"Differences between the Editions of Command Decision" Topic

As some pointed out in my TMP link last thread, there have been many editions of Command Decision and each edition has its own fans.

I'm curious to learn about those differences. It is inevitably with any ruleset that most people will generally have only the latest version in their head, but please stretch back your memories and dust off those old boxed sets to provide details about the older editions as well. How would you describe the changes in each iteration of Command Decision?

Please comment on any of these sets:

• Command Decision 1st Edition (1986)
  
• Combined Arms (1988)
  
• Over the Top (1990)
  
• Command Decision 2nd Edition (1992)
  
• Command Decision 3rd Edition (1998)
  
• Command Decision: Test of Battle (2006)

I liked first edition, never saw the need to make further changes. Except to fix the goof over when to make certain rolls, which the designer assumed were once per turn, but the rules said once per phase, as I dimly recall.

GW said Combined Arms (modern warfare) was messed up, but I never understood what the error was.

Over the Top is WWI, seemed fine to me.

I started playing CD when it first came out. At that time, I didn't have much of a collection, but a buddy of mine had a large collection of ROCOs. His goto game was Tractics. I was enthused when a game came out at a higher level – model/stand = platoon and ME is a company – which allowed you to play more actions you read about, involving a brigade/regiment of a couple of battalions. Also, it made infantry actually have a role, and introduced C2 and more realistic morale (my aforementioned "treadhead" buddy was done with CD the first time we played it, and one of his tank companies retreated due to small arms fire on a 1 in 10 chance – he wasn't having any of the idea that tankers would get nervous when fired at by small arms, even if it was likely that same fire could just as easily be an AT weapon like a bazooka or panzerfaust. And that it was just a bad roll…). I'm not going to say anything about Over the Top; never played it or any WWI ground for that matter.

The best thing about 1st Edition was that direct fire (DF) was pretty simple. IIRC, you had a basic to hit number, and if the target was in cover, you halved it. Perhaps a little coarse for some people, but it was quick, even if there were a lot of range bands. The effect of fire on stands, i.e. number of hits to force it back or eliminate it, was related to troop quality, which was a nice innovation. The order/C2 system was also innovative, and there was plenty of movement on the table top (Frank Chadwick's quote in the Designer's Notes is "movement is good", and I couldn't agree more). Speed of play was an issue, in no small part because IIRC a stand could fire in multiple fire phases (I might be misremembering this…).

2nd Edition was more polished. Direct fire became slower due to more finely detailed mods, but I believe it was this version where it changed to a stand only firing once per turn in one fire phase. Effects of fire and morale were unchanged, but other aspects, such as artillery, air support, paratroopers, etc. were expanded/codified. At that time, I did play some modern stuff. GDW's TAC Force had been the goto set, but we switched to and enjoyed Combined Arms (CA) for all of the same reasons related to switching from Tractics for WWII. I remembered CA essentially being CD 2nd Edition for modern, I didn't recall it came out first.

3rd Edition is where they started trying to speed up play. The main change I recall is for DF they shrunk down the number of range bands (to four?), and tried to make the to hit number in each range band consistent. The overall focus of the rules remained the same however.

TOB was a fairly major departure, which they did in no small part to compete with games like FoW. They introduced a points system to appeal to the FoW/pickup up game people, but did try to keep historical units as the basis. They kept the streamlined range bands from 3rd Ed, but changed the effect of fire mechanic to involve a die roll (it became possible, however unlikely, for a Green stand to stick it out for awhile or an Elite stand to be eliminated after one hit). Some people liked that change, some didn't. I believe it was in TOB they also expanded they idea/function of DF HE suppressive fire.

It's been quite awhile since I played any version of CD, especially the earlier ones, so hopefully I'm not too off base on what I wrote…

Most of the changes through time have been to streamline processes and remove table clutter.

TOB (first printings) had a points/scenario system. more recent printings do not have this.

I've played CD from the start and like where it has gone. Combined Arms and Over the Top can be used with TOB with a few edits (available from the Forum).

!st edition: 3 fire phases, cumulative hits on infantry stands, armor hits damage (-1 rate of fire), disable (knocked out but recoverable) or destroy (catastrophic kill) depending on amount of armor penetration. Small arms fire is a slightly different procedure than other fires as is close assault. HE direct fire is two separate die rolls for determining effect. Spotting is by D10 based on target category, spotter type and range. 9 range bands for direct fire. Simple air attack and AAA fire. For it's time, it was a very innovative set of rules. I'm biased as I got a playtest credit.

Combined Arms is Command Decision 1.5. Mostly the same as 1st edition with modern weapons added. Had a more complicated air system.

Over the Top is 1st edition with some minor changes related to the WW1 period.

Second edition tidied up the rules and added the order of battle book. Armor damage is changed to 1 hit, 2 hits or destroyed depending on penetration with the hits having the same effect as hits on troops. This made it easier to knock out low quality armor stands. A detailed air system like Combined Arms was added.

3rd edition was a major re-write of the rules. Down to 2 fire phases, close fire removed. Only 4 range bands for direct fire with small arms using the same rules as other fire. Close assault is now just another form of fire. The command phase was moved from the beginning of the turn to before the morale phase at the end of the turn. HE direct fire is simplified. The spotting system does get more complicated in this edition. The air system gets more involved. There is an amphibious landing system with landing boats and ships. I feel that this edition has the most "chrome" added to it. This is the only version to include the Japanese in the base game. 3rd edition only has a small order of battle book but has the biggest scenarios.

4th edition is a slimmer, faster version of 3rd edition. Movement is now I go/ You go instead of simultaneous. Stands no longer accumulate hit markers, they are destroyed or fine. HE fire suppresses target stands. Spotting no longer requires a die roll, if you are in range you are spotted. HE direct fire is only one die roll. Morale categories are simplified. Overall it plays quicker without losing the feel of Command Decision. The first printing had a point value system for competitive games. There are 6 late war US-German scenarios and 6 43-44 Eastern Front scenarios included. Test of Battle Games has several campaign guides and order of battle books supporting 4th edition or any other platoon level game for that matter.

Striker II was a modified version of 2nd edition. This changed the player role from battalion to platoon or company commander with stand representing fire teams or squads and individual vehicles or heavy weapons. The rules and weapons values let you fight from WW1 through the far-future. These rules were written to support the Traveller: the new era SFRPG.

I hope this helped. I've been playing Command Decision for nearly 40 years now in one form or another and have never found a set of rules I like better. If you want to play as a colonel versus as an LT., this is the way to go.

I've played CD 1-IV. We played a ton of II and III, and while we missed the range gradations of II we liked the speed of play and clean system. Test of Battle had just come out when I moved away so I only have a bit of an impression, mostly good.

I thought I did but apparently I forgot to say:

Thank you jekinder6 and codiver for your very useful writeups! They have helped me a lot to understand the various editions of Command Decision. Cheers!

One big difference from CD III to CD IV (TOB) is that being pinned in CD III could be a result of being fired upon (result = fall back pinned), whereas in CD IV, being pinned is strictly a morale result. So in CD IV, a stand that is forced back by fire is not pinned. To me, this was a great improvement for attackers.

Our group still plays CD II. We've tried IV but we are not liking the 6-12-18-xx range bands. We did like the prep fire phase for HE type weapons firing directly, however the rules never quite explained if the -2 suppression marker was an automatic hit, whether you needed to roll to hit and whether you could damage the target or just put a suppression on it.
To this day I still have no clue…

Just our .02 on the subject.

The 4th, TOB, edition is the best overall. I address the pro & con here:

link

We did like the prep fire phase for HE type weapons firing directly, however the rules never quite explained if the -2 suppression marker was an automatic hit, whether you needed to roll to hit and whether you could damage the target or just put a suppression on it.

Prep fire by HE is an automatic hit for suppression purposes only, suppressing one stand (-2) that is designated as the target. Rolling for a hit to potentially cause actual damage is done in the usual way. If an actual hit results from the die roll, there is a second roll as usual to determine the effect of the hit: no effect, forced back, or eliminated.

Some comments on what codiver wrote (above) plus some observations of my own.

2nd Edition was more polished. I believe it was this version where it changed to a stand only firing once per turn in one fire phase.

CD2 refined a lot of CD1 details. For example, more gradations of Troop Quality were added, raising the number to 6. By the way, firing only once per turn was not introduced until CD3.

TOB was a fairly major departure, which they did in no small part to compete with games like FoW. They introduced a points system to appeal to the FoW/pickup up game people, but did try to keep historical units as the basis. They kept the streamlined range bands from 3rd Ed, but changed the effect of fire mechanic to involve a die roll (it became possible, however unlikely, for a Green stand to stick it out for a while or an Elite stand to be eliminated after one hit). Some people liked that change, some didn't. I believe it was in TOB they also expanded the idea/function of DF HE suppressive fire.

I think it's important to distinguish CD4 from TOB. It seems to me that CD4 refers to the version of the rules, while TOB is more of what codiver describes above: a way to set up more balanced games for tournament play while allowing players to have discretion about the makeup of the forces. I think the TOB part was where Glenn Kidd was more involved -- hence the dual authorship credit that is absent in the earlier versions. Glenn may want to chime in and correct me.

As for rolling a die to determine fire effect, I never did like the predictability of so many hits creating steps of stand deterioration based on troop quality. I feel that the die roll injects a salubrious element of uncertainty. For example, in one of the first CD4 games I played, a green Italian stand stood up against one or more elite Australian stands for at least a turn (or two, IIRC) which SHOULD be possible even if highly unlikely.

CD4 IMO improved by differentiating a Pin as being a morale result and not a hit result. The latter, I think, made attacking even more difficult in earlier versions. Being forced back by a hit is to me a more accurate reflection of a temporary setback for a stand (that can have further harmful effects on that stand's company later in the turn when Morale is rolled).

Yes, codiver is correct in saying that CD4 (as I choose to call it) introduced Prep Fire. Even more important IMO were the IDF rules that brought artillery fire into line with the idea that a lot of HE suppresses units and channels movement, while also to a lesser degree having the potential to inflict real damage and affect morale. I think this feature reflects much of the literature about actual HE indirect fire in WW2.

Greg Novak's *Over the Top* was a good version of CD1 (also useful for CD2) for WW1. It was the only source for years, and I've successfully run several of the scenarios in it, using CD3 and CD4.

The primary WW1 books for CD4 are the ones that Jessee Scarborough has produced for the West and East Fronts in 1914. These contain not only scenarios but also rules supplements for the ways in which WW1 differed from WW2, especially in terms of artillery, machine guns and cavalry, not to mention the lack of radios.

And, for the record, I agree with Bill Owen that CD4 is the best set of CD rules so far. Your mileage may vary.

Interesting observations! I've actually completed my review of the various editions since this initial post a year ago and I've settled on CDIII as the best fit for me. I appreciate the work that was put into CDIV and would say every edition is worth playing and has its merits, but I personally didn't like the things that CDIV "added" and find CDIII to be the best combination of quick playing yet still having detail in the right parts. CDIII also has a great old-school feel while still being a very tight set of rules… CDIV borrows a number of ideas from games that were popular in the early 2000's and ends up feeling like a 2000's era ruleset as a result, despite having an 80's rules skeleton.

Regarding the "predictability" of fire effects that you say, I actually found the CDIV suppression mechanics to be far too mechanistic and predictable. I did add a house rule to CDIII to include suppression, without making it a guarantee: essentially, two pips (a roll of 1 or 2) that would have caused a "hit" on the d10 attack roll will only pin the target personnel stand instead if the weapon is SA or HE. This has the benefit of making infantry a little more survivable (particularly on the attack, as you mention) while introducing a pinning mechanic that is not guaranteed. I've posted to full rule (and its exclusions) elsewhere on this forum. It is working well for me so far!

And none of this should be read as an indictment of CDIV. It's more so something I have personally recognized over the years in the hobby… I can scarcely find a bigger myth than the idea that "every edition represents an iterative improvement and clean-up of earlier editions." The reality of the matter is that no game is designed in a vacuum, whether that is the initial edition or the umpteenth one. Every new edition comes up in a certain time and place and quite intentionally absorbs ideas of mechanics from the popular games of that era.

Thus every new edition represents as much a "modernization" of those rules as it does another pass through the editor to clean-up the earlier text. CDIV feels very much "modern" for the early 2000's, which is great for people who love that era and its games (like early Too Fat Lardies titles for example). CDIII similarly represents a "modernization" of Command Decision for the late 90's, and incorporates the new design sensibilities of that era. I tend to like 90's rules… I've gotten into many "new to me" games over the past two decades, but not one of them has been the (then) current version. I am naturally very skeptical of the mantra that "newer is better" or "latest version is best." Instead, I do my own research and decide for myself… everyone is looking for something different and there is just no cookie-cutter when it comes to personal preferences.

CDIII hits the right notes for me and speaks to my nostalgia for a certain era of mid-90's game design and aesthetics. I'm glad the other editions have their fans though! I used to give CD a pass back in the day because I thought it was something very different and I am not sure I would have given it a second look if I didn't see the occasional reminder of the game from loyal fans keeping the candle lit.

I am not sure I would have given it a second look if I didn't see the occasional reminder of the game from loyal fans keeping the candle lit.

Trying to keep it lit -- in whatever iteration, I, II, III or IV! :-)