"Challenger rules opinions" Topic

Hey all,
Looking for everyone's opinions on the change Challenger rules by Bruce Taylor
Thanks all

I always thought they were pretty good.

Several versions of them, and more complexity with each set, but they pretty much set the bar for Modern rules back in the day.

Still pretty useful and relevant I suspect, and you don't have to use all the rules, if you want a simpler game.

The group I played with in the late 80s and early 90s (which included a few serving Army chums) tried them a few times but we didn't really like them. WRG 1950-1985 was the preferred set

We play tested Challenger 2000 and Challenger II. We found them to be very slow to play, even for experienced players. One game turn could last a whole evening with a reasonable sized battlegroup per side.
We eventually wrote our own 'in house' fast play rules, which we still use. They're still not ultra fast, owing to the complexity of the equipment and period, but we like them. We can play most conflicts between 1945 and 1995, and a few what ifs. After then the complexity of ultra modern kit means you have to reduce the force sizes to maintain control of all the nuances. These are quicker games because of the effectiveness of modern weapons and the high kill rate.
The basic mechanism divides both side into 'commands' at the players choice. Players with fewer commands have a number of 'passes' to equalise the number of commands.
Player roll dice for initiative, the winning player choosing to go first, or make his opponent go first. After that players take turns to 'activate' one of their commands, until all have done so. this is followed by previously 'called' artillery strikes. Communication between on table units, calling artillery and air assets follows to end the turn.
Air have a three component sequence. 1) a movement on to table and spotting phase, 2) a movement and strike phase, 3) an exit from the table phase (unless loitering to spot). All three phases occur concurrently and sequentially with other ground units phases.
Helicopters are slightly different. The still have 3 phases, 1 and 3 concurrent with other ground unit phases The middle 'Strike' phase becomes a new 'Command' on its own, and earns the opponent an extra 'pass'. Helicopter moves need not be sequential as they can hover.
Land units moving and not wishing to fire may go to 'overwatch' and fire when a target presents itself.
Calling assets varies depending on the command level calling, his equipment etc
Spotting varies depending on the actions of the target, actions of the firer and any equipment eg. TI through smoke.
It makes for a fun game, and much soul searching decision making over which command to activate next, or in fact whether to go first or not.

Always found them to be very complex and slow. You could speed them up by cutting out a lot and limiting the forces. There are many more playable sets available such as Cold War Commander and Sabre Squadron that I would prefer to play.

I saw "Challenger" and was thinking 1986…

Dobber:

Jarrovian is spot on. His experience parallels my own; we could barely get combat-team sized battles done and the rules ground larger games to a painful halt. Interesting principles for its time but not that playable as you migrated from chart to chart. We preferred WRG 1950-2000 for playability.

Cheers and good gaming.
Rod Robertson.

THERE IS SOMETHING to be said about too much accuracy.does not always play well in games.

Thank you everyone!

My head hurts just thinking about them…..

Yea, I think WRG1950+ are the sweet spot, based upon some playtests I've done.

Combat Commander is another option, though the very, very detailed requirements for unit spacing and cohesion used to give me headaches just reading them. Probably just being overly thorough, and once you grasped the concept(s), perhaps not as troublesome with a game or three under your belt.

Seems to me though, that on most wargaming tables, it is pretty hard to get units out of unit control range.

Yes agree with the consensus – found them to be very complex, but no doubt very authoritative. Had some terrific games with them though! The accompanying Equipment Handbook I still find very useful.

I've also struggled a little with the WRG set, since as with their WW2 set, you are very much constrained by which 'Mode' you happen to be in…

To be honest I'd given up on 'modern' Cold War gaming until Team Yankee came along. Just the right level of abstraction to be playable yet deliver credible outcomes!

Vicmagpa,

Precision and accuracy are not the same.

I had no problems teaching a 13 year old how to play.

Thread deviation;

Is there any way to get a copy of the equipment lists? I have the Challenger 2000 rules, but I have not had a chance to play.