Lion,
I've played FoF a few times and have the rules (great production value). Last year I got into a discussion and I did a comparison or their reaction rules and the one I'm working on. Since FoF is a small unit engagement, whenever you react to fire it is going to feel like a few seconds advantage and it did when I played. For a game with an abstracted turn length it does give a pretty good feel for small arms exchange and interaction. However, reactions like FoF didn't allow me to do what I wanted for tank gunnery which is the timing in seconds because the factors like turret rotation and rate of fire are measured in seconds and I did not want to abstract them.
Andy,
The timing in seconds is critical at the moment enemy units come into LOS and within spotting range. That's when the play aid is used. Compare the Tiger to the T-34 turret rotation times and you'll see the difference.
If a tank or anti-tank gun is concealed far enough away not to be spotted and in ambush it could engage at long range. When their turn comes to fire (after any delay and aim time) they can elect to hold fire and track the target. On the turn it comes into the desired range or presents a flank shot they can shoot right away (no delay) because any delay or aim time is already handled. That's probably what the Brit tank commanders were describing. The target can react to the flash if he is still alive. So yes, when one side has enough time to spot, estimate the range, aim and shoot before the target even notices him he does have the initiative to shoot first and turret rotation does not enter into the action.
I use a timing mechanism. Other games use reaction, IGOUGO or initiative. All can work well enough in a game but only timing will synch all other units on the table to the same turn and not force players to wait around to be activated or their turn to come. Using one second turns for timing allows historical turret rotation and rate of fire without abstracting them or impacting playability with additional special rules or exceptions. I like that too, some people don't care. We can all get along together.
When the first shot misses or bounces and they start exchanging shots is when things get interesting too. Most games handle it with some type of activation, random turn or reaction check which can give a good feel and be playable. Personally I think that 1:1 engagement is determined as a timing issue (rate of fire, aim time and crew efficiency) and games with abstracted game turns or turns of 10-30 seconds cannot realistically handle the results of each shot interactively (at least to my satisfaction anyhow).
So far I've found using turns as a timing mechanism allows players the latitude and flexibility to interact and perform a variety of actions. The few timing factors are similar to die roll modifiers and no more complicated to use in a game.
When exchanging shots players can elect to trade accuracy for speed by shaving 1-3 seconds off of a shot to shoot before his opponent or a better crew have a few seconds advantage. Almost every game we've played a tank gets knocked out one turn before he is scheduled to fire. That's when players start second guessing, hurry their shot and then miss. That when the risk-reward decision backfires.
Let's say your Sherman is in a multi-unit engagement and a Panther off to your side rotates his turret towards you. That's an action you can react to on the turn it happens with an SA Check. The Sherman player can decide to engage or move and evade. Most likely he'll break off any fire order and move out to make the Panther miss. A long delay enough caused by being buttoned up or flanked may allow the Panther to get the shot off and the Sherman will not notice until the round hits. It's all about a measurable Time & Action, not a random die roll.
You can also perform shoot and scoot without special rules. Fire while halted and immediately place a movement marker, now you are a moving target. While moving reload and acquire your target (no turning or evading allowed if aiming). After 10-12 turns of moving halt, take a few more turns to aim, fire and then place a movement arrow and repeat. No need for ROF modifier or arbitrary accuracy penalty.
Opportunity fire works well as I mentioned previously.
I have all of the Phoenix Command books and they use 2 second turn phases. I tried the 2 seconds but the 1 second turns worked out just as well. I gave up on trying to play the system but I like the concepts.
Just one more thing. Historical WWII tank on tank engagements describe engaging and knocking out up to 3-4 of the enemy in one minute. Modern engagements with Abrams have done even better. I understand these were probably under ideal conditions in a target rich environment but the only game I'm aware of that allows engaging multiple targets in a single fixed turn length of firing with a single die roll is Panzer War. panzer-war.com
I think you could recreate those WWII engagement results using turns of 1-5 seconds as a timing mechanism. A turn of 5-10 seconds could be a "bound" like Andy mentioned. The longer the turn the more abstraction you need to do. Platoon and Company sized bases would use much longer turn or bound.
Thanks for the feedback and questions. I actually do encourage disagreement and differing viewpoints on how I can streamline and make it playable. You guys have really helped me to put together what I need to include in the video, including the formation examples for Art, ready by Monday(?).
Thanks,
Wolfhag
's favorite historical WWII theaters to game and model.
