Categories
wargame rules wargaming

Scenario MO/01: The Observer

In this Scenario someone needs to see something…..

In my last post I described a small action in a narrative style.

I created the Scenario to try out some new figures. As I have no heavy weapons the challenge needed to be simple.

One box of Russian Summer dress Plastics Soldier Company 1/72 infantry plus one box of Early War US 1/72 infantry. Sadly the heavy weapons for the US figures get a very negative review on Plastic Soldier Review and from the photos I was inconvinced as well. It seems though that the Russians in all respects are dealt with better by PSC.

Also I game solo or rather ZERO. So the scenario had to meet certain specifics. The main one was that surprise or chance was needed to animate the game.

Most solo players are more than happy with rulesets that randomise outcomes far more than the norm for two player games. The reason is easy to see – deprived of your human opponent you need to substitute what would have been their random or unknown acts.

The following Scenario details will help you to apply this to your chosen rules and any number of players you chose.

RED v BLUE – for convenience I have used these terms. In the narrative the Azorians were RED and the Vossackians were BLUE.

RED objective: Place observer on hill to view valley below and call in an air strike against expected enemy concentrations.

BLUE objective: defender may or may not appear!

You can see immediately I have made this one sided in the sense that RED is the active party and BLUE the reactive party – well initially.

An abstraction of a Platoon – using 3 figures per section. Platoon leader has two rifleman. The observer team brought their own section with them. BAR’s and Garands are modelled by PSC. In the scenario Grabern split one section amongst his other three.

notable rules:

  • you should specify a distance for sighting or observing enemy units. This might look odd on the table when you can plainly see opponents in direct sight. This abstraction is fine – no different to the out of scale scenery versus figures or weapon ranges v movement. Distortion is the whole point of table top wargaming.
  • The defender throws each turn after RED has moved to find out if a part of its force has appeared
  • defenders appear at certain points (marked 1 to 8 on the map)
  • if RED pass through a marked point it ceases to be a point of entry for BLUE
  • to add variety troops can be of different qualities
  • movement was not hampered by the hills
  • movement was hampered by the woodland which covered all the hills anyway

I thought about which rules to use. Having returned only recently to the WW2 era I had previous rulesets to draw upon as well as new ones as yet untried.

  • Poor Bloody Infantry by Peter Pig
  • Chain of Command by TooFatLardies
  • One Hour Wargames by Neil Thomas
  • Various Featherstone rules – notably the set from Battles with Model Soldiers
  • “Battle” practical wargaming by Charles Grant Senior
  • “Operation Warboard” by Gavin and Bernard Lyall
  • Rapid Fire reloaded
played these and enjoyed them quite a few years ago
struggled to get into these rules despite liking TFL mechanisms/ideas
the go to ruleset – great for timepoor moments and even brain tired ones as well. A great antidote for “i am too busy to game”. They look like Vossackians to me…….and maybe both 28 and 25mm chaps on show – to be honest I had never noticed before?
A Classic ruleset (almost) – my first “bought” book – the “incomplete” ww2 rules were a fantastic technique of Donald Featherstone’s, to make you do some work yourself – definitely a Classic in that respect. Could you get away with half a product today?
discovered in a charity shop in Autumn 2021 – this book started a minor project and buying those Plastic Soldier Company figures, who fought this first WW2 wargame in many a long year!
In for a penny, in for a pound – having found the Grant book by accident I remembered an enticing blog post about “Warboard” being an often overlooked classic but more to the point definitely not typical. I have read it cover to cover – fascinating.
Just out in this format – Rapid Fire is now a veteran set – and with these quick play rules I will look again. Many years ago I dumped these in favour of Peter Pig before abandoning WW2 completely. Yes I have rebought Peter Pig PBI albeit secondhand.

To confound matters I remembered Neil Thomas published Wargaming an Introduction (WaI) that had a WW2 ruleset.

I cannot quite explain this – but I chose to run out these WW2 rules first. Well maybe I wanted a One Hour Wargames “feeling” with more detail?

I opted for this ruleset feeling that One Hour Wargames might be too “lite” for my needs.

WaI is maybe not familiar to many people. It has similar mechanisms to other rulesets.

Dice were always six sided except a 1d8 for defender unit location

Back to the Scenario the following were added to the rules

  • I permitted double moves at the start as my 6×4 or 1.8m x 1.2m table had a lot of distance to be covered for no response due to the sighting rules.
  • Essentially the units could sprint (double move) once followed by a minimum two moves at normal speed.
  • Sections comprised separate figures spaced up to 3cm apart
  • 3 Sections equalled a Platoon
  • I diced for observation distance on the day
    • 20cm on a 3
    • 30cm on a 4
    • 40cm on a 5
    • 50cm on a 6
  • After each RED move BLUE threw 1d6 to appear
    • 1= throw a 1d8 for location of defender appearing
    • throw 1d6 again to find out whats there
      • 1 nothing ! (this is logical confusion when solo gaming)
      • 2,3,4 means a rifle section
      • 5 means SMG section (could be another rifle section of course)
      • 6 means LMG or on a second check =6 again you get (1,2,3 HMG or 4,5,6 Heavy Mortar). In my game these would never have actually appeared – simply their effect being used.
    • I also tested units for grade/quality as WaI requires this info.
      • 1,2 2nd rate
      • 3,4,5 average
      • 6 elite

What Happened?

Lieutenant Grabern set off with his platoon and the observer team. The game lasted 17 turns including some double moves at the beginning. That also meant RED closed at a faster rate per BLUE chance of generating defenders.

On turn 2 a defender location (3) was generated but at this stage its type was not diced for

On turn 7 another location generated (5)

Location 1 was overrun early on so could never activate any defenders

On turn 8 location 4 was also neutralised by RED

Location (6) generated on move 9 along with (2)

On move 11 location (3) was discovered to be an LMG and an elite unit into the bargain. They quickly pinned White Section.

(5) produced elite riflemen and (2) became another LMG – also elite!!!!

Donovan wiped out the LMG at (3) on move 12.

But this was soon replaced by an average rifle section (6) generation

The Azorians were all average troops and once effectively surrounded started to withdraw from move 13 onwards. On move 15 White Section was destroyed while on move 16 the Platoon Leader (Grabern) Section was nearly wiped retreating to the enclosure.

The difference in the “Observers” moves forward and then back is due to the action ending for the Azorians at the enclosure and not behind Hill 90 which was still several moves away.

So there you have it. A simple scenario for a platoon type action.

I was surprised and pleased at the fun levels without heavy weapons or any armour present. They can wait their turn.

Finally the satisfaction is also in selecting, acquiring, painting and then gaming the figures.

lorenzoseventh's avatar

By lorenzoseventh

Wargaming in an erratic style

8 replies on “Scenario MO/01: The Observer”

I had a feeling you might have gone for Neil Thomas’ rules in some form, although you did have quite a selection there! 🙂 Having read your game report, that all seems to make good sense. I can see myself trying out more solo games in future, so I’ll need to randomise things a lot more. Have enjoyed reading these last couple of posts!

Like

Thanks John, I am an armchair rules gamer! However I have to say Neil Thomas rules really have grown on me over the years and make me put soldiers on the table very easily. But they have competition. Pleased you enjoyed these posts.

Like

Nice to see the detail behind the narrative. Many of my games are solo too. I’d say that it’s a good way to learn the rules or try new things, but it could just be that I like to win!

Like

Nice one, I noticed you had found solo rules for what a tanker. I did not know that. I have some delayed posts on what a tanker games played. In one of them I just used the rules as is, like you did, and they worked for solo.

Like

Yeah, I found solo rules, but early on was trying the rules out to see how they worked, so played the “as is” rules. In the end I like them enough to not bother with the solo bits.
Because of the activation mechanics, you never really know what you’ll be able to do with any given tank anyway, so while I have a broad idea what I want to do with the side I’m biased towards, actually I just have to play the best I can with what I roll. I have had one player (long long ago in a non-solo game) complain that that was the main weakness of the rules in his opinion. The fact that all he managed to do all game was drive slowly towards the fight only to be knocked out after one shot might have skewed his view a bit.
Looking forward to your WaT posts 🙂

Like

Thanks for the reply, I have to laugh about your opponents expectations, wonder what they would make of Peter pig or piquet rule sets which really don’t like you to have the total freedom found in fantasyland.

Like

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.