the attacker comes on with almost every thing hugging one side of the table except for some fire elements to cover his flank and the whole mass tries to run past or over-run the defender's flank unit.

If the defender is an isolated unit then the attacker might just go around their flank out if range. They are only prevented from doing this by the edge of the table. If the defender isn't an isolated unit, then putting a mob forward on their flank would draw fire from the next defending unit, which is off the table.

So how do you stop this rush down the flank?

Oops, didn't mean to make duplicate posts. Mea culpa.

I've seen that too.

Indeed I've seen and played many games where the entire battle is fought using only about 20% of a 6x4 table and sometimes even less.

Some ideas:

1. No deployment of troops 12 inches from short table edge – this means all forces are deployed reasonable close to table centre.

Any concentration of force on a flank requires maneuouvre.

2. Allow defenders reserves from flank – obviously that could result in attacker's flanking force being flanked.

3. Have table chopped up into quarters or even 12 inches sections with each section requiring at least 1 unit to be deployed.

4. Allow defender to re-deploy 1-2 units to take into account that they would strengthen the most obvious approaches (in this case extreme flank).

5. Have attackers objectives spread out across table.

Basically tactics should have inbuilt risks.

Games/scenarios should avoid risk-free tactics.

Easiest way – better written scenarios. If the attacker has to get off the board then make it the center third of the far end. Doesn't hurt to say they have to at least go through or near a point at the center of the table.

Another possibility would reflect real world considerations.

Common military doctrine calls for units to be assigned individual zones to attack in to prevent friendly units from firing on friendly forces from a different unit that suddenly appear in front of them in their zone…

An option would be that units operating within a certain distance of the table edge are susceptible to friendly fire.

Not absolutely 100% certain, but enough to give an attacker pause on not just hugging the edge of the table, but making love to it just to keep from the possibility of enduring any defensive fire…

Frank

As I've said, on another post, if the rule set is good, than it is the lack of player(s) tactical expertise …

Simple, have off table defences, 'on-table'. Draw out the defensive position and superimpose the table dimensions onto it. Work out the distance from the defensive positions, outside the superimposed table area, to the actual table edge and add that to any measurement, during combat. If you had the troops you could even have them on a separate table and losses could be inflicted as though they were on the table.

So when the German player rushes his armour for a flank surge, against a dug in company, inform him his armour is now being attacked, in the flank, by a combination of 45mm and 76.2mm AT/tank guns and dozens of AT rifles. Should stop gamey tactics. The flanking MG posts should also give the infantry a bit of bother.