Unfortunately it has been poorly supported since it was published which is a great shame.
That takes money unless there is some way to create a viral video to gain followers, instructional videos, put on tournaments, or develop a new line of figures that specifically fit the game.
There is support on Board Game Geeks: link
I've had a copy of the rules for years but I played it for the first time last week. I just finished reading the rules so I'll give my feedback. I'm no expert in the game and many of my suggestions may not be relevant or I did not entirely grasp the rules:
Pros that I think make the game more historically accurate:
No IGYG or unit activations
No range bands for small arms fire but should be for SMGs.
No random intuitive determination as the initiative is not random. In the game, you seize or lose the initiative based more on your tactics and decisions.
Ground Hugging is done correctly but I don't think they should fire normally. Generally, you are either exposing yourself to shoot or seeking cover or a combination of the two which would have a firepower modifier penalty.
Stand-up from Ground Hugging can be hit by Reactive Fire is correct because advancing under fire is very difficult.
Fire & Maneuver: This can be performed pretty much the way it was done historically. One or more units perform fire on the target while the maneuver unit is Ground Hugging. After suppressing the defender the unit Hugging Ground advances.
Small Arms Fire: I like using the group rather than individuals.
Ambush Fire: I like the idea but with a Point Man. The ambushed unit should be able to immediately respond by falling back to the edge where he entered avoiding causalities or an immediate close assault. You don't get pinned down in the kill zone!
C&C: Keeping units in the LOS is better than an artificial command range. Allowing some sub-units to move out of LOS is correct as generally a unit is given an objective to move to and does not need to be supervised along the way.
Recon by Fire: Looks good to me.
Target Proximity Rule: Makes sense
Movement: Overall I like it and speeds up the game. I like the Ambush Fire rule too. However, there should be an accommodation for a point man moving through woods and close terrain with a chance to avoid an ambush or only the point man is affected.
Cons and suggestions at the risk of complications of course:
Leadership: Have a Risk-Reward Decision when you fail a die roll an attached leader could be used to pass it but at a fairly high chance of becoming a causality, especially from Sniper Fire. This would reflect leaders exposing themselves to enemy fire to improve their performance or motivate them. Squad and Platoon Leaders generally should not be firing their weapons in combat (except in Close Combat or Assault) as it is more important to observe and control than to shoot.
I would not allow them to be targeted unless they were using their leadership modifier but there could be situations like leading an assault.
Grenades: I can't see where they are included in the game. I think they should be included for Close Assaults and fighting room-room function mainly as Suppression. My friends in Ukraine told me the side that wins a trench fight is the side with the most grenades. The same was true with the Marines at Hue and Fallujah. In WWI Brits attacked trenches carrying bags full of Mills Bombs. Their effectiveness is increased inside confined spaces. The German stick grenades were primarily for concussion in a close assault as you don't want shrapnel flying back at you after you throw it.
I have a special liking for Flamethrowers, White Phosphorus, and Thermite grenades.
Close Combat: Always use smoke. When it is declared the defender should get a free movement to Fall Back. If there is a good LOS the attackers should get a chance to cut them down with Small Arms Fire without any return fire from the defenders.
Historically, close assaults were not a charge by the entire unit but by a few guys (sometimes specialized units like Combat Engineers with flame throwers and satchel charges or a leader) sneaking up on the defenders to deliver a satchel charge, grenades, etc. If 1-3 guys attempt to sneak up or crawl (Hugging Ground) to a bunker or pillbox under suppressive fire they should have a better chance of getting in contact.
I don't know if you've ever been inside a bunker or pillbox but your observation is very restricted at close range. This is why they have barbed wire and landmines in front of them.
Small Arms Fire: I think it is too much die-rolling and is kind of clunky to follow as a first-time gamer. There are easier ways to do it.
Reverse Slope Defense: If units on the reverse slope are suppressed or pinned down they should be able to fall back and move to another location on the same slope, staying out of the enemy LOS, just as a unit not pinned and fully recover from suppression once in their new location. Maybe have the same rule if defending in a large multi-story building or the basement.
Suppression/Pinned/Causality: Overall I just don't like it. I can go into details later. Basically, the "experts" who have studied suppression in combat define suppression as the decreased ability to move, communicate, shoot, and observe.
As firepower increases defenders will spend more time avoiding fire than returning fire, be less able to communicate offers to units not attached to, etc. I like the idea of Hug Ground to avoid casualties.
I think in reality Pinned Down is more of a choice that moving under fire is not worth the risk. However, in a desperate situation, they may attack and units should be allowed to freely Fall Back out of the enemy LOS without being able to shoot or be stopped by small arms fire as there are many historical examples.
Reactive Fire: In 6.5.1 I'm not sure of how Reactive Fire affects a moving target other than when it is halted. Is it Hugging Ground (which I'd expect) or Pinned? Can it return fire?
Locked in a Fire Fight: The individual guys shooting at the enemy generally have reduced Situational Awareness of new enemy threats and shoot at what they are told to. Generally, their Fire Team or Squad Leader is controlling who or what they fire at. To switch to another target should be a leadership roll.
SMG: The SMG squad should have a range reduction as their effectiveness severely drops off after 50m. They should get a bonus for assaults. Platoon Leaders and NCOs often carried SMGs because their job was to observe and move around to control their units and not to increase their firepower as you can't do both. It does come in handy in close combat and assaults.
SNAFUs: There should be a small chance that a unit that is given an order without the leader attached misses the command or does not interpret it correctly. Maybe have the defender roll a D10 with a SNAFU on a 1. It should not end the turn except for that particular unit.
Surprise Encounter: I think the surprised side is the one that is flanked! If the moving unit/attacker is surprised then I'd expect an ambush would take place. The attacker and defender could surprise each other and then the side with the better troops act first. It could result in an automatic surrender or retreat for the defender which I think occurred as often as close combat HTH fighting.
Indirect Artillery: In a close-range small unit engagement I doubt if you be calling in artillery greater than 75mm unless the target was already registered. Same for air support. I'd even be careful with medium or heavy mortars but light mortars no problem. Light mortars with a direct LOS to the defenders should get an accuracy advantage.
Armor combat: As stated, the rules are very abstract. I'd do it a little differently.
Overall I liked the game more than I thought I would. I'll be better prepared the next time I play.
Wolfhag
