"Chain of Command Tactics (Patrol Phase and Militia Tactics)" Topic

I've been playing a lot of chain of command lately (mostly the Spanish Civil War), and thought I'd share some of what I learned. It probably largely benefit those newer to the game, or those who want to play militia type units which require very different tactics than a professional force.

Enjoy, and let me know what you think or if you have alternate tactics to try.

link

Thanks for the post.

Matthew

Interesting read. If you haven't already post on the too fat lardie forum too.

We have only played WW2 but have found a few things.
1) start with patrol markers no more than 8" apart so you can actually manoeuvre.
2) look to end up with good terrain for jump off markers behind the patrol markers
3) Dont spread your jump off markers too much (and keep this in mind during patrol phase). Although you occupy more ground they end up unable to mutually support so you can't hold the ground.
4) with poor troops (we have used green Russians) think about your support. Although you often have lots to spend too many units are too hard to command with only 4 dice.
5) keep poor troops near their commander. It is often easier to combine command dice to activate him and then activate 3 units than try to activate them separately.
Leigh

Also note you don't roll twice for a team on force morale. Either it is wiped out (killed to the man) or routs (due to shock). Rich confirmed to me that removing a routed team at turn end is not being wiped out.

I don't know about SCW but with Russians (1 team per section) that while the German morale gradually trickles away the Russians tend to take a lot to get their sections in trouble but when they do it is quite a hit on morale and often will be losing a leader at same time.

Thanks for the feedback!

Fettster – I'm familiar with these basic guidelines – what intrigued me and prompted me to write is that for this game I found it better to actually ignore all of those rules but #2.

Also, you do roll twice for a team, once when it breaks and once when it either is wiped out or breaks (but only one of those).

Interesting article. The rules do an excellent job of reflecting the historical differences between professional troops with more tactical finesse and those dependent on sheer weight of numbers.

And Fettstar is right, you do not roll twice for a broken team on the Force Morale Table, unless after the first time it recovers from its initial rout and is subsequently broken again. Removing a broken unit from the table at turn end does not trigger another test unless the unit is accompanied by a Leader who routs off table.

Right, no roll after rout, but you do roll again if they're wiped out. And the section will either have the junior leader killed or routed most likely, which is another roll.

Sorry, my basic arithmetic is lacking. The two rolls were for breaking and destruction (per team), and again for the section as a whole, plus rolls for the leader. That's a maximum of 8 rolls (for a 3-team section) rather than 10 like I initially wrote. Thanks for pointing it out. I was counting the rout for the team, but I've never played that way.

Beautiful table! I'm still attempting to get the guys interested in a WW2 game that's not Flames of War…

Hard to get one of the guys interested, he's a terminal treadhead.

1) start with patrol markers no more than 8" apart so you can actually manoeuvre.

Fettster 42:

Are you talking about the friendly patrol markers relation to each other at the start, during the entire patrol phase or/and the distance from enemy patrol markers that lock them down?

With the 12" distances and movement, the actual sides, in maneuvering, can end up facing down lengthways down the table.

Primalucem,
In my experience it is relatively rare for a team to be both broken and wiped out, it's usually one or the other. When a team breaks it will normally fall back out of the firing line seeking cover, that tends to mean that the enemy will find they have other priority targets to deal with. Obviously that won't always be the case and is heavily dependent on the circumstances in any game but is one explanation as to why the theoretical total you calculate is rarely seen in practice.

More importantly I think your calculation overlooks the ability of teams to share the effect of shock if they remain within 4" of other members of the section. If you maintain unit coherence in this way not only are the team's harder to break, but you can avoid having to take a separate Force Morale test for each team. Instead you make one test when the section breaks.

Something I've done which surprises opponents is be prepared to sacrifice a Patrol Marker (or even 2) to limit their options. Push it up quickly and lock a couple of his simultaneously- preferably the middle 2. Not only does this take away a big chunk of the table he can't use early on, the proximity means he is severely limited, while you can manoeuvre with impunity behind, changing your axis of attack.

Likewise, don't be frightened to end a patrol phase by locking off yours if he is out manoeuvring you.

8" start between your own markers. When we first started playing we would deploy them max distance apart but then you found it very difficult to respond to your opponent as you are already at the limit. Starting less apart you have room to move in either direction.

Probably makes more sense once you try it out on the table.

And often use last hussars tactic. Can be very beneficial.

Archdukek,

I'm not sure how what you're saying is any different than what I've said. I absolutely agree that the ability to distribute shock among teams and use leaders to rally shock makes professional platoons more robust and long lasting. I've typically found in most non-militia games, that a section tends to hang around for a quite a while, but when it breaks it tends to break with multiple teams at (near) once, say when fire is concentrated on them as happened in the game I was analyzing.

I'm not in any way saying that the militia platoons are better in any way, just that there are ways we can use them that capitalize on their strengths. One strength is simply that you can more easily afford to have them break, hence my suggestion to not use them like a professional group by keeping your one effective leader attached to them and try to save them from breaking. Having a (junior) leader is always better, but as People's Militia, you only get one senior leader and that's it.

Further, it may be an overlooked tactic, but trying to wipe out a broken unit can be a pretty valid way to wear down your opponent and force morale rolls.

Theoretical numbers aside, Archdukek, would you play militia differently? If so how?

8" start between your own markers. When we first started playing we would deploy them max distance apart but then you found it very difficult to respond to your opponent as you are already at the limit. Starting less apart you have room to move in either direction.

Probably makes more sense once you try it out on the table.

Fettster 42:

No, it makes sense, I just didn't know 'in what sense' you meant it. It strikes me as sound tactics.

And often use last hussars tactic. Can be very beneficial.

Yes. There are several variations of that tactic, besides denying the center to your opponent.

Primalucem,
Sorry if I wasn't clear.
No I wouldn't play militia any different. I think your article was a very sound analysis of how to get the best out of them. They do require a different approach to using a regular platoon and knowing when to employ your leader is definitely part of that as you rightly say.

What I was disagreeing with was the emphasis in your analysis of the theoretical number of Force Morale test which a regular platoon might face. In practice I think we are both agreed that is unlikely to be the case.

One thing I did wonder from your original article was whether when a regular section broke you assumed that you had to roll for each constituent team breaking as well which you don't.

My understanding of the rule is that if two teams break, you roll twice, and if the third team breaks, you roll for the section (or if it's militia, just for the section). Not sure if my number of rolls listed reflects that. Is that what you meant?

I'm still attempting to get the guys interested in a WW2 game that's not Flames of War…Hard to get one of the guys interested, he's a terminal treadhead.

Then get him into Battlegroup!
Armor friendly and none of this silly-knees-bent-running about-advancing-behavior :)

Tell you what is handy – 3 lengths of dowling 12" long – one for the moving unit, one to check still in contact and one to check for lock down – 3 means you can have them all on the table simultaneously.

Rich laughed when I pulled them out my dice box, but quickly revised his opinion when he saw how useful they were in the patrol phase!

The thing about locking the middle two enemy markers isn't necessarily about the centre of the table – it means he only has 12" on each side, or has to spend time moving a marker from one side to another, locking 2 severely limits his options – he is stuck in a box defined by you.

People often comment the patrol phase turns the game through 90' – rather think of it this way, what you have discovered is a safe path to create a salient in a long finger

Here is my first outing into CoC.

twtrb.blogspot.co.uk

I took a 4 foot dowling and chopped it into 3. 2 18" lengths and a single 12" length.

The 12" is useful for the patrol phase and the 18" lengths are great for determining JOPs. You position the two to determine the angle and the JOP just needs to be beyond the length of the dowels.

I considered that, but would not have fitted into the dice/equipment box.