"Balanced game of defend a town question bolt action" Topic

How many points or extra units do people use when playing a scenario that the objective is to take a town. I'm assuming the attacker would need more points or units for a balanced wargame to be obtained. Any suggestions please and thanks

We've found company-ish in attack v platoon-ish in defence works pretty well, but it's maybe worth allowing he defenders squads split into rife/LMG groups to get a better dice balance.

Normally an attacker should have 3:1 odds to successfully attack an enemy. But against a tow, I'd favor 5:1.

Jim

I always wonder about that 3:1 ratio. That's what was needed to mount an attack that will be successful. With that ratio, it's more of a certainty than a game. Plus defensive artillery fire and long range machine gun fire has been discounted by the time you reach the kind of ranges that you are dealing with in Bolt Action.
In Chain of Command the attacker gets twice as much support as the defender: that might be a couple of extra sections or other support units over the basic platoon-plus than each side has.

Actually, the 3:1 rule is for a 50/50 chance against a defender of roughly equal skill in prepared defenses, according to empirical analysis and some military manuals.

I'm reality, the 3:1 rule has been quoted for hundreds of years, for both linear and modern warfare, for strategic, operational, and tactical scales, and for various levels of defender preparation. Various empirical studies show that it's generally bunk: analysis of WWII operations roughly the scale of Operation Goodwood found that chances of success had a very small correlation with force ratios, roughly zero correlation with force densities (high attacker force densities primarily increased attacker losses in proportion to the increase in force density), and a high correlation with attacker proficiency advantages over the defender.

Not taking into account whether the defender has enough troops to defend the area – otherwise the attacker can infiltrate and destroy the defender in detail.

In game terms, 3:1 is usually overkill and hard to stop.

Closer to 2:1 tends towards an enjoyable game.

If you're GM'ing a scenario, it's always a good plan to have some potential reserve units for either side that can be brought in if the game is clearly becoming a runaway victory too early. If one side is facing a crushing defeat too soon into the game time, roll some dice at the start of the next turn and then bring in reserves to bolster them.

x2 for miniMo

I'm with miniMo also on this one. I mean, you want BOTH sides to have a chance, right? 2:1 Attackers.

MinoMo: +3

My experience with v2 is that even at 2:1 the attacker will quickly overwhelm the defender in a town. The very simple answer is HE vs units in buildings. 2000 points to 1000 points in buildings is a cake walk for the attacker. With buildings no longer providing a cover bonus OR extra protection to units in buildings I will simply spend my extra 1000 points on howitzers and SPGs. Hit each building with defenders in it with a couple 3" or 4" HE shots and knock the buildings down. I'll also have a massive dice advantage so by turn 2 or 3 I'll be able to move around the board with impunity. The only defense is to go down to halve the hits, which takes your units out of the game effectively anyways.

Not historical you say? Read up on Achen. Point blank SPG and ATG shots into buildings to clear the city. The Germans had infantry guns and several halftrack mounted guns that were intended for direct fire support to infantry operations.

Last year we did a D-Day beach assault of 1250 American vs 1000 German in trenches and bunkers. The Americans, moving in open ground most of the way, over ran the trenches by turn 6. This year we did 1100 vs 1000 and it was a close game, with the Americans reaching the trenches and barely holding off a counter attack due to the time limit really. I think 1250:1000 is probably the sweet spot for this particular scenario we run.

If you're making up the lists for the opponents and ‘balancing' the forces 2:1 might work, but I would probably to 1.5:1. If the attacker is making his own list, 1.5:1 may very well be too much…