"Squad coherency?" Topic

In games with individually based figures that are required to remain within a certain distance from each other, what do you prefer?

A: Maintain a maximum distance between figures (such as 40K)

B: Maintain a maximum distance from the squad leader (such as Warzone)

C: Some other system to be explained in the comments.

For the pedantic, the poll is regarding coherency distances. Hence "No coherency distance", "Everyone in base contact", "I don't play games with miniatures" and "I only play first edition DBA" are not included as poll options.

I prefer B, because I don't like daisy chaining. I do believe that there should be mechanics for coherency to be broken such as a SAW gunner firing whilst other team members move.

I cut my teeth on A (40K), but prefer B (WarZone rules!), with better leaders / more elite troopers having a wider radius.

B for most troops. A for special forces, recon and the line.

Future communications? Jamming (ECM, ECCM, etc.,) can be a game within a game. Given today's ability to link I think distance on a tactical table is wide open but chances of "breakdown" and a non-PC possibly doing something undesired (yes, I like THW mechanics) should be reflected in the game.

So – D.

B. But I really prefer no mandatory coherency, but inherent bonuses withn the game for troops keeping closer to one another. Like in FiveCore, or Frostgrave.

B.

The examples you listed are all SCIFI. The coherancy issues is totally different than 1900s combat.
In the 1900s, individuals tended to deploy at variable ranges based as much on LOS as distance. As long as a trooper could see a fellow soldier from his unit (whom he knows) then he will function ok. Once he is out of the LOS then his actions may become timid to the point of being frozen or pinned.

In the SCIFI world, the LOS would not be as much of a consideration as a trooper's vision may be limited by the helmet. yet sensors and laser radio commo would replace seeing a friend. So members of a squad would function a lot more independently. Just my opinion.

If indeed this is a SF genre query I would suggest within audio communication. If Hollywood is any indication SF squadies and HQ only go hysterical when they loose audio communication between themselves. I contend there must be countless video clips from such movies to support my theory. If it's in the movies it must be true.

Sensors and laser radio would not replace line of sight for command control. Even now a nco needs to be in sight to get a team member to do anything. Humans are visual, tribal, creatures uncomfortable in isolation from other members of the group. Ymmv.

B, more a communications thing

I usually assume troops are capable of repeating hand signals down the line, so A.

If particularly awful from a training/cohesion point of view and they really do follow the SL around like a flock of sheep, then B.

Doesn't have to be a scifi question, I just used that as an example.

A., although I'll play it however the rules say I should.

bee

@Martin

I'll buy into that. I'd fine with A was well as B. I had in mind entire platoons of men daisy chained out like in Flames of War.

With individually based 15mm troops in a firing line the guy on the end has a good chance of being in command anyways. If the squad is further broken down into teams line Chain of Command it's really no trouble to have at least on team member close enough to the leader.

QILS has an option for both A and B, as well as the possibility of multiple C2 configurations for a set of units. You can use that to build your own.

My fave implementation is (low bonus) for A (daisy chain) @4" separation (for 4+SL) or (high bonus) for B (SL radius) @ 8".

Yes, if we are talking about platoons, companies etc, then some sort of command radius is more appropriate. Within a section or fireteam, a daisychain seems more appropriate.

C. All units within a command distance of each other based on the unit leader's command rating, as in Star Wars Miniatures Battles.
Yes, you can – and may have to – risk a long, strung out line of troops with some men being momentarily isolated by the loss of a link in the chain, but that's realistic.
Oh, and any nonsense about "units must fire at the closest target" is the first thing I throw out of any rules set; it's absolute rubbish.