Help support TMP

"Schwere Kompanie" Topic

8 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 WWII Rules Message Board

Areas of Interest

World War Two on the Land

805 hits since 9 Sep 2019
©1994-2020 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

monongahela10 Sep 2019 4:34 p.m. PST

Wanting to buy a copy of the Schwere Kompanie rules. Is the ritterkrieg.blogspot legit? Or another option? Thanks.

Dynaman878910 Sep 2019 5:25 p.m. PST

It still looks legit but I could swear it was moved (perhaps it was the ongoing new versions you get was moved). The following facebook group is updated regularly and references back to the page.


Mark 111 Sep 2019 5:04 p.m. PST

Is the ritterkrieg.blogspot legit?

Is it legit? OK, let's see, how could that question be addressed…

Troy Ritter is legit. I've known him as an online friend for years. He is a wargamer's wargamer. I am just now finishing up some GHQ Pershing tanks I bought from him when he left the 6mm scale to focus on larger stuff. It was a loss for the 6mm community, as his skills in painting miniatures are really amazing. Really. Amazing. And I learned a lot from him. (And I bought some stuff from him, and have no complaints about any of the transactions.)

He is the author of the Schwere Kompanie rules. The rules are legit. His authorship is legit.

Is the blogspot legit? Well, I'm gonna go out on a limb and say yeah, I believe it's legit. It's his work that is showcased -- of this I am quite confident. I recognize his handywork. Could someone else have grabbed a bunch of his pics and forged up a blogspot website for the fortune to be made making fraudulent sales of a miniatures rulebook? Well, maybe, but I'm gonna say not too entirely likely.

It might be that it has languished since he put up his facebook page. But it's still there. There's still a forum under the blogspot page. In 30 seconds of wandering around it I didn't find a stack of dead links. My anti-virus didn't scream at about nefarious pop-ups. So looks pretty OK to me.

But I've never made a purchase from it. So I'm only guessing if it's legit.

(aka: Mk 1)

Thresher01 Supporting Member of TMP13 Sep 2019 6:00 p.m. PST

Any reviews on these rules?

Dynaman878915 Sep 2019 5:53 a.m. PST

Not that I know of. I really like them. Take ASL, boil it down to a manageable set of rules for miniatures, and you have Schwere Kompanie. Infantry combat is very different (rolling for hits instead of using a firepower table). There is (or at least was) a demo version of the rules featuring T34s vs Panzer IVs that give a good view of how the armor system works.

Mark 120 Sep 2019 4:39 p.m. PST

I have read the rules (years ago), but never played them.

Some folks look for solo gaming potential. I don't, so did not look for any solo-friendly aspects and have no opinion on that issue.

They seemed to be a reasonably interesting set for combined arms combat. That is one of my most desired aspects of rulesets -- that they don't overbalance towards armor (common in micro-scale games) or infantry (common in larger scales). I seek rules that play well for armor vs. armor, infantry vs. infantry, armor vs. infantry, infantry with some armored support, and/or armor with some infantry support. Schwere Kompanie looked to my reading as if infantry and armor would integrate on the game table particularly well. I can't say as I really remember any impressions of artillery or air.

As I recall I also got the impression that the rules might play pretty quickly and fluidly at company- and reinforced company-sized formations.

But it did not look like the game mechanisms would scale gracefully to larger games with more players. That was, and is, another of my most desired aspects in rulesets. I seek rules that play well with 2 players at about a company per player, but also allow me to get more players together and run a battalion per side -- that's when things really get fun for me.

That last factor is/was why I didn't start playing the rules. No criticism of where they are, but they didn't go where I wanted my ruleset to go.

(aka: Mk 1)

captaincold6930 Sep 2019 6:43 p.m. PST

Mark, is this why you chose Mein Panzer instead?

I also have SK, and for solo play only, I'm trying to decide between SK (I own, read YEARS ago) Mein Panzer (just bought, read and they seem like fun) and IABSM (own, read multiple times but have never played, but enjoyed Chain of Command).

The IABSM FB page has a neat little write up where they've incorporated the CoC activation dice mechanism to IABSM.

Anyways, decisions, decisions

Mark 102 Oct 2019 2:38 p.m. PST

Mark, is this why you chose Mein Panzer instead?

As I said, I have read the SK rules, but never played them. I could see that they would not scale gracefully to multiple players per side, and that was, for me, a requirement in my rules. So I put them aside.

That's why I didn't chose SK.

Now why did I choose Mein Panzer? My selection criteria were about the same as I described for SK. I don't know if MP is better than SK on some of these issues, because I haven't played SK. But SK would not have managed the scaling, and that is done very well by MP.

MP has a very interesting game turn mechanism, that really works well for keeping multiple players involved all the time. It is reasonably fast-play -- OK this one is a hard one for me because I just LOVE all the details, but in reality you just can't game a company + each if your rules worked at an "all the details" level. MP has a nice balance of details vs. playability. Is it the best? IDK, but it's balanced enough to play pretty fast and still give me a rewarding feel that I'm learning how Pz IIIs would have to fight to win vs. T-34s.

I really like the infantry combat in MP. Really. Infantry combat has a feel, some characteristics, that makes infantry something other than slow, fragile, weak tanks. Infantry formations are HARD to kill. They take casualties, and they fall back, but they don't disappear. And when they fall back, it's usually because you, the gamer, pull them back. You pull them back because you just can't stand up to the firepower you are taking. You feel the pressure, and eventually you give in to the pressure and pull them back to the next covered position, hoping to get them back ahead of the enemy's advance, so they get a few moments to recover their wits before they have to fight again. This is SO different from pulling them back because you got some die role on a table with 23 modifiers told you you had to pull them back.

Artillery is fast and interesting. How it occurs within the game turn sequence rewards the thoughtful approach.

Almost everything in MP starts with troop quality. I like that. If your troop quality is better, it's a little easier to spot the enemy, to hit your target, to survive being hit, to call artillery, to have the artillery be on target, to perform engineering tasks, to remove suppression, etc. etc. Not a lot easier, just a little easier. But across several platoons of your force, and across all the things you want your troops to do during a battle, it makes a difference. Better troops get better results.

The rules are scalable to greater depth and detail, too. The core rules are pretty straight-forward. But there are MANY detailed expansions. So you can make the rules more complex if you'd like. I tend to stick mostly to the core rules.

The commercial terms aren't too bad either. Yes you'll want the full rulebook and WW2 equipment handbook (if you're doing WW2). That sets you back a few bucks. But then you get access to download a bunch of freeby stuff (extra game tokens, scenarios, optional rules, etc.) and you get free updates. The ODGW forums are adequate for questions to the rules authors, and among users. (Although not nearly to the level of TMP in terms of daily interactions.)

I also play JagdPanzer 2 rules, as others in my area had chosen this ruleset (and we provided feedback to the owner of the rules / author of the update as beta testers). These rules also scale to more players for battalion-sized games, and are reasonably fast play as well. But they don't have the innovation in the game turn, or the simple but robust troop quality issues that MP does so well. So while I'm happy playing JP, if I get to chose the rules I go with MP.

Just my thoughts. Your tankage may vary.

(aka: Mk 1)

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.