Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12
  1. #1
    Super Moderator josta59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    A mountain in Tennessee
    Posts
    880

    Assault on the Juba power station! Reboot with different rules!

    Hi, all,

    I set up my gaming table almost the same as a year ago, so I could replay a scenario I created then. This time, instead of the No End in Sight rules, I'll be using the rules I created that are based on the rules for the Firepower board game from 1984.

    The rules are here: http://www.wargamingdropzone.com/sho...ull=1#post6881

    And the scenario is here: http://www.wargamingdropzone.com/sho...sault-scenario

    Here is the new table setup:

    Name:  20201113_125834.jpg
Views: 34
Size:  96.0 KB

    I remember when I would salivate over tables like this just a few years ago. Now I have one! There are certainly better tables out there, but I'm very happy with mine. Making it modular, so I can rearrange the terrain easily, was one of my best decisions. And the N-scale buildings and vehicles work great with my 10mm figures.

  2. #2
    Super Moderator josta59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    A mountain in Tennessee
    Posts
    880
    In turn 1, the rebel scout team rolled up beside the power station in their technical. The HMG gunner in the truck blew away three Chinese, including those carrying the RPG and SAW, before they could respond. The scout team climbed out and raced to the nearest locked door. While they fiddled with the door, one of the Chinese picked up the SAW and blew away the truck's gunner and driver. The half-squad in the power station ran out the other door, and one of them tossed a grenade at the scout team, who were still messing with the door. One grenade took out the whole team, and the table was clear of rebels for a fleeting moment. The Chinese took the opportunity to send out another man to pick up the RPG and head toward a suitable spot before the next vehicles arrived.

    Name:  20201116_203555.jpg
Views: 16
Size:  86.2 KB
    A Chinese soldier takes out a whole rebel scout team with a grenade.
    Last edited by josta59; 11-16-2020 at 09:47 PM.

  3. #3
    Super Moderator josta59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    A mountain in Tennessee
    Posts
    880
    In turn 2, the rest of the rebels entered the table, half in vehicles. The Chinese soldier with the RPG missed, reloaded, and then hit the armored car as it was unloading, killing the platoon leader and a squad leader! Only the car's driver survived.

    Name:  20201118_185120.jpg
Views: 12
Size:  92.5 KB
    A Chinese soldier (pictured right) nails an armored car with an RPG.

  4. #4
    Member madman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    An hour north of Toronto
    Posts
    217
    Is it just me or is this much bloodier than the previous rules?

  5. #5
    Super Moderator josta59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    A mountain in Tennessee
    Posts
    880
    Quote Originally Posted by madman View Post
    Is it just me or is this much bloodier than the previous rules?
    By far. A problem I had with No End in Sight was the very slow progress of games due to inability to remove figures from play. Firepower isn't as bloody as Wars of Insurgency, but there is a lot of death.

    I used to play the Firepower board game with a very skilled player. He always wiped out my force very quickly. So my minis rules are true to the original. You have to make sure to have your figures go prone or crouch while they're in cover to improve their chance of survival, which can't be done in Wars of Insurgency.
    Last edited by josta59; 11-18-2020 at 09:41 PM.

  6. #6
    Member madman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    An hour north of Toronto
    Posts
    217
    Yes, but that begs the point; How do WE feel about the results both in game terms and as players.

    Is the casualty rate what we would expect given the circumstances in "real life", whatever that is?

    And

    As a GAME, not simulation, do we enjoy that level of casualties? In this case you are playing solo but if playing 1v1 would these results put you off the game as a game?

    Curious as to your take. Myself I think a mechanism to either reduce the carnage or impose some other less lethal result such as going to ground, or forcing a retreat rather than take these casualties. Perhaps a mechanism, enacted for either this particular game or for these particular forces in a number of games, which would enable or force the troops a lower kill chance (both for and against) but potential results of "going to ground" or retreat are enhanced or included where there was not the option before. Just thinking (hopefully clearly) out loud.

  7. #7
    Administrator Whiterook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,857
    madman has some valid points and I personally lean towards his thinking on this. I’ve admittedly, not really digested all the rules but, how are does your system handle pinning, disruption, and routing, for instance? All ways to reduce carnage and hope for some rallies, rather than outright slaughter

    Another thing I was thinking was, fire ratio: Does every combatant fire a weapon every chance they are activated? That’s an important consideration in game design, in that sometimes a soldier simply couldn’t, or wouldn’t fire their weapon either in the course of a battle continuously. For heavy weapons, like heavy or medium machine guns, jamming is often a problem...perhaps something to consider?

    Does weather factor into your system? That can affect battle.

    Sorry...I just realized I am hijacking the thread...please feel free to delete this post if it’s too much. Hope you don’t mind my prattling on I got chirpy for some reason!
    "There is no off position on the Genius Switch”

  8. #8
    Super Moderator josta59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    A mountain in Tennessee
    Posts
    880
    These rules are pretty unique. You have to track every little move carefully. You can only do so many things per impulse, and you never know which player will get the next impulse. Few of your figures will fire weapons in an impulse. And if your game turns are limited, an unexpected retreat could be disastrous. I don't think I'd want that in these rules. They're really different.

    Also, I feel like you're piling on at a time when we just saw a couple of well placed explosions. A grenade went off at the feet of four men in turn 1. Of course they're out of the fight. In turn 2, an RPG hit right when a half-squad was exiting a vehicle--of course they're out of the fight. And did you notice the first RPG shot missed?

    Also, I'm not telling you guys every little thing that happened. You don't know how many shots missed.

    So far, everything that's happened makes a lot of sense to me.

    To answer one of Em's questions, figures are suppressed when they are targeted but not hit by automatic fire. They are stunned when they are in the blast zone but not eliminated by an explosion.

    Madman, does going to ground mean going prone? I described above how you need to have figures crouch or go prone in cover to improve their chance of survival. I have a man firing from a prone position right now.

    Thanks for the comments.
    Last edited by josta59; 11-20-2020 at 01:05 PM.

  9. #9
    Member madman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    An hour north of Toronto
    Posts
    217
    Great your reply addresses my questions/concerns. Since you didn't mention missed shots and every attack seemed to result in pretty much total losses I assumed it was massively bloody. Thank you for clearing things up. Sounds like one to look closer at.

    I used to play GDW's Snapshot which used an action points based system. So I have always loved the concept but never found an implementation I liked (always messy in actual play).

    Since this is a re-boot of an existing scenario using a different set of rules I assumed discussing how those rules affected the play of the scenario is definitely on topic. If you don't agree Josta please let us know.

  10. #10
    Super Moderator josta59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    A mountain in Tennessee
    Posts
    880
    Oh, it's totally on-topic! I appreciate the questions. I'm glad I was able to explain it in a way that helped. I'm not the kind to give every detail of a game I play. That's way too much work, and I don't want to bore people. I want to tell a fun story.

    To address Em's question about weather, my previous scenario was at night. I simply made it harder to fire accurately, using a dice roll modification. I got that straight from the original Avalon Hill rules. Bad weather might have a similar effect, but I'd have to look it up in the old rule book to see how they handled it.

    I like to keep my rule books very short and simple, so I prefer to put details that wouldn't be used very often into scenario descriptions rather than in the rule book.
    Last edited by josta59; 11-20-2020 at 01:09 PM.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •