For the other games I played this past weekend, I opted to use Disposable Heroes/Coffin For
Seven Brothers 1st ed (hereafter DHC7B). The second edition has been out awhile now, and while I'm sure there are improvements to play and to the writing, these have served me well for years now. My copy is battered, the cover has fallen off, and the pages are loose, so while I may replace them with a new copy, but I won't change editions.
I played the scenario twice with these rules, and both were surprisingly enjoyable.
I say surprisingly, because for DHC7B, this is a very small game and I've had issues with this before.
Unlike One Hour Skirmish Wargames (OHSW), which
is a 1:1 game with single figure maneuver elements, DHC7B is a 1:1 game
with fire team (1/2 squad) maneuver elements. It's also a more
"realistic" game: getting a team caught in the open against an MG-42 in LMG mode,
which rolls 5 dice to hit and has an anti-personnel score of 8 (meaning 8
or less on a d10 kills for each hit) is bad news for sure.
I suppose it's the difference between more "realistic" vs more "cinematic".
Apples and oranges really, and I like both. Last weekend, as it happened, I was more in the mood for apples.
The first game saw the German rifle/security patrol appear on the left and the Brits managed to do some serious damage. In the end though, the LMG - which appeared in the yellow building - and the rallied remnants of the security patrol overwhelmed the British (flanked, to my own surprise, and without cover; the British were fish in a barrel).
In the final game of the weekend, early reveals of blinds showed nothing.
Consequently, the British were able to advance, running from cover to cover.
As one team dashed to reach the yellow building, the German LMG team appeared on the left (this time closer to the grey house), firing in reaction.
Once the paras gained the yellow building, they were able to get the Vickers set up. As expected, the MG made quick work of the Germans opposite their position.
And began firing at the yellow building, taking out one paratrooper, but taking fire from two points: the building and from behind the burning StuG.
I just love that StuG model in close ups! |
Rifle fire downed the NCO, and the remainder of the German squad retreated, leaving the paratroopers in possession of the farm.
As mentioned, for DHC7B this is a very small game.
The rules give the impression that a reinforced platoon is the ideal size. That would be 6-12 maneuver elements or so. With just one squad (two fire teams) per side you would think the game would be quick and uninteresting but yet it was ripe with decisions to make - the higher lethality makes for more weighing of risks/rewards - and it wasn't over as quickly as you'd think(I didn't time it, but I'd say 30 minutes or so).
I think in part it's because units only ever fire with half of their figures and hitting anyone in cover is hard (killing them is fairly easy if they are hit). I also like that every time a unit is fired on, hit or not, it has to take a "guts" check - it just seems believable to me. Pinning and the like is just something I expect at this level of game.
If I recall, close combat in DHC7B is kind of a mess, at the very least OHSW is certainly easier, but thankfully it didn't come to that.
Some random thoughts:
The table was perhaps unnecessarily large (4' x 4') for either rule set. A 3x3 table would have been just as enjoyable. 2x2 could have worked as well, but I think then a 5 figure vs 5 figure game would be more in order. That said, 4' x 4' did allow for more blinds, spread farther apart.
Speaking of, the blinds system, such as it was, worked well. While DHC7B has a recon system for spotting hidden units, it was easy enough to make OHSW handle it and in both cases I did not expect the Germans to be where they were.
I had figured they'd be in the buildings but I didn't weigh those blinds any more heavily than the rest - is that a flaw or a design feature?
In fact, only once did Germans start in a building. So the games had the feel of two patrols encountering each other, fighting for the objective, rather than the British having to force the Germans out of their positions.
The "system" (it's a little simple to call it that) does not predetermine which blind represents a force and which is nothing, say as in marked chits, rather it uses a percentage chance of a blind being a unit.
For example:
There are 5 blinds for the LMG team.
- The first blind has a 20% chance of being the LMG.
- The second blind has a 25% chance (1/4)
- The third blind checked has a 33% chance (1/3).
- The fourth blind has a 50% chance (1/2).
Now you could say:
- first blind 20%
- 2nd blind 40%
- 3rd blind 60%
- 4th blind 80%
I like the first approach, and that's what I use. I'm sure someone who knows statistics could point out that one way is objectively better than the other. I am not that person, so I just use my preference (but if you are said person, I'd love to know which one).
Really enjoyed your battle report and musings upon it. I haven’t played the rules you mention but they sound interesting.
ReplyDeleteThank you! It was enjoyable playing the same scenario with two sets of rules and seeing the differences.
DeleteThey are a decent set of older WW2 rules - the armor rules have an interesting target acquisition rule that I like. The market is crowded with offerings in the same scale - more so than when I purchased DHC7B: Chain of Command and Bolt Action being but two. I have played the latter and enjoy it as well, but I only have it in PDF and flipping pages to find a given rule is more annoying to me that way (the hardcover is too rich for my blood). I do prefer the Bolt Action activation mechanism of drawing a die from a bag as it is quite solo friendly.
P.s I see the new edition of the rules is £35 so I will leave them as an idea for the moment.
ReplyDeleteThe price of the 2nd edition has served in part to dispel whatever curiosity I might have about them. I'm not convinced that I'd get enough "better" for the extra money. The 1st edition can still be had for $16 USD (new old stock), and used copies - not nearly as distressed as my own - often turn up on eBay for around that.
DeleteInteresting report, thanks for uploading.
ReplyDeleteMichael
Thank you, Michael!
DeleteI like the look of these games, apart from any 'movie' feel they might have, they look like a game of toy soldiers. I just wish I could get my head into playing them.
ReplyDeleteAs for the blinds, I prefer the 1st method because the relative chance that this blind is real remains equal as the number of blinds goes down. I see no reason why one of the remaing 2 should suddenly be 4x more likely to be 'the one' when they started with an even chance. My.02cad
Thanks, Ross! That is always the look I am going for regardless of the rules.
DeleteI enjoyed your 'apples' too! Your close-up photos are particularly splendid.
ReplyDeleteRegards, James
Thank you James! These figures are so full of action - they cry out for close-ups.
Delete