"Turn Sequence thoughts" Topic

Try it and see what you think. Easy enough to change if it doesn't work.

Or you could do a simple card system where the phases are marked on cards and randomly drawn.

I would assess a movement penalty to a unit if it shoots before moving in the same turn. Maybe half it's normal move. Likewise, if it moves first, then a shooting penalty should apply.
If it is a move-or-shoot type unit, then it can only do one or the other.

In OHW a unit may only be attacked by one unit per facing. So you can shoot them or beat them up, not both.

In the WGRG Horse and musket it was

Move, opponent shoots, etc.

which I always thought was a stroke of genius

You could modify this to

Move or shoot, opponent shoots, etc.

Note that this permits both sides to shoot in a round and you may need to adjust the casualty rates

I honestly think this kind of a simple turn sequence is completely inapplicable to WW2 gaming. You need to have concepts of area fire, suppression, reactive fire etc. The amount a unit can fire is likely to be more limited by ammunition than the rate of fire of the weapon.

I am not familiar with the OHW rules, so may have missed something completely

John

All his rules use the classic:
Move, Shoot, Melee – Eliminate Units, i.e. Routs.

This allows players to move up, shoot, then charge in and fight hand to hand. However, none of his rules allow units that moved to shoot.

In the OHW rules units may not move AND shoot in the same turn. Your second sentence is therefore self contradictory.

Movement is however factored into the shooting of light troops (who don't actually move, but shoot a very long way).

Shoot then move is the classic Panzerblitz/Panzerleader/WRG 1925-50 turn sequence. It works very well for twentieth century warfare as it automatically gives the defender the first shot without a lot of pratting around with opportunity fire.

The OHW rules are extremly simple, I wouldn't overthink things though, particularly as there is no concept of suppression. Combat is entirely attrition.

In the OHW rules units may not move AND shoot in the same turn.

What about horsearchers? It seems like an unnecessary abstraction to give them an artificially longer range to "factor in" movement….

What about horse archers? It seems like an unnecessary abstraction to give them an artificially longer range to "factor in" movement….

The OHW rules for Ancient, Dark Age and Medieval do not have a separate troop type for Horse Archers. The Ancient and Dark Age versions only have "Cavalry" and the Medieval version just has "Knights". Abstraction rules OK?

What if you use a system that allows one side to move first or have the other side move first? "Initiative" determined by a die roll at the beginning of each turn. Then when units are getting close to each other, divide the turn into two "impulses" or phases. That way you can minimize abstraction like you are talking about. Assuming things we don't actually model means that they don't get seen on the table. Yet we are using miniatures, models, that we are moving about, so why not model movement as closely as possible? Instead of waving our hands in the air and resorting to needless abstraction.

The short version is: Yes, it is necessary to have the player move to within javelin range, and then "throw". If he can get out of melee contact range after throwing that is fine. If the rule differentiates between loose/skirmish order movement to the rear, and massed, close order movement requirements accurately, then the skirmishing javelin chuckers ought to get out of melee range against the latter target. The movement rules should model these differences and not abstract them. Imho, of course….

Let me muddy this up
Side A partial move
Side B reaction move
Side A finish move
Side A First fire
Side B reaction fire
Side A final fire
Side A and B resolve fires
Side A and B resolve melee
Side A final move
Casualty elimination or hit markers
Moral checks

Reaction moves, facing off against flank rear attack, form square
Reaction fire defensive fire by eligible troops
First fire by eligible troops not moving
Final fire by eligible troops that didn't First Fire

And of course Close combat, Overruns, Artillery Airpower, engineering, limber in unlimbering mounting dismounting

And add some Forests, Towns, rivers, defiles
And a happy time for all

I still love the card system that "TSATF" uses. Regular deck of cards. One side is "black" and the other "red".

Start of the turn one card is flipped over. If it's red, then red gets to move one unit of his choice. If it's black, then black gets to move one of his units. Keep turning over cards until all the units have had a chance to move or not move.

If a unit contacts another unit during it's move, then it halts and is considered in melee.

For combat, reshuffle the deck and repeat the process, except each unit has the opportunity to fire, if it is unit that is capable of shooting, OR, it can engage in melee if in contact with another unit.

Elegantly simple and works with many game systems out there.

Another consideration is a turn's time frame.

Many move and shoot rules depend somewhat on the time frame of a turn.The smaller the time frame, the more negative the effects on fire.The larger the time frame the smaller the effects.

A turn time that simulates 2 minutes might not allow shooting if a unit moves full rate or allow a shoot with modifiers if only a partial move.

A turn of 20-30 minutes could abstract the process and allow units to move and shoot without penalties. Such a model could allow all units to move (including into melee) and then fire if within range, thus mitigating the requirement to track which units moved but also fire/melee conflicts. In other words, move all, shoot all no movement penalties.

The ability to charge into melee after firing could be added via a tactical card system. Example: 1 regiment gets an extra action during active players turn.

Finally, depending on the period being modeled, some units had a quicker reaction loop (ooda) such as archers/artillery and cavalry/AFV. Therefore, a sequence for unit actions is often included. Units with faster reaction loops are often allowed to conduct actions first.

Depends on time frame, ooda loop, level of the fight and your own personal preferences.

That sequence should work just fine. Whether it achieves what you want is something only play will decide.

We have taken the turn sequence in Volley and Bayonet, [which I have always thought brilliant, having all morale tests before combat]:

Side A:
*Command Determination
*Movement
*Rally
*Morale Tests
*fire and melee Combat
*Exhaustion[both sides check]

Side B repeats.

What we have done is put each phase, A and B on cards which are mixed and turned over one at a time. It creates a wild game where both players are always involved. Just another idea.