| kmahony111 | 07 Apr 2015 3:21 a.m. PST |
We are going to have a game of these rules after a gap of about 25-30 years and I'm trying to remember what points a standard size force was for an Encounter game. Can anyone remember? Cheers
Kieran |
 Saber6   | 07 Apr 2015 9:13 a.m. PST |
NATO Company vs WARPAC Battalion would be a good starter |
| Mako11 | 07 Apr 2015 1:04 p.m. PST |
I wasn't bothering with totaling up points, but was planning on pitting a company vs. a battalion, as mentioned above, at least for starters. If NATO fairs too well, the next Soviet/Warsaw Pact battalion is just behind the first one. |
| JCD1964 | 07 Apr 2015 1:06 p.m. PST |
I have dug out an old army list from 1986. 6000 points bought one reduced tank coy, 2 infantry coy, a recce section, an AA section, a battlegroup HQ and 3 batteries of 155mm (1 battery in direct support and 2 batteries available as thickening fire). |
| Weasel | 07 Apr 2015 1:22 p.m. PST |
Bear in mind that you are rolling separately for every single barrel pointing at the enemy, so probably advisable to start a little smaller to get reacquainted :) |
| Mako11 | 07 Apr 2015 1:48 p.m. PST |
Perhaps, though those Soviet tanks advancing and attempting to fire on the move from long range can't hit any targets anyway, so……… |
| Mako11 | 07 Apr 2015 5:58 p.m. PST |
Did a little test run, on paper, pitting a M48 platoon of 5 tanks (90mm guns) vs. a company of T-55s (13 x tanks) against one another, on an open plain. Took me about 40 minutes to an hour, I'd guess, as I was getting used to the visual detection, To-Hit, and Damage charts, and making notes of the battle and results on paper. I'll post that on another thread, shortly. |
| Weasel | 07 Apr 2015 6:25 p.m. PST |
I noticed that in the WW2 rules, detection is automatic when you are within range.
I imagine if you wanted to speed things up, you could adopt that for the modern version too. |
| raylev3 | 07 Apr 2015 9:10 p.m. PST |
Used to play these back in the day…enjoyed it then but I doubt I would now given the details and extremely slow play. |
| David Manley | 07 Apr 2015 9:40 p.m. PST |
Are you sure you are thinking of the WRG rukes, raylev? We found them to be pretty quick, and not overly detailed. TTGs "Challenger" rules, on the other hand…… |
| Mako11 | 07 Apr 2015 9:52 p.m. PST |
They're quite quick – see above for my first time out, resolving a company level attack in an hour, or so, while just learning to use them. |
| kmahony111 | 07 Apr 2015 11:08 p.m. PST |
Thanks guys. I've been playing the 1950-2000 set for years so I am familiar with a lot of the rules (and the older set is much simpler to play and read). |
| raylev3 | 08 Apr 2015 8:57 a.m. PST |
I'm sure it was the WRG rules -- still have them. But my memories of ease of play may be clouded by the fact this was 30 years ago :-) and the memory of never being able to finish a game in any timely manner. Of course, that could be because we play with units too large to accomodate the rules mechanism. |
