Cold Warrior | 06 Feb 2016 3:51 p.m. PST |
Liked the free version, curious what others think now that the full version of the rules is out. Does it give a good game at company level with a reasonable amount of detail? |
carne68 | 06 Feb 2016 4:01 p.m. PST |
I thought it looked good. I bought it yesterday. |
gunnerphil | 06 Feb 2016 4:27 p.m. PST |
I like the rules, do have a level of detail but are still playable. Worth getting " 7 days to the Rhine" for Soviet army lists. |
Cold Warrior | 06 Feb 2016 5:59 p.m. PST |
Will be grabbing 7 Days when I purchase the rules. Been looking a VERY long time for a good set of rules at this scale. |
Generalstoner49 | 06 Feb 2016 7:27 p.m. PST |
Best rules for Cold War games I have played. All the previous rules I used were missing something it seemed. Saber Squadron provides a good sized game at a playable scale. I will play devil's advocate though and say if you are looking for large scale NATO brigades against Soviet divisions these are not the rules for you. |
McWong73 | 06 Feb 2016 7:39 p.m. PST |
Generalstoner, can you eleborate on that? (Said in a friendly manner BTW) |
Generalstoner49 | 06 Feb 2016 8:32 p.m. PST |
Sure thing. I will start with the rules I have and still play. 1. Cold War Commander. It's not a bad rules set. It plays fast and is easy to pick up, especially if you are familiar with the war master rules system. It also allows for decent NATO battalions on Soviet regiments. It's command and control system is unique and allows for fog of war from botched rolls. But its base removal system is broken unless fixed with house rules. Airpower is also broken but perhaps rightfully so. 2. Fistful of TOWS 3. My second favorite rules set. It plays quick and allows for a good flow of battle. It also is a very well written rules set that is easy to pick up. My only issue with this rules set is that it plays at a NATO battalion level vs. Soviet Regiment level but it feels more like a skirmish game rules-wise. 3. Modern Spearhead. A true large scale rules system. Perhaps the most realistic set of rules. I think that this is the only rules set that allows for multiple NATO battle groups to face off against a soviet division sized force. The problem with the rules set is if you are looking to square your 4 Abrams off against 12 T-80's and see if you can stop them this is not the rules set for you. A little too large scale for me. 4. MBT. A great rules set and recently expanded with British and such but complex. It is not a rules set that I think I have ever played a battle to completion with. There are others like challenger 2000, tac force, team Yankee etc but I have never played them so I cannot comment on them. I have found Saber Squadron to be played at the scale our group likes, it is easy to pick up but has the complexity that allows for the NATO forces to use their quality versus Soviet quantity which I think most rules seem to lack. Airpower is present but not horrendously overpowered. If I have a complaint about the rules it is the scale. Most of the games I have seen use 15mm models, our group just does not have the room for that kind of scale. This forces us to play at 6mm and even 3mm. Not that this is a big problem but it just feels like we should be gaming in 15mm to get the proper feel. I hope this helps! |
McWong73 | 06 Feb 2016 10:34 p.m. PST |
|
GeoffQRF | 07 Feb 2016 6:11 a.m. PST |
I have the full rules (bought to use with 1/300) and like them a lot. I must admit I was surprised (but excited) to see a few of the AARs were in 15mm (and doubly so that they used our models!). I think the 15mm games shown are not on a very big table, 8x4, or even 6x4 |
Cold Warrior | 07 Feb 2016 6:46 a.m. PST |
Well, for me at least, I want a decent set of rules where a vehicle or weapons team is 1:1 and infantry are fire teams or sections. Playing in 15mm, so this seems to be what Saber Squadron offers scale-wise. Also gaming in 1/600, but am doing so at a much larger scale, so have other rules in mind for this. |
Todd636 | 07 Feb 2016 8:12 a.m. PST |
Generalstoner49. What are some of the house rules you were talking about for Cold War Commander? |
Generalstoner49 | 07 Feb 2016 9:09 a.m. PST |
The first rule is the way hits are marked. At the end of the shooting phase any leftover hits are just lost. They disappear. We follow a house rule where all hits stay. It makes for a faster game and also is more realistic. It is frustrating enough needing to hit let alone damage a Challenger 2 or a M1A2 Abrams let alone put 5 hits on it in a turn to eliminate it. We also changed the way ATGM's are evaded. The air power also needed to be tweaked. It is just too strong in its base form. We gave both sides a percentage of their points extra in AD to represent the assets behind the front that could still hit strike aircraft. |
Todd636 | 07 Feb 2016 9:52 a.m. PST |
Thanks Generalstoner49. I do like the rules, but found the fact that everything was renewed as though nothing happened a bit frustrating. |
Weasel | 07 Feb 2016 11:52 a.m. PST |
When we did CWC, we did something like that. I think we removed 1 hit and kept the rest which is sort of a middle between the rules and what we liked better. Maybe its just because we were coming from Command Decision. |
Sudwind | 07 Feb 2016 12:47 p.m. PST |
Command Decision is still a great game. The newest version has some good changes (simplified spotting, proper suppression from HE fire, no longer needing chits to mark hits, etc). On their forum, you can find data on current vehicles. To me this was always the most realistic game out there (particularly the way it addresses morale and command and control) and with stands representing platoons, you can play large actions. |
Weasel | 07 Feb 2016 12:56 p.m. PST |
Yeah, it's a bit more gear-head than my group tends to like (hence a big part of why I don't end up writing gearhead games, since I'd never get to play them) but I think for "military feel", it's a cut above for sure. |
Mako11 | 07 Feb 2016 2:03 p.m. PST |
Generalstoner49, how did you adjust the ATGM evasion rules? |
Generalstoner49 | 07 Feb 2016 8:59 p.m. PST |
Mako, we changed the evade rules by not allowing an evading unit to move forward the 10cm. The rules state on a successful evade roll that your unit can move 10cm in any direction. Historically tank would juke by either reversing and popping smoke or moving in a zig-zag way. We had some "rules lawyers" who started using the 10cm movement to their benefit. 10cm can mean the difference of getting closer to your opponent and getting better shots off on the following turn. We also allowed evades to take place against air strike with missiles even if you evaded that turn from a ground target. Again, our group just found air power too strong in those rules. We did at one point see if allowing multiple evade rolls in a turn was feasible but it was not. The same player used it as an independent opportunity to move his units even close still. We then tried to add additional -1 to the evading units command roll but this just made the game a tracking mess. Trying to remember which units were at -1 and which were at -3 was just too much book keeping. |
Mako11 | 07 Feb 2016 11:22 p.m. PST |
Thanks for the info. I appreciate it. |
gregoryk | 08 Feb 2016 6:17 p.m. PST |
I st still like the level of research and detail in FFT. And I am going to use 3mm models. |
Weasel | 09 Feb 2016 1:01 a.m. PST |
Honestly, FFT is worth buying even if you never intend to play it, just for all the troop ratings. |
Corwin | 09 Feb 2016 4:22 a.m. PST |
Have got the full rules and have had a couple of games, not likely to have any more as I am not a fan of the move segments system and with modern MBTs most engagements are auto kills either way which takes the random element away from it and to me makes less of a fun game. There are a few suggestions on the forums which help with lethality but I will stick with FFT and CWC for larger games. Trying the 5-Core rules this week, I like the kill/shock mechanisms and the special turns a lot, will see how they pan out. |
Hayden | 09 Feb 2016 12:12 p.m. PST |
5-core company commander is fine system i like it for solo games. Thiniking of buying 10mm korea miniatures for it. And you can always check my Able Archer game :) but Sabre squadron is fine too link link |
Sulaco | 10 Feb 2016 3:13 a.m. PST |
I think, with a bit of tweaking the Cold War Commander rules are excellent. I just wish the 2nd edition would come out soon, with some of the house rules that have been discussed on the forums implemented. |