"LSHM Texas - UltraCombat Modern rules review" Topic

Pete Atack from the Lone Star Historical Miniatures (LSHM) club of Texas recently reviewed the rules: UltraCombat Modern for the LSHM February Dispatch – here is his review:

Very interesting, thanks for the rules review, I appreciate it. I hadn't heard of these before, so this is very useful. One question though: is there any further information on how units/men activate?

V/R,
Jack

Hi Jack,

The game uses a concept of "elements" and the rules are basically three sets of rules tailored to which level of "element" you are playing.

The first element is the fireteam – this level of the game has you activating individual troops under the umbrella of a Fireteam organization. The second element is the squad – this level has you activating Fireteams under the umbrella of a Squad organization. The third element is the platoon – this level has you activating squads under the umbrella of a Platoon organization.

Within those levels elements are all activated the same way – via cards. Each element (individual, fireteam, squad) has a card that shows its stats that result in players having a hand of cards that you play each activation. If your element is better rated (Novice vs Veteran, for example), you go first. There are ways to modify this process via Doctrine Cards, but that is not a common occurrence.

Now that said… after a 2d play of the rules I do have some concerns / additional comments on how things play out with these rules. I shared these with Charlie and they will appear in the next newsletter. Again – this is my opinion based on two plays of the rules so your mileage may vary and any errors are obviously mine! :)

--

Circling back on this game. After the first shot at it I was not all that satisfied, so after getting some feedback on multiple questions I figured it was time for a second try.
Bottom line up front : I wouldn't currently recommend these rules and will only play with some specific House Rules.
Why?
First and a bit frustrating – you are going to have to guess the designers intent on a few aspects of the game as things are mentioned somewhat in passing, but are not clearly defined or carried thru completely in other sections or charts.
Overall I would say the rules read exceedingly well, but they just did not seem to hold up on the table and deliver the play experience I was hoping for.
I'll try not to get into the stuff I posted in December, but here are some additional comments.
Element cards for Fireteam level. There are not enough. You basically get 1 "flavor" of each type, so you can't have two SAW gunners that are both "Average" without making your own cards, altering the card, or making a note. Yes – minor, but now you are aware.
Doctrine cards. These add a neat aspect. But there is nothing in the rules that clearly says you take all the cards and build ONE deck that everyone draws from. Again pretty minor – but why should someone have to wonder when a clear sentence would have cleared it up instead of a player assuming (my confusing came from the fact that there are 4 equal sets of 13 cards – so… is that for one deck or does each player get his own deck?). In play they seem a bit disjointed – most say "play when you activate your element". Now for some that is fine considering the effect, but many are played and leave you hoping your opponent reacts to or takes an action against that element. So for defensive minded cards you are telegraphing the added 'skill' to your opponent who can then make a clear decision as to what to do (unless you play the card and don't have to tell your opponent what it says – again… take a guess at the intent).
I already ranted about the Scatter / Divergence Diagram (just save yourself and house rule it before you play). Similar but different…
AOE weapons are a complete mess. So if you have a template weapon (we'll talk about the RPG7 here), you fire; if you hit you have an 8" radius where all troops are considered in a Kill Zone and roll 3d20 for results. You have a 24" Damage Zone where all troops roll 1d20 for results. Now… both of those can be mitigated by Cover, but… that is a MASSIVE area of impact on the table. To visualize : if you are playing on a 4x4 table and fire an RPG at a target in the middle of the table, virtually the ENTIRE table is in that Damage zone bubble, including the firer and all his buddies. And in case you wondered – there are NO provisions for LOS or terrain blocking that effect.
Let me link to that thought. In the new vehicle PDF, the main cannon on a Main Battle Tank rolls the same number of damage dice in the KZ and DZ, but has a smaller blast radius (about 50% smaller). Expanding on that, why the rules did not include a section for vehicles firing on infantry is still a bit odd. Was this an oversight or design intent? No idea.
Continuing with the RPG7 and other light AT systems and how they play on the table. Your Element is given 3 Action Points to move, spot, shoot, etc… To fire an RPG7 costs 3 APs. You must Spot a target before firing (1AP). So in an activation, except for some corner cases, your RPG gunner will never be able to fire on a target unless an Officer or NCO has given him additional APs. I don't understand this in the grand scheme of things. Not sure what the intent is or what it is trying to reflect, but in play on the table it fails.
Where I will re-touch from the previous comments : the Morale system. I'm still not sure the section in the rules is "complete" and it does not seem to align with the charts in some cases (mainly how Hesitate and Pinned are concerned). And we can argue the morale impact of combat on troops, but I'm fairly confident in saying morale in this system is greatly overstated to the point of it being common for elements on the table to be damn near paralyzed with up to 4 different morale tokens & their impact on play. I don't feel it consistently captures real life and it does not deliver a smooth flowing game play experience, IMO.

Great insight Pete – thanks for the additional observations.

Pete,

Wow, thank you very much for the comprehensive review, that was very kind and helpful of you to share your experience and thoughts on the rules. Not to be unfair to the author(s), but I have to agree, from what you've written it would seem everything isn't as fleshed out as it could be. And it struck me as odd that one set of rules was trying to cover ‘elements' spanning individual troops, teams, and then squads; seems to me that probably helped cause the confusion as to how to handle elements receiving fire and their reaction to it in terms of morale.

Thanks again, and I'll keep my eyes open for more modern skirmish games/reviews.

V/R,
Jack

You're welcome, Jack.

At its core this is / can be a very solid set of rules. I'm still eager to see other player's comments once they start playing to see other opinions.

The basics of shoot-n-move, the d20 resolution, and the activation process are all pretty cool. But where my concerns pop up, things just seem to be solidly off the mark. To me it just seems like there was a disconnect between what is written into the rules and how those rules play out on the table.

But assuming there is no clarification of certain rules, then with some effort and house rules, I think this becomes a solid play on my table.

Regards,
Pete

Jack – that is the Texas way!!!

Gotcha Pete, and thanks again. I've got too many projects going on, so no time to jump into new rules that don't come highly recommended. I certainly play my fair share of modern skirmish; I tend to go with a modified "Five Men at Kursk" for quick shoot'em ups, "Black Ops" for Special Operations-type stuff with a stealth component, and "SOF Warrior" for crunchier stuff. Then use Ambush Alley/Force on Force occasionally, and 5Core Company Command more frequently, for platoon to company-sized actions.

Torokchar -Indeed it is! I'm up in DFW, by the way.

V/R,
Jack