Intuitively it may seem to be a step back, as I remember all those wargamers I knew who had played Spearhead (and there are a lot from pre-2000, as it is an old rule set and was very popular in its time), who had enjoyed it but bemoaned the simplicity of the d6, so guess what - they introduced their own rule modifications (using d10s and some form of variation of morale break rules to allow remnants [as opposed to battalions break and disappear] like DBM to survive, but dwindle away giving token resistance). In fact I know hybrid Spearhead and Command Decision rule-sets were devised for 20-30 player Mega Games, as I have good friends who participated in them during the early 2000's. For one reason or another I too seemed to have discounted it, but in my greying years I see complexity for the sake of it, over simplicity to be generally a bad thing now (increasing dice rolls and playing time for no real gain) and I am tending to go the other way, more focusing on decision making. I remember James Sterrett's quote, "All models are wrong, but some models are useful"). The above struck me as I was watching online some Nimitz games by Jom Owczarski and noticed he also did some Spearhead videos too (see below, the appealing bit being they are "double blind" with an umpire, which seems to be the magic ingredient and the secret sauce of success - let the players play):
The ongoing adventures of a boy who never grew out of making and playing with plastic model kits (and even some metal ones too). Also a wargamer in search of the perfect set of wargaming rules for WWII Land and 20th Century Naval campaigns.
Tuesday, 30 May 2023
Spearhead - Could it be the one? - WWII Rule Sets.
Intuitively it may seem to be a step back, as I remember all those wargamers I knew who had played Spearhead (and there are a lot from pre-2000, as it is an old rule set and was very popular in its time), who had enjoyed it but bemoaned the simplicity of the d6, so guess what - they introduced their own rule modifications (using d10s and some form of variation of morale break rules to allow remnants [as opposed to battalions break and disappear] like DBM to survive, but dwindle away giving token resistance). In fact I know hybrid Spearhead and Command Decision rule-sets were devised for 20-30 player Mega Games, as I have good friends who participated in them during the early 2000's. For one reason or another I too seemed to have discounted it, but in my greying years I see complexity for the sake of it, over simplicity to be generally a bad thing now (increasing dice rolls and playing time for no real gain) and I am tending to go the other way, more focusing on decision making. I remember James Sterrett's quote, "All models are wrong, but some models are useful"). The above struck me as I was watching online some Nimitz games by Jom Owczarski and noticed he also did some Spearhead videos too (see below, the appealing bit being they are "double blind" with an umpire, which seems to be the magic ingredient and the secret sauce of success - let the players play):
Sunday, 28 May 2023
WWII Western Desert SAS Book - Speed, Aggression Surprise
Entertaining, illuminating and therefore "hand on heart", the book can be highly recommended as a good read. The genius behind much of the subterfuge being a little known British officer called Dudley Clarke, with the creation of phantom armies and Axis misdirection being his speciality. If I tried to list all the schemes devised, I would be doing them and him an injustice - instead I can recommend the book. It is sobering to read about the formation of the SAS in the context of this maelstrom of intrigue. Certain unconventional officers having a desire to put their hard earned Commando special training, learnt from the Scottish Highlands to good use, matched equally with the need to avoid standard "military bull". To think of the SAS as one of the many quirky "special forces" units and ideas floating around at the time. The LRDP by contrast being fathered in a more specialised pre-war incubation of foresight, fostered by Wavell, Hobart and Ralph Bagnold. Indeed the success of 1941 Commando Operations was highly debatable with a strong anti-special operations meme from the established military in general. Auchinleck gave the SAS an "in", being named as a parachute unit by accident brought in Clarke's distanced "approval" or "help" (despite a disastrous first parachute operation that nearly killed all the SAS participants) and really saved by the LRDP professionalism. Post North Africa, the SAS seemed to be a solution looking for a problem - "helping" French partisans in guerrilla warfare, almost fitting the bill?
Saturday, 20 May 2023
Flash Back: Memories of Binni (2016) .. A War that Never Was [Updated with Paxsims reference]
[Narrator's Footnote: The old gentleman was lead in by his young grandson. Physically infirmed and partially sighted he nevertheless displayed a quickness of mind unbecoming of his physical appearance. He became animated upon his recollections and we sat for several hours by the light of a kerosene light talking. He gave me a frank and candid account of his actions during September 2016, his eyes glowing with an inner fire that seemed far more than the light reflected from the smoky lantern. Still on the run and technically in hiding the interview was prematurely terminated by his nervous security guards but Bollangda still managed to shed valuable light on the hitherto unknown actions of the Official Opposition Party and their motivations. In my subsequent hurried escape from Binni the bulk of the precious interview transcript was lost, apart from this tantalising fragment.]
[Bollangda] You have to understand that for some time the situation was getting progressively worse and worse in Binni. For those of us who had managed to benefit from the enlightened times of education and prosperity this backward slide into tribalism and superstition was dismaying. The soul of the country was being sucked into a mire. Foreign powers were active in manipulating this turn of events. With my own very eyes I had seen the 'white ghosts' [Ed: Mercenaries] of the Foreign Interventionists initiate horrendous, callous actions. For that I cannot forgive, yet I had to work with their White Masters as if they were not there, ignoring the sound of gunfire in the street. Using the low technical means available to my followers, we still managed a effective campaign of civil disobedience that hurt the vital infrastructure of the country and reduced the power and reach of the man who called himself President. While the man we considered our true leader languished in jail.
[Ed:] A prison that as it turns out had very loose bars in the summer of 2016?
[Bollangda, chuckled to himself] Yes, they underestimated us. Although the means at our disposal was primitive we were cunning like the fox. We sprung the old lion out, grabbing the attention of the nation and spreading fear into the hearts of our enemies. [Ed: The smile soon faded] Only to find that in prison he had lost his way and had turned into a bleating goat, putting himself above the people, indignant, as if the people had not suffered greatly for him. No sooner was he safe, he distanced himself from us and started acquiring wealth by working for those who had been his jailors. This was a treachery we could not stand. We cut ties with the old fool. I would not have his blood on my hands but I no longer offered him my protection and he moved back to the capitol. He soon was a mere laughing stock and fool of a clown, wearing a feathered hat and a string of medals on his chest. At that point I talked to the devil himself.
[Ed:] Do you specifically mean the Paris Peace Conference where you met your Arch-Enemy the President?
Friday, 19 May 2023
Audible Book: The Stasi Poetry Circle
I asked for an Audible book recommendation for a car long journey and a friend came back with the most curious titled book I ever had heard of (see below, was this a send up .. a later day "Tinker, Tailor, Solder, Spy"? So I downloaded it .. and was not disappointed by any means):
I was transported into the dystopian East German communist/socialist state and a mindset that Orwell himself would have been proud of creating. What followed was a exercise in "reducto ad absurdum" - where a country decided to control every aspect of the language its citizens spoke, only to become frightened of the poets and dissidents who used the language far better than they. So naturally they had to counterattack and understand this dangerous phenomena, study it and control it. By their very nature the jailors informed on themselves with tragic comical effect. A dog has a better chance of catching its own tail!
Thursday, 18 May 2023
Nimitz - Operation Freya (1/3000 Ships)
I guess the intention in the scenario (from Sam Mustafa's website download section) is to be a WW2 version of a Dogger Bank 'fast and furious' battlecruiser clash, with one side (RN) having destroyers and one side (KM) having a light cruiser, both sides having something capable of firing torpedoes (see below, the ships were fast out of their starting blocks with the KM hurling caution to the wind and sending in their light cruiser [Nurnberg] for a torpedo attack on the RN Hood and Repulse):
Nurnberg was crippled and sunk, but her sacrifice was not entirely in vain (as the RN battlecruisers paid her some main armament attention) as she allowed the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau to deliver painful blows to the Mighty Hood, taking structural points away (see below, one crippled RN destroyer stays attending to the British main force [aka hiding], while the two healthy attack the German battle cruisers [gulp]):
With HMS Hood suffering yet again (and the British return shells bouncing off Krupp armour) t'was "the better part of valour" this time for the British as they retired off table under cover of a threatened or rather attempted torpedo attack (see below, the rules showed the nice premise of a running battle - jumping between tactical and operation game boards was possible - something previously hinted at but not really supported by other tactical rules sets):
I liked the scenario (and the way Nimitz was playing [without cheese]) so much I decided to play it again, this time over at a friend's house who had a much better "sea mat" than me! In a short summary, the British need to get lucky early or the German armour works in the KM's favour over the course of a long range gunnery dual. Note, players don't seem to be the classic missing smoke-screens, not just yet at any rate (see below, in the first run through we forgot about rolling the "dice for advantage" [I like this little tweak] - nothing is equal so KM rolled well enough to "have the advantage2, so they can watch the RN set-up in a limited "floor space" and choose their angle of attack from anywhere in their half of the board (see below, the RN force opt to make a high speed run [hence the yellow counters on their ships]):
The RN strategy is "run fast, shoot with a full broadside and then get lucky" whereas the KM felt an uncontrollable urge to charge at the enemy with the Nurnberg - two separate [unrelated so I don't think it's genetics] German players did this (see below, in the exchange the Scharnhorst suffered light damage [structural] and the KM player learned it pays to "move fast when you can" because you are harder to hit - even if it makes your shooting slightly worse):
A RN admiral discussion concluded that whereas the German armour was saving them from serious damage and the Admiralty would like to get HMS Hood back to Scapa to be repaired (see below, the two fresh RN destroyers were able to chase the German battlecruisers away as the RN battlecruisers disengaged):
After seeing what torpedoes can do to KM ships the German admiral was satisfied to claim honours and retire just after the British had retired from the map (see below, the game worked really well, credit to the Germans in both games with sound tactical victories - note in the Halsey campaign this would be set up for a nice running battle over several encounters and other Task Forces trying to intercept [or hide if you were a convoy], all good stuff):
This all bodes well for this rule system methinks and future battles. Nimitz is easy to pick up, fun to play and gives more or less, plausible historical results in a much quicker time than the likes of GQ II (my previous preferred WW2 naval rule set). I can recommend watching the SaturdayNightFights of the Armchair Dragoons fame, playthrough of Operation Freya:
Wednesday, 17 May 2023
Command Decision IV - Test of Battle (To Be or Not To Be the ONE? That is the question!). First looking back at CD1.
For some thirty years I have been searching the hobby game stores for THE WWII "land war rule set" that will be the saviour, or rather my excuse for, buying my 20mm (and 1/200) wargaming collections (now 15mm, 10mm and 6mm need also to be included). Like a little lost soul seeking love and attention I yearn for the "perfect enough" set of rules to make me happy. In this quest "Command Decision I, II, III and finally IV (Test of Battle)" have been acquired - as has been the likes of Spearhead and Crossfire. Alas the bonfire does not burn as well as I expected - although I always thought Command Decision was almost right and crossing the Rubicon (its morale and its orders for command decisions, hence the name). Nevertheless the 20mm collection grows steadily bigger with each passing year, but few games have really been played on the sacred table top (see below, what the collective from Board Game Geek thought of CD1):
Piquing my interest in WW2 land war recently were these posts:
- https://sgtsteiner.blogspot.com/2023/04/test-of-battle-lindern-1944-scenario.html
- https://sgtsteiner.blogspot.com/2023/04/test-of-battle-test-game.html
Has Sgt Steiner succeeded where I have failed for all these years? In fairness teh games get rated better with each edition (see below, V2, V3 and V4 ratings - so Frank Chadwick must have been onto something I think):
For my own consumption I revisited the large stack of Command Decision boxes I have, containing therein the sacred rules and decided to do a play-test, actually going back to CD 1 (fondly remembering the day I discovered it lurking on the shelves of the Aberdeen Virgin Store, in the Games Section alongside boxes of Computer Games, thinking "now this looks interesting", as I thought then and still think so now).
So I took CD1 out for a stroll, to show two of my wargaming allies some 1941 Barbarossa action near Kiev. I chose a 3:1 odds battle of a Veteran German Motorised Battalion from a Panzer Division versus a Green Soviet Infantry Battalion defending a couple of hills in front of a town, a real slap in the face job, but "only" using the organic German and Russian battalion weaponry. A full strength German Panzer Grenadier Battalion is easy 3:1 in advantage over a weakened Soviet Infantry Battalion. I thought he morale extremes should make it a relatively quick battle, just to learn the rules again (I expected the Russian force to melt, as it did). Rather than player versus player, as it was a very static Russian defence (one command order) and an active German (our command orders) there was much more discussion about what the Germans could and could not do.
Most of the issues on the day really stemmed from the difference between reading the rules and getting the gist, then playing a game and finding the reference to the right rule quickly when simultaneously explaining it to two other wargamers (there were too many pauses but my friends were patient). The game (IMHO) played well though, the order system was very representative of the capabilities of WWII forces although it played slower than the accepted 1:1 timeline [game time v real battlefield time] in the Designers Notes (something which I always though should be quicker in CD .. later versions simplified mechanics and tried to streamline .. maybe just a case of familiarity). I think I still need to convince my compatriots though, one a die-hard convicted "Avalon Hill Panzer Blitz rules in miniatures is the way forward", the other likes to see a few examples before making his mind up. Which is all fair enough.
I smile though as I thought it worked and I will tell you why, because the German plan was worked through the CD1 Order System, not as an after thought. No such thing exists in Panzer Blitz and many other rule sets. Two dismounted (that is from trucks) German infantry companies went forward supported by their own "company organic but dropped off" MG Platoons and the well-sited MGs/Mtr of the Weapons Company which punished the Russian defenders. The armoured half-track company was kept in reserve. For simplicity I had the defender's positions already spotted (assuming the Panzer Recon and Veteran Infantry Patrol had doe their job well the night before). A quick full advance and a cautious cautious advance allowed the Germans to fire in the General Phase. This melted away the Russian defenders on the two hills, causing as expected an adverse morale effect for the third Russian company, in the town with battalion commander and a infantry weapon stand (they hunkered down - pinned). One German company however stalled with a bad morale roll (in fairness it took the brunt of the Russian fire). The German reserve was released by their battalion commander while the battered German company regrouped. With over whelming effective fire power the Germans reduced the defenders and their morale broke on turn four, the only survivor - the Russian indirect mortar platoon - decided discretion was the better part of valour and legged it. To me it had an authentic feel to it. Like anything after playing the rules once (especially after so many years) re-reading the rules again ironed out a few queries. Introducing spotting is the next key, as bumping into stuff you have not spotted and dropping indirect on stuff you have spotted is another tactical feature of the CD system I liked!
PS1: Apologies for forgetting to take pictures of the battle!
PS2: Most significant features I had forgotten about was extreme range for infantry was double normal effective range - which makes life little more dangerous.