"Rules recommendation for company level 1:1 games" Topic

Hello – I am looking for recommendations for Modern (current) rules that have the player controlling up to a reinforced company in a peer/near-peer environment in 1/285th figure scale in a 1:1 representation on the table. (including infantry) If the rules can work with multiple players each controlling a company all the better. I want the rules to cover supporting arms in a realistic fashion as well. Close air support and air transport should be represented on the table. I want command friction and rewards real world tactics. I'd like the morale function to also be believable as well (suppressions, pinning, etc.). I currently have SabreSquadron and Cold War Commander but want to see what else is out there.

Can I please ask that when you give your recommendation that you state what aspects you like about the rules and what you may not like or feel could be improved. Thanks in advance for your suggestions.

Fistful of TOWs can be played at 1:1 (TBH it *is* a 1:1 game disguised as a higher level game). I use it this way for WW2 but it covers up to today with the same rules (bonus!) and all the vehicle/troop data you need is in one book.

It definitely ticks all your boxes but one: command friction. Here is a detailed summary of version 2 I wrote:

link

The current version 3 is very close to this with some clean up in the artillery section.

Frankly, with as complex as the modenr battlefield si, your players will give you all the command friction you can take, if my experience is any guide.

"What part of hold the ridge did you think meant attack toward the river?"

Thanks EC for the recommendation. I'll look at FFT3 again. I discounted it due to not being 1:1.

What other recommendations are out there?

Flames of War v3 might work for you. There was a fan-made Moderns variant out there that I think can be found on the web.

Flames v4 is definitely a battalion-per-side game.

Ours (Maneouver Group) is a 1 to 1 for a company. It covers all of it, I think we'll. I would say it's strong point is realism. For instance tanks have as many limitations as they have advantages. HOWEVER it would not be suitable for multiple companies. It's an IGOUGO system so really only one player at a time. As the company could easily have a command team with support weapons,4 tanks as a platoon plus 2 platoons of infantry which if all deployed is 6 AFV's with 12 or more infantry teams that is a lot of kit on its own.

UshCha: the rules state that they are up to 2010. How do they deal with 2018+?

Oh, you might also want to check out Tomorrow's War (and just keep the really advanced stuff out of the game).

Like the other Ambush Alley games, it's written for up to a reinforced company per side, but will be complex at that level, especially if you have mechanized infantry on the table.

Private Matters, the rules were written in 2008 so we were being careful. To be honest we had got Battle management and drones in, so really not a lot more now just a lot more of it. Even now I would not use Hyperbaric warheads in the game, like tactical nukes it's too big really to make a plausible game at company level, certainly not one I would want to play. Interesting should I go for 2021? While lots of new weapons being put forward, BMS at man level, new 6.3mm calibre weapons they are not by a long way here. These seem a bit pointless as investments when some guys have not even got the best personal armour protection currently available. Much of what is new is intelligence gathering which to me is beyond the scope of our level of tabletop game.

I personally an not really interested in what if games that concentrate on technology.

A game with BMS on both sides is much harder, things happen faster and more data to process.

Could be an interesting thread about what is really out there. The Amarti new Russian tank is not in any way shape or form a production tank. What is really in production?

My target gaming audience are primarily active duty US Marines of various ranks. A fair amount has changed in the past ten years and what is coming out in the next couple years seems to be interesting. One of the greatest threats at the tactical level is the ability to disrupt battlefield management systems. That would impact games at company and even platoon level.

I'll buy a copy of Maneuver Group and compare it to the others.

Extra Crispy— do you make any modifications for playing at 1:1?

Private Matters, if you do go that far any, feedback good or bad as long as it's constructive is more than welcome.

Private Matter,
I have a copy of Maneuver Group. I think the reaction system it has gives a good reflection of being able to disrupt battlefield systems and enemy intentions.

If you want to implement some modern SigInt and EW rules please contact me. My son did 5 years with the 1st Radio Battalion with multiple deployments. I worked at one of those three letter intel agencies so I'm more than a little familiar with the equipment and techniques. These rules are a must if you are going to be using low-level infantry operations. You can contact me at:
treadheadgames AT g m a i l . com

Happy belated Marine Corps Birthday. Please take a picture of Camp Geiger for me the next time you pass by.

Wolfhag

Are there any YouTube videos on playing Manoeuvre Group. I've read through the rules and parts of it aren't making sense. My thinking is if I could see a demo the pieces would fall into place and make more sense.

Private Matters, I am afraid not. You can ask questions here or use the email in the rules, however I an away from base for the next few days on a different mail so I will take a few days to respond in the latter case.

I'm going to ask my questions here as it may help others who may have the same questions or may be interested in purchasing the rules.

I am having trouble understanding the "Assualt" process. Can you please walk through a couple of examples covering a couple of different scenarios of how this works?

No problem, I did re write this for version 2 same stuff but hopefully clever.

1) pick an enemy element to assault. Preferably one that is suppressed or otherwise it may go badly if you have no other advantages.
2) declare the assault (not reverseable). You say who is assaulting. As it's IGOUGO the elements need to not have gone or they need to get an extra go from the command element.
3) if the target element has not yet gone this bound it loses it's go (marker turned over) this can if you get it right give an affect of impetus, you go again before he gets a go.
4) target of assault decides to stand or run off. If it runs off it does so now. It takes a reaction, which in these rules is likely to degrade the elements performance if you have already suppressed it.
5) Normaly you launch adults from a short distance. If you are close and the luck is are with you, you get into contact with the enemy. If you are feeling lucky (or daft) you can try and move up in another mode. However you risk more as you are exposed longer. Similarly you may not get their in one go even if you are in assault if you are unlucky and its a long way away. In that case the target gets to role and see if he can stop you or do you some damage, before you get in. How likely he is to shoot back depends on his faceing (can't shoot if not in arc) and how suppressed he is. Resolve the shooting and then role to see if you get in at the second attemp. If you fail you stop where you reached or can go back to the start. If some but not all get in, those not getting there can try again but only count half strength.
6) if you get in compare factors attacker role a random deviation (an approximation of a normal distribution) and resolve damage, this is no fun for the loser. If the attacker wins he can either stay where he is or role to pursue, it's an easier roll if he ran away and you took an empty position. If the pursuet goes ahead the retreating unit has to run away, bad news as this is another hit to his leadership whatever ( assuming you did a good job supressing him before you started). If you catch him fight if not it's the end and do final checks and play moves on.

It sounds far harder than it looks, actually it's fairly intuitive, I hope!
2