Chain of Command: Talking Tactics

[Lardy Rich]

After a bit of chat here yesterday, I thought I'd start a series of talking tactics for Chain of Command.  The rules are very firmly embedded in historical tactics, so this series looks at how real life tactics apply to the game and how to apply them effectively.

Part One is the introduction, here:
http://toofatlardies.co.uk/blog/?p=3282

As always, introductions are a bit dull, so I thought I'd add Part Two as well which looks at reconnaissance and the Patrol Phase.
http://toofatlardies.co.uk/blog/?p=3286



I do hope these are of interest.  If anyone would like to see any specific issues covered then please just leave feedback so I can sort that out for you.

Cheers

Rich

[Mad Doc Morris]

Most excellent! Thanks for the effort, that indeed is of interest.

[huevans]

Cheers, Rich. About to scout them out.

A handy tactic for me to justify avoiding work for 15 minutes or so. 

[Mr. Peabody]

Great stuff!

[Lardy Rich]

We've just posted Part Three onto Lard Island News.  Here we look at deploying onto the table from the attacker's perspective.

http://toofatlardies.co.uk/blog/?p=3296



We'll be looking at this from the defender's perspective tomorrow.

Rich

[Lardy Rich]

And Part Five is now up here:

http://toofatlardies.co.uk/blog/?p=3311

We cover the defender deploying along with issues of dealing withe enemy scouts and an opponent with overwhelming firepower.



A day off tomorrow.  On Monday we'll look at fire and movement.  My favourite!

As said before, if there is anything you'd like to see included, just leave feedback and I'll cover it.

Rich

[Too Bo Coo]

Rich, this is fantastic!  Please keep it coming.  IMHO I find CoC a much better game than BA for my tastes, but I find it's sometimes hard to get my mates to switch.  They have more or less all the minis, I think this may be quite helpful to convert the 'unsure but curious'

Cheers!

[Lardy Rich]

Hi Too Bo Coo

That's interesting, we tend to find that most people convert pretty easily, as you say, they have the figures so why not play both?  What seems to be holding them back?

Rich

[Too Bo Coo]

Hi Too Bo Coo

That's interesting, we tend to find that most people convert pretty easily, as you say, they have the figures so why not play both?  What seems to be holding them back?

Rich

Committing to another ruleset....  I know, it is baffling.  Somehow I think, as much as the BA guys say otherwise, its easy for former GW gamers to get into BA due to the pedigree.  Part of why I love gaming so much is that once I get the minis done, I can use your rules, try others, etc... 

I was going to run CoC for Poldercon this year, but went with Across the Dead Earth because minis wise, I am much closer to having enough ready for a 4 player game than for my WWII stuff. 

 I for one think it's a great game and although I have not played it yet, I can see that the leader-centric style seems more 'right' to me.  I hope the BA guys can forgive me, but when questions come up like, "Do the rules prevent the Sgt from being the LMG loader?"  I have to bite my tongue from saying, "In CoC this question would not even come up...."  but I digress

[Ahistorian]

Thank you for this Rich. I always enjoy the "theory" articles on the blog (and the rest of course) 

[Lardy Rich]

Too Bo Coo.  Interesting,  I suspect that familiarity with the mechanisms is, for ex 40k gamers, a significant plus.  However, what a shame it would be if all wargames were simply derivatives of what we already know!  Oh well, let's hope you succeed in broadening their outlook. 

Some of what is covered in these pieces could, in some way, also apply to Bolt Action I'm sure.  Unfortunately the fire and movement from the infantry manuals stuff doesn't work for them as the ranges are abbreviated and you can't deploy as fire teams, so real WWII tactics don't work at all. 

Ahistorian, thanks, glad they are of interest. 

Rich

[Ahistorian]

Some of what is covered in these pieces could, in some way, also apply to Bolt Action I'm sure.  Unfortunately the fire and movement from the infantry manuals stuff doesn't work for them as the ranges are abbreviated and you can't deploy as fire teams, so real WWII tactics don't work at all.

As delicately hinted at in WI325, they also don't lay down enough fire with MGs to make fire/manoeuvre at a section level a viable proposition. You could technically pick two five man squads instead of one ten man section, but small units don't do much with their paltry fire dice.

[Red Sveta]

I am interested in gaming the eastern front mainly up to 43. These unit tactics are interesting but what of the early war Soviet unit tactics? Where they just of the same sort or not as developed? Most, if not all the info I can find have the soviets as pretty much useless tactically during the early war and resorting to mass attacks. Does anyone know it the Red army used well developed small unit tactics early on?

[Too Bo Coo]

I am interested in gaming the eastern front mainly up to 43. These unit tactics are interesting but what of the early war Soviet unit tactics? Where they just of the same sort or not as developed? Most, if not all the info I can find have the soviets as pretty much useless tactically during the early war and resorting to mass attacks. Does anyone know it the Red army used well developed small unit tactics early on?

One can of course argue that the massed formations the Soviet's used was their 'tactic'.  The availability of so much human capital perhaps helped retard any perceived need to develop more nuanced tactics like say the German army.  Or it could have been partially the result of so many purges of the officer corps...  or a little bit of both, plus some?  It is an interesting question.

[warburton]

Great posts - very useful. Thanks!