"Winter War #8 - In Search of Dolin's Brigade" Topic

The latest scenario in my ongoing Winter War campaign in the Kuhmo sector.
Rules: Nuts! by Two Hour Wargames
An attack in the deep forest

Full report here:
link

Some teaser photos:

Korvessa,

Cool stuff, as always! I thought it was pretty cool how the rules worked out with the Finns trying to get to their jump-off positions by daybreak but not making it because of the deep snow, then the Soviets winning the initial ISTs.

Regarding opposing forces not causing new ISTs when guys were out of sight but move In Sight, because some of the unit members were already In Sight, I thought you couldn't end an activation with opposing forces still In Sight, I thought combat had to end in one side being eliminated or pushed back out of sight (Duck Back)? Maybe I'm screwing that up, that would make troops in fortifications potentially too easy to shift out (though I love your adjustment to just have them go prone).

In any case, I would submit that new guys coming In Sight (from a unit that already had some guys in Sight) should draw a new ISTs, with the stationary side getting a bonus. Here's what I mean: the Soviets are sitting in their burned out house, just had a firefight with some Finns out in the forest. The Finns can still see the helmets of some Reds in the house, and the Reds can still see a Finn cap, arm, or weapon amongst the trees, but the firing has died off. But now, here come two dudes walking into sight that we hadn't seen before; I'd say it's more likely than not that the Soviets would end up shooting at them, maybe unless you had some good narrative reason not to (low on ammo, shooters on the verge of panic, etc…). And I sure as heck would have liked to see the Finns open up on the three Soviets that moved up to retrieve the LMG and SMG (bet you would have too!).

I absolutely love this pic:

It was a great campaign, sad to see it end, but well done! I look forward to the Kauhu stalking the Karelian Isthmus.

V/R,
Jack

Thanks for the comments, Jack!
This may be my own interpretation thing, but I came to that conclusion for a couple of reasons. I do admit that this situation comes up more with these two armies (when most have bolt action rifles) than in my Normandy scenarios when everyone has semi-auto rifles or SMG and LMG.
Because the Soviets had such big squads (14 men, only one LMG) at the start of the war (later reduced to nine men with 2xLMG), there are going to be times when not everyone is shot at. I learned on the forum that there is only one round of reaction fire. So if you have a Finnish LMG squad (7 men, one LMG) going against the Soviet squad, depending on who wins the IST, there may be several figures that were never targeted. Regardless as to which side wins, there will likely be figs from both sides still standing (Unless one side totally bombs the Man Down reaction). Now sometimes the Active Fire round takes care of that, but not always.
Going with the above example, suppose the Finns win the IST and decide to have their LMG target the enemy LMG with all four shots. That means only 7 of the 14 Soviets are targeted. Lets say the Finns win five of those (either by KIA, WIA or drop back) and they lose two (same way). So after one round, you have 5 Finns and 9 Soviets still standing. Now the Finns perform Active fire (which can also be returned, by the way). This time the Finns win 4 and lose one. So now we have 4 Finns v 5 Soviets. If they both get "Carry On" results from Man Down, you will end the turn with figures from both sides in LoS of each other. If there's cover near enough, some of those figures that have dropped back may still be within 4" of a figure from their group that has LoS to the enemy. Especially, if they are in a defensive position. Hence, to me anyway, a figure can move up in line with the rest of the group, but still not trigger a new IST as someone from that group had LoS to the enemy.
To me, that is why the IST requires a group to move into the LoS of the opposite group. If at least one figure from the group is already in the LoS at the start of the action phase, the requirement that, "the opposing group was not seen previously during this action phase" isn't satisfied, so a new IST isn't triggered.
Secondly, it is the only way I could think of to model the "Human Wave" tactics the Soviets used. Given the same two squads with the Soviets being active this time. Again the Finns win the IST. So after the initial reaction, the 9 Soviets still standing can finish their move and active fire at the end of it. This time you would end up with more than one group, but at least they are covering the ground,
This may not be 100% how the rules are supposed to work, but it works for me and like I said, it is the only way I could think of to do Huan Waves.

Regarding the coordination.
I like that friendly groups (that are not led by your "Star.") are controlled by the game mechanics. That way, they may or may not act like you wanted. So I have a couple of ways to coordinate actions that to me are realistic.
1) When group leaders are together (or at the beginning of the game like in this instance) they can develop a plan to do something on a certain turn: more or less the in-game equivalent of synchronizing watches. For various reasons it may not go off in time, just like in real life or as happened in this game. It could also happen that some will act on time and some will not.
2) I have also used "runners" to send a message to do a certain thing at a certain time.
3) Have a leader fire a flare or something. Maybe even test to see if it went off or was noticed.
Basically different ways of allowing some coordination without relying on "God's eye view" of the gamer so that all your groups do exactly what you want them to do.

Just Jack
Something occurred to me just after I finished typing my last response.
You are right about fire between two figures must come to a conclusion (KIA, WIA or Drop Back). This applied to both reactive and active fire. But that rule only applies to the specific figures, not the groups. After a firefight you will usually have figures from both sides in good order (assuming they pass any reaction test with Carry On), either because they won their particular duel, or they were never targeted.

Korvessa,

Wow man, thanks for laying that out for me, I GREATLY appreciate the detailed explanation, and now I've got it. Yeah, I thought the 'survivors' would just keep shooting at each other as long as someone was still in sight, until everyone on one side was down or Duck Back, but I see where I went wrong (only applies to the specific figures targeted, not the group).

With that, your Finns and my Soviets finish the turn in sight of each other. You win initiative and activate the group of Finns in sight of my Soviets; can you 'active move' them across my front without me getting to fire, or does the movement trigger an In Sight test? I get if your Finns get to fire at me without an In Sight test, but surely your guys can't dash about in plain sight of me without me being able to fire, right? Or is that how you get the Human Wave attack to work?

Regarding your 'coordination,' that's awesome, and I play my solo games the same way, that the dudes on the ground can't know things they wouldn't know in real life, just because I know them as the player, so you work out a comms or signal plan for that type of stuff (or, as you mentioned, send a runner).

Cool stuff man, thanks again for laying that all out for me.

V/R,
Jack

I think examples help clear thing sup, so here you go. Again, this might not be 100% within the rules, this is just how it works for me. It's the only way I know of for troops to move forward under fire (another example would be the attack on Foy in "Band of Brothers").
In this example, we have a 14-man Soviet squad (1xLMG + 13 rifles) v. a 7-man Finnish squad (1xLMG + 6 rifles). The Soviets are in the woods and the Finns are defending a wall.

The Finns had the initiative and went first this turn, but the Soviet squad was too deep into the woods for LoS, so nothing happened.
The soviets move up to the edge of the woods where they are spotted by the Finns. The Finns win the IST, but because the Soviets are still inside, they count as being in cover.
The Finnish LMG targets the Soviet LMG but does not get a hit. Return fire from the Soviet LMG causes a "Duck Back." With my rule, the Finn just ducks down behind the wall. The remaining five Finns return fire (The 6th man is the assistant LMG gunner, so does not fire himself). The Finns wound one and cause a couple of Duck Backs. Return fire from the Soviets who did not duck back causes one Finn to "drop down" behind wall.
The Soviets that are in good order now finish their move and advance.

At the end of the move they initiate active fire. Neither side causes any casualties, but both score some drop backs. Because there were no new WIA or KIA on either side, no one takes a "Man Down" test. This leaves this situation, with some figs from both sides in good order. (The Finn figures lying down are in "Duck Back" Status and not in enemy LoS because they are hiding behind the wall.

Now it is a new turn.
If the Finns win and are able to activate, there is no new IST. I'll quote the rule for the benefit of anyone who is reading this but doesn't have the rulebook:
Whenever a group has an opposing group enter into its Line of Sight or LOS, and the opposing group was not seen previously during this activation phase, the in Sight Test has been triggered.
To me, the enemy group starts the turn in LoS, so does not meet the requirement of, "not seen previously."
So the Finns who are standing can "active fire," but there is no reaction fire. The ones that are dropped down can take a recover test, but since that takes up their last action, they cannot reman their positions, they stay down out of sight behind the wall.
Suppose the Soviets failed to activate, so we move on to the next turn. For the sake of this example, the Finns win the initiative. Those standing still don't get a new IST. Those behind the wall can now take their positions with their normal move and are now in sight of the Soviets. By my way of doing things, there is still no new IST as members of their group (the ones standing) were within LoS of the enemy at start of the turn. Now all the Finns perform active fire.
If the Soviets had won the initiative, they advance first (because no IST) then active fire. Advancing like this will enable you to come within grenade range. Otherwise if you have to do an IST at every phase, no one could move forward after sighting the enemy – which doesn't feel right to me.
It took me awhile to work this out. I like how it opens up tactical flexibility and possibilities, like using the fire and maneuver tactics I learned so long ago (I was a reserve officer in the late 1980s)

Holy cow, you are way too kind! Damn man, I didn't mean to take up all your time, but I greatly appreciate that, it all makes sense. A lot to mull over; I can imagine myself playing it different ways based on the specific tactical situation, i.e., according to the narrative playing in my head ;)

Like I said, I could see it causing a new IST if I pictured a lull in the action, but now (thanks to your example) I can all see how an IST might not be appropriate as what we're dealing with is nothing more than a continuous firefight that is playing out over several turns, i.e., there is no break in the battle, we're just waiting for the next round of combat resolution, and to see who gains the initiative (via the die roll).

The only issue I'm still contemplating is this:
"Otherwise if you have to do an IST at every phase, no one could move forward after sighting the enemy…"
That's not strictly true, is it? If I'm the attacker, I move up into LOS, we roll IST, I win and I open fire, pinning your entire unit, thereby taking no return fire. Now I am able to finish my turn by taking any unused movement, right? I take your point that if the enemy has a larger force that not everyone is targeted and thus they're going to be able to take my men under fire, but that's real life, it's hard to move up while taking fire.

Let's say you end up with something like two guys hit, five guys pinned, and three still in 'carry on' status. The three 'carry on' guys can still go; I get the line of thinking that "I don't want to go with only three guys, I want to go with the eight guys that are still drawing breath," but that's exactly where small unit leadership comes into play, right?

The squad leader should be the one leading the assault, and the Platoon Sergeant and/or Platoon Commander should be over there kicking the five pinned guys in the ass to get them following their squad leader, at least in my view.

Again, just something I'm still pondering, and I can't wait to get some guys on the table and start working through some of these scenarios. Like you, I imagine I'll hew as close to the rules as written as possible, but will alter some things to better fit my view on how things should go down.

"(I was a reserve officer in the late 1980s)"
Oh many, I wish you hadn't have said that! I will do my best to overlook your officer-ness ;) I did ten years in the Marine Corps, got out as a Staff Sergeant. In all seriousness, glad to hear it, that means we have a certain baseline understanding of how things should work, then it just gets down to issues of personal preference. I'm renowned for having a romanticized version of war in my batreps, with lots of fights ending in high risk, high reward close combat, our main character either becoming a hero… or a posthumous hero ;)

Thanks again for sharing your knowledge and experience with the rules, I really appreciate it, and the example (with pics!) was more than anyone could ask for.

V/R,
Jack

The "officer-ness" (love the phrase) was the only way I could improve on my family! (Warning serious family pride coming – LOL):
My dad was SSG with 507th PIR from Normandy to Germany.
My grandpa was a Cpl in the trenches in WWI (not sure what outfit – his unit 40th ID IIRC was broken up and used as replacements)
My G-G-grandpa was in 2nd US Arty from Bull Run to Appomatix
I had an uncle who was a Marine in Okinawa and a cousin who was a Marine in Viet Nam.

I did my time in a reserve training division – the rank is all I got – LOL.

re the rules explanation:
My pleasure and thanks for the kind words.

I couldn't agree more with the concept of using the framework and adapting to circumstances. My personal rule of thumb is if I can convince myself it is reasonable and plausible, I go for it. That's the beauty of a solo game.

Here's a couple of examples:
You have a man with an M1 who wants to run from one building to another. There is a 3" gap that is covered by an enemy MG. He runs into the gap and triggers an IST.
If he loses the IST (meaning enemy was ready for him) and he is lucky enough to survive, he drops back to where he started.
If he wins the IST (caught the enemy by surprise), shooting his M1 at an MG is not a good idea – most likely result is MG winning firefight. So I think why not let your fire be voluntary? Win the IST and instead of shooting just keep running to cover, thereby denying the enemy a chance at "return fire" – if you don't shoot, he can't return fire. Kind of like when Lipton runs out in the open to draw the sniper fire in Band of Brothers.
Another example would be suppose you have a man with an M1 and a readied grenade behind cover and out of sight of an enemy MG position 10" away – too far to throw the grenade. Your guy pops out in the open and wins the IST. It's better if he doesn't fire, finishes his move into grenade range and throws it, rather than engaging an MG with an M1. I justify this by saying the MG team was distracted or whatever, so our hero got the "jump" on him. Maybe his full move was actually a series of dashes and drops, so they could never get a bead on him. Eather way, seems reasonable to me so the GM (me) approves, even if it isn't a 100% "by the book."

Awesome man, that's pretty cool, and I saw the photo of your dad in the SSgt Rockstar campaign. We've got a long military tradition in my family as well, allegedly all the way back to the Revolution. Good stuff.

And yes, we're seeing eye to eye on rules concepts, and the scenario where the GI with the grenade ready winning the IST and being able to advance without drawing fire is perfect . The enemy machine gunners weren't just staring at him as you sauntered up and smoked them, they were scanning a different sector or clearing a malfunction.

Great stuff and, again, I can't thank you enough. I finished the Germans last night so now I just need to finish the Soviets; probably another couple weeks, but then it will be time to get some games going. I think my playtests will be with these guys, since a late war USMC squad had a squad leader and three four-man fireteams, so essentially a pared down platoon, to make it easier to get my feet wet.

V/R,
Jack