"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?

Create rules to permit offboard fire by unobserved units, since rarely are flanks truly open, and unprotected.

You are assuming there is a unit off table that can react to the column flying down the edge of the table. If there is, the player needs to know that he will be exposing his flank to off table enemy units and that he can expect to take fire from them. You can randomly generate how much and what (rifles, MGs, ATGs, etc.) can fire each turn.

The flank can be a minefield (surprise!)

The defending player sets up his troop position with chips or cards (include extra dummy cards), so the sneaky player doesn't know what is where. If you want to, defender sets up, sneaky player puts his figures on the table, then defender can rearrange up to two sets of two cards.

Another way of dealing with this is to limit the entry points to 6 specific locations, all away from the flanks by at least a foot, and having the entering player roll for which entry area they come in on.

Let the defender pick his spot. By that I mean choosing favourable terrain for delay or hasty defense. Pretty unlikely that a defender will be occupying a crappy position when he has the choice.

I would allow the attacker to pick 6-8 terrain features for a 4x6 board, and then let the defender place them on the table. Then the attacking player gets to move one and remove one.

Let the defender deploy half his forces and keep the other half in reserve. Attacker deploys. Defender deploys the other half, with 1/4 of the total available to deploy behind the attacker, but on the table edge. Yeah, flanks work both ways.

Some game I forget the name of now would "lock" units in place if they were hugging the edge of the table. Once you got within a certain distance, you had to stay there basically.

I like the "off table fire" option better though.

Orient the board towards the corners, rather than the edges. I haven't tried this enough to know if it will fix your problem entirely, but it does change the dynamics of the game quite a bit.

Research is continuing…

You could also just move the "exit point" to be near the middle of the board edge. That way the attacker can still try to sneak but they have to double back. If there's a time limit, it should make life interesting enough.

Or determine the exit point AFTER the attacker sets up

Give the players a map that covers about 3 table widths. Give the defender about 3 x the forces you expect to deploy on the table, but require him to cover the whole front. Have the attacker plan his attack and then set up the table so that it covers either side of his main effort.

Just a thought here – unless it's an infiltration mission or a headlong retreat movement through an encirclement where any route across the table is a good route, advances and attacks are typically oriented toward seizing key transport routes (roads, tracks, etc) or key terrain features that command/control them (towns, villages, elevations, woods, bridges, fords, etc). What good is it to pass your attack force down the edge of the table when no supply can follow them? Logistics should play a role in dictating tabletop tactical objectives.

B

Yep. "Secure a route across the table" is a better victory condition than "drive across the table."

Make it so it is not a straight line to the exit point so that hugging the flank won't work.

As well, this is a classic case where maneuver is power. Assuming they advance with the mass and have a few cover forces…

1) Overwhelm the covering forces.
2) Pin the enemy against the flank edge of the board and cut them to ribbons.

Easier said than done but that is the gist.

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.

I personally do not like these types of victory conditions. Players will either race down the flanks or race like mad across the table ignoring everything and anything. It never feels right to me. For exmaple, would you as a commander drive right through 3 enemy tanks (or basically their 'front') just to make the crossroads by h hour? Would you not be concerned about your rear? Certainly there are break through attacks or special race like mad assaults, but they rarely transfers to the gaming table with any sense of realism (IMO). I agree about securing a route, acheiving an objective or some other less 'gamey' victory condition.

Mike

Attackers nearly always had clear boundaries to avoid friendly fire casualties and not mess up another units attack plan.

If you have players who can't play fair and stray out of their zones hit them with a largish calibre artillery 'stonk' or a air attack – that'll learn 'em.

Basically it should be a given that there is a 6-12 inch no go zone along each table edge. If the players can't understand the need for this you need new players.

Attacks are usually to seize or cover roads. Even overland attacks will have a road net of some sort as the objective. So getting off the table while leaving a enemy blocking force in place isn't a good idea.

I'll say what I said in the other thread – put some objectives in the middle of the table (like others have mentioned) and the problem goes away. I've always hated "off table" fire as being a bother – the table edge should be that no go zone…

Realy this is a proerty of a badly designed board or un-realistic rules or both. A real defender will pick a choke point to defend. That is a pont where if he deploys a significant number of troops at such a point the enemy either has to attack at that point of take a time consuming detour (if he is lucky), giving the defender time to re-deploy to block him. Choke points are typically a bridge, road through difficult going/minfield etc. Seems like the board set up may be one of "those games" that use a points for terrain system if so that is a fundamental problem with the methodology, they are not supposed to be realistic.

Personaly as has been said, require the attacker to secure a route (road or river). However this is likely to require more resouces than an "escape" secnario.

I would also require the attacker to keep the route open against possible counter attack. For example set a number of points along the main axis of advance which must be garrisoned and held. Allocate VP for each turn that the point is held.

Take a look at how board games cover this. SPI's West Wall Quad game of Market Garden for examples of how to deal with keeping lines of communication open.

The trick is to "entice" the attacker onto a realistic line of attack.

I did see rules in a D-Day scenario to cover for it. Any unit within X of the table edge had to roll at the end of the turn. On a 4+ on a D6 they were removed as it was assumed they had been drawn off to an adjoining action.

When playing a strategic game we had "No Armor" lines that ran the length of the board about 6" in. the attacker wasn't permitted to place any heavy weapons or AFV's outside that line, but the defender was. It makes the edge of the board a much less attractive place to advance.

Another solution is to model offtable friendly flanking units abstractly – dice throw for how far friendlies advance each turn (D6+2" or whatever) and if you are within 6" of the table edge beyond that line, you take flanking fire from unsuppressed baddies.

Martin – now THAT is a good idea. I wish I had thought of it, but will still pretend I did next time I run a WWII game!

I claim no particular credit for the idea, that goes to Victory Games 'Hells Highway', but it does work very well.

Makes it a bit less mechanical than assuming the whole table edge is always dangerous (or completely safe).