Help support TMP


"Hind Commander or Hind and Seek?" Topic


10 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Cold War (1946-1989) Message Board



493 hits since 13 Aug 2017
©1994-2017 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

The Membership System will be closing for maintenance in 11 minutes. Please finish anything that will involve the membership system, including membership changes or posting of messages.

Todd63613 Aug 2017 11:08 a.m. PST

Anyone have experience with both? Aspect of both interest me. HC covers more nations, but doesn't seem to have any support. Post seem to be 5+ years old. Like aspects of H&S but seems to be limited to the Soviet/Afghanistan conflict. More current and looks like there would be support.
Is HC more of an air game with land support and H&S more of a land game with air support?
Ideally, I would like to use 3mm or 6mm figures which doesn't seem to be an issue with either.
Opinions/thoughts?

stephen m13 Aug 2017 4:01 p.m. PST

I do not have HC but I do have H&S but have yet to play it. I have lots of period micro armour but no terrain or infantry! One thing that makes the game stand out is how your forces interact with civilians.

Scale is 1" to 20m, units are squads, individual weapons, and vehicles, time scale is up to a minute. From what I have seen of the games the designer played (and posted here and elsewhere) it looks like 4' x 4' is minimum workable table size. This matches well with the weapons ranges, infantry weapons up to a couple feet and crew served weapons and mortars up to five feet. Terrain is mountains, villages and what the designer calls area terrain (think anything which can grant cover or concealment). This could be crops, broken ground, orchards, forests (in Afghanistan I really do not know). There is no provision for combat in built up areas. This is insurgency out in the rough.

There is a large section of the rules devoted to creating scenarios. Forces, set up, typical terrain layouts, troop dispositions and victory requirements.

It is communists vs Mujahadeen. This is not Europe but could be applied to any insurgency with a little thought. It is oriented towards campaign play in that your actions help or hinder your reputation. This in turn affects how the locals view you and what level of support they provide either the insurgents or the national government troops.

The insurgents have the ability to melt away when the going gets rough but whether they can escape without losses is not predetermined. You buy forces and can save some (up to most) of your "points" for chances at special forces or abilities. You can also use some of your special assets to counter your opponents. Sort of a bidding war on scenario set up. I haven't analysed the rules enough to determine how well the Soviet side is able to "win the hearts and minds" of the locals (proper counterinsurgency techniques) as opposed to how they operated in Afghanistan by depopulating the countryside in an effort to rid the insurgents of support, both military and morale.

Please ask any questions. I am sure I am missing or misinterpreted some aspects and am willing to reread and address.

Todd63613 Aug 2017 5:56 p.m. PST

The reputation "track" is what drew me to the game vs. shoot up everything you see mentality.
Is there hidden movement or units?
Any opportunity reaction?
Is it mainly ground units with air support?
I know it varies, but how many units would make up a force?
Is it random activation? I saw a post with cards on the table.
Sorry for all the questions.
Thanks

stephen m13 Aug 2017 6:13 p.m. PST

The reputation track is one of the really neat ideas, along with the handling of "where is the insurgent/where did he go" and not at all a one sided benefit. But be brutal and nobody is helping you, either side, so human shields is not an option for the insurgents either.

No problem with the questions but remember I have only read it a couple times and not played yet.

Yes, hidden movement and the ability of the insurgents to vanish is well handled. Basically they can go hidden and are represented by a counter. If the opponent gets within visual range the counter is replaced by the unit(s). At any time the player can reveal the unit but within a range from the counter and the counter can move so exactly where they can pop up is suspect. If I remember correctly if the opponent gets a visual on the counter to expose it then it has to be placed at the last position of the counter or very close. There are hidden ambush and IED set ups possible at the start of ambush scenarios. It seemed a good blend of forces being able to evaporate if not being tracked but without immunity when being forced to move.

I don't remember how opportunity actions were handled.

IIRC you can buy ground and heli forces but artillery (off board) and air strikes were more of a chance and result of the randomized scenario generation.

It varied based on points buying but the feel is platoon to battalion level with the emphasis on company size engagements. Just where I like it.

I don't remember the activation but it didn't stand out as awful, which I have seen a lot of lately. The cards may have been part of the scenario set up, the bidding and drawing of "opportunity" forces or conditions. I don't remember but you may have been able to play them during the game. Sort of now I play my benefit card, I have a weapons cache here with XX weapon, or I play my card and now my informants in the town you pissed off last month will expose X number of your hidden forces within X of the village here. Not actual just what sort of things might be available.

Hope this helps.

Todd63613 Aug 2017 6:34 p.m. PST

Thanks. Think I will order the printed version!

stephen m13 Aug 2017 6:44 p.m. PST

I wanted to buy the combo print and pdf when it was on sale for just the cost of the print but it was going to cost $20 USD to get the print copy up to me! Waaah!

SovietCanadian15 Aug 2017 8:39 a.m. PST

Todd636, you are correct in that Hind Commander is mostly air units with some ground units as support, while Hind & Seek is ground units with some air support.

From what I recall Hind Commander is ALL about rotary wing aircraft, so fixed wing (jets) don't really make much appearance, while ground units are few and mostly abstracted (along the lines of one stand representing a platoon, with only a handful of stats, just enough to differentiate tanks, APCs, trucks, AAA, etc) and are mostly there to provide targets/objectives or some AA fire.

As Stephen M has said, Hind & Seek is a insurgency warfare game, and he has done a good enough job describing it I will not bother to. I will say that the cards you recall may have been for assets that either side had purchased (air/artillery strikes, blocking forces preventing escape from certain map edges, etc) to remind them that they had them.

Lion in the Stars15 Aug 2017 9:38 p.m. PST

May have to check out Hind and Seek…

alan lockhart Supporting Member of TMP16 Aug 2017 2:26 a.m. PST

Having been involved in a small (non-commercial) way with H&S, I can certainly vouch for the amount of effort that went into the development of the rules (we got to version 29 or so, if I recall correctly).

stephen m16 Aug 2017 6:06 p.m. PST

Any of you in Ontario?

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.