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: 

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. 


6 comments:

pancerni said...

I am biased, we have played CD in all 4 versions over the years. Each edition is an 'improvement' over the last. I'd argue that you keep the scenario you explained to run through each edition you resolve to look at.
I only have one AAR from CD-ToB on my blog, but would be happy to explain any of the nuances that don't give themselves up to just a read through. I have not played "O" Group, but from several AAR's report a lot of gamey situations to my eyes, more than I would need in a game.

Martin Rapier said...

I used to play a lot of CD, mainly CD 2, but we dumped it in favour of Spearhead in the late 90s as it produced much the same result, but far faster and with less faff. I revisited CD IV when it came out, and although some mechanisms had been streamlined and it put more emphasis on tracking the state of companies than platoons, it still had much of the finicky fiddlyness which put me off originally.

If you can get around the headache inducing layout and presentation of the rules, there is a decent battalion level game buried in there, mayb a couple of battalions. It is also invaluable as a reference and source of innumerable scenarios. I found doing a QRS helped get my head around it, and it is quite feasible to reduce the entire rule set to a single side of A4.

If you like mode ased command systems, you might want to look at TAC:WW2, but that also has some fiddly aspects which sit oddly against the very pared down combat system.

Geordie an Exiled FoG said...

Thanks pancerni good advice in which I intend to follow

Geordie an Exiled FoG said...

Thanks Martin

The more I play the more I think Command Decision F2F (1 v 1) is best a KG Battalion scrap (one battalion defending and several battalions attacking with assets attacking). The historical reference point of Command Decision for the Div Orbats to pull assets down to the battalion level is a very good reference point.

You could almost think a Halsey style campaign system to Nimitz (Command Decision) table top.

Spearhead had less chrome and was higher brigade to divisional level, Megagame territory.

Cheers
Mark

Archduke Piccolo said...

Geordie -
I played quite a lot of CD1 back in the early 1990s. I found the army list for a Soviet Mechanised Brigade very well suited to a game of about 6 hours. Against the more flexible Germans, the rigid Soviet command structure - and the less robust quality and morale factors (Exp, 8/9) presented a considerable challenge, but in pick-up games they lost just once in several years, though a lot of battles were inconclusive.

But a hiatus of 20 years tends to discourage trying to recover one's knowledge of the rule set. A difficult 'Bulge' scenario played a couple of years ago was not a completely satisfying outing after not having seen the rules for close to 20 years...
http://archdukepiccolo.blogspot.com/2021/03/command-decision-battle-of-bulge-action.html
Cheers,
Ion

Geordie an Exiled FoG said...

Cheers Archduke

Interesting comments, I'll bear them in mind.
I think the key is to avoid competition games and stick to more historical scenarios for the sake of your spleen

From what I can remember:

Sov v Germans seems generally a stand up fight
Russian Quantity over German Command Flexibility and some quality kit.

German v US looks interesting in the sense that the US has good command structure but a weakness in kit, but I sense a richness in artillery and call in power. Perhaps a little bias in the rules.

Brits are stoically sound - unsexy with (Europe) kit but less endowed than the Yanks.

Best Wishes
Mark