"Lots of Combat Patrol (TM) at Historicon in July" Topic

I just got done going through the PEL for Historicon, and I was surprised at the number of games that will be using those rules. I have attached images of the sheets I built. A couple of years ago, these all fit on one sheet.

Give the rules a try. I don't think you'll be disappointed. Though the review overemphasized a lot of negative things early in the review, the recent LittleWarsTV video review of Combat Patrol gave it one of the highest scores they have ever given a set of rules. If you stick with the review to the end, you'll see a lot of very positive comments.

I am signed up for several of the games. The HAWKS run some of the best organized convention games I have ever played in. CP rules are great, easy to pick up and the games flows quickly.

Thanks for the kind words, Tanker11. We look forward to seeing you at Historicon.

By the way, we are looking for folks to run Combat Patrol games at conventions outside the HMGS East area.

Played a game of Combat Patrol at Fall In 2023. The WW1 scenario was set in Africa and featured German native levy troops holding the high ground in improvised trenches while British Punjab infantry was tasked with dislodging them from these positions. The GM interpreted the rules and awarded the entrenched Germans as being in concrete bunkers (an icon that appears on 40 out of 50 cards in this set). The attacking Punjabi's were moving across open ground and uphill. The Germans did not need to roll to sight, but the attacking infantry did. Casualties were cataclysmic. I assume the GM made some technical errors such as not providing any sort of soft cover for the attackers and not making the sighted, fired upon Germans who were hit according to the card pulled to take a marker for being stunned. Both sides drew cards for bolt action rifles that read jammed. How does a bolt action rifle jam? There was a charge made by a company of five men against one solitary defender of a trench that was repelled by that solitary defender. Not only did the company fall back, but they also incurred loss and were given stunned markers. Again, the GM gave the attacker the cover awarded to a cement bunker, which obviously they were not. Based on this experience, I would most definitely not play this rule system again nor would I encourage anyone else from playing or purchasing.

I am sorry you did not have a great time in one of the games you played at Fall In!.

However, I don't think calling out a GM in a public forum is a classy move. I am sure the GM spent a lot of time painting figures and terrain, learning the rules, transporting them to and from the convention and giving up their time to host a game. I don't know if you have hosted a game at a major convention or not, but I can tell you it is not easy. It is also a little nerve wracking to welcome people you don't know (who may or may not know the rules) into your game.
Who knows, this may have been the first time the GM had run a game at a convention. A few words of encouragement could have gone a long way.

Sure, things may not have gone perfectly in your opinion. But my preference is to have a polite conversation with the GM after the game and offer constructive comments. I know that I certainly welcome feedback, good or bad.

Also posting your opinions of the rules is fair enough, but linking it to a particular GM is, in my opinion, not really the right way of going about it.

I certainly appreciate all of the players out there that take that next step and host a game at a convention. I hope that this particular GM decides to host again.

This is a pretty extreme reaction to a single gaming experience. There are any number of reasons for your perceived bad gaming experience.

In the end its just a game and should not be taken this seriously. Your opinion may vary.

TRU

I have some friends who have played Combat Patrol and liked it. I have not played it yet.

Wolfhag

I guess Ragnar needs to play Jupiter's Cox*.

Quote from the post by Ragnor Lothair:

Played a game of Combat Patrol at Fall In 2023. The WW1 scenario was set in Africa and featured German native levy troops holding the high ground in improvised trenches while British Punjab infantry was tasked with dislodging them from these positions.
1. The GM interpreted the rules and awarded the entrenched Germans as being in concrete bunkers (an icon that appears on 40 out of 50 cards in this set). The attacking Punjabis were moving across open ground and uphill. The Germans did not need to roll to sight, but the attacking infantry did. Casualties were cataclysmic.
2. I assume the GM made some technical errors such as not providing any sort of soft cover for the attackers and
3. not making the sighted, fired upon Germans who were hit according to the card pulled to take a marker for being stunned.
4. Both sides drew cards for bolt action rifles that read jammed. How does a bolt action rifle jam?
5. There was a charge made by a company of five men against one solitary defender of a trench that was repelled by that solitary defender. Not only did the company fall back, but they also incurred loss and were given stunned markers. Again, the GM gave the attacker the cover awarded to a cement bunker, which obviously they were not.
6. Based on this experience, I would most definitely not play this rule system again nor would I encourage anyone else from playing or purchasing.

Response from DRE, GM: I have numbered Ragnor Lothair's comments above, for clarity as to my responses.

First of all, I take players' feedback very seriously. Let me thank the players who stayed after the game's conclusion and gave immediate critique. Chief among these was the youngest player, who has participated in close to half a dozen of the games that I have put on during the past few years, using various sets of rules. His comments were not only insightful and incisive but also encouraging. I regret that I failed to actively solicit the same debriefing process with Ragnor Lothair.

Despite the casualties incurred by the Allies, the game was a draw. Neither side achieved its objectives. The German-led Askari were not charged with simply holding the trenches they occupied; they were also to counterattack and drive the Allies from the field. This they did not do.

Thanks to Martyn K for his kind words, including about my possible inexperience. Had it been my first time to run a game, I might have been ready to quit at this point, but not so. I have run one or two games at nearly every HMGS-East con and Barrage! con during the past 10 years and know how to ride the waves. It does seem, however, that my performance was less than optimal in this case.

1. My designation of trenches as concrete bunkers and foxholes resulted from a brain f*rt in reading incorrectly my own game notes, which stated that entrenched troops should receive only the cover benefit of foxholes. The bunker icon, per my own game notes, should have been reserved solely for figures on the downhill side of the cliffs --- generally speaking, the Allied attackers. That was an oversight in the heat of battle, so to speak, for which I apologize.

2. Feedback from the players has encouraged me to rethink the effect of light brush for cover from fire. I think the differing effects of light and heavy brush in terms of sighting is about right, being in accord with eyewitness accounts of bush fighting in East Africa regarding the difficulty of actually seeing the enemy. However, with regard to the effects of fire on target stands located in either light OR heavy brush, in future Combat Patrol East Africa games I propose to have the "tree" cover icon on the card result in cover from fire in both types of brush.

3. My recollection is that during the game in question any stand hit by fire, whether it suffered an effect of being wounded or incapacitated, or did not suffer any physical harm, was nevertheless marked as being stunned, in accordance with the rules. My recollection could be in error, of course. In any case, during the briefing prior to the game both sides were informed that a hit, whether damaging or not, would result in a stun.

4. The "out of ammo" result on the cards can be read as whatever glitch in firearm operation is appropriate. Perhaps thinking of it as some other situation for a bolt-action rifle (such as panic-stricken failure to load properly) would be more acceptable.

5. Hand-to-hand combat is indeed as it was played. As the author wrote, "The modifier is for outnumbered and is +2 no matter how many attackers. This was based on a conversation with the NCOs at the US Army combative ms course (hand to hand)". Five against one, and the one rolled a number that with modifiers gave him a higher total than the attackers with their modifiers. The man likely got an Iron Cross (posthumous).

6. I hope that, on the basis of this one experience, Ragnor Lothair does not write off the fine series of scenario books, Skirmish Campaigns and Skirmish Elite (from which this scenario was adapted by combining two of them), nor that he discounts Combat Patrol as a game system.

I urge anyone reading this thread to view the WW2 orientation to the basic rules of Combat Patrol, as recorded by the author. YouTube link

Surdu 2005 wrote: By the way, we are looking for folks to run Combat Patrol games at conventions outside the HMGS East area.

Upon arrival in Albuquerque late December for a four-month stay, I will incite Gerard and others to continue our CP games on a regular basis. I'm taking along lots of FJ figures, ANZAC PW's and RAF volunteers, plus the usual Kiwi suspects, to play some more of the Crete Skirmish Elite scenarios.

If I'm not mistaken, Gerard ran a CP game at a con in AZ not too long ago.

I also obtained Feudal Patrol from Dennis at Fall-In! and hope to find someone with medieval figures in New Mexico. Having those rules will incentivize me, once I return to PA, to paint the El Cid figures I obtained from Gary at AGC Wargaming several conventions ago.

Don't let it bother you in the least. We all make mistakes as players and as game masters.

TRU

Don't let it bother you in the least. We all make mistakes as players and as game masters.

How well I know! Thanks for your support, TRUgamer, as well as Martyn K and Wolfhag.

I hope many more people will discover Combat Parol and its derivations.

Just as a belated aside: Bolt action rifles can most certainly jam. Lee-Enfields infamously suffer from rim-lock if the charger clips are loaded improperly, and the head of the cartridge case can sometimes detach when fired and stick in the chamber. Even the Kar98, which is a somewhat more modern design, can jam if crud gets in the chamber or the bolt's tolerances become off.