The Portable Wargame Blows the Bridge

Last night, I pulled out the card table yet again and setup Tabletop Teaser #1. The goal was to try The Portable Wargame, rules as written.

The table is once again a 6 x 6 grid - a fairly small number of spaces for such a large attacking force and beyond what the rules themselves recommend (in Developing the Portable Wargame) for this grid size. The Germans have six infantry, 1 heavy weapons team(Pz. Gren.), 1 ATG, two tanks, a scout car (well a kubelwagen in this case), and a leader.

The Soviet left buckles slowly, while the right holds steady.

A blurry photo of advancing Germans.

The T-34 company on the left never recovered from the initial German infantry assault. Pressed back to the river they were destroyed

The Soviet engineers encountered issues wiring the bridge. The defenders are exhausted but the attackers are wearing out too.

The Soviet leader encourages his men to give their last drops of blood for the Motherland. They rise to the challenge and the German assault runs out of steam. The bridge never had to be blown.

I played using the two hit variant and the exhaustion point rules were in play as well. The game was enjoyable, and despite being nose down in the rules, it felt like I was engaged with the game on the table. I think the game lasted 8 or 9 turns.

One notable difference to my own rules is that units can move and engage in close combat in the same turn. The result was the Soviet tank unit on the left being put on its heels right from the start. I'm not sure I like this or not - in my mind the units are companies and spaces are 500m square, so advancing a kilometer to engage in close combat, without the enemy having a chance to fire feels off. On the other hand, it seems to increase the possibility of flanking the enemy successfully which does add to the fun factor.

The two point variant makes close combat in The Portable Wargame more to my liking. And, while I can think of lots of variations that work more like I picture close combat, I'm not sure they bring anything more to the game than the rules as written when using the two hit variant.

There were some grey areas- like can a heavy weapons unit on the flank of an enemy tank unit, otherwise engaged, continue advancing. I ruled yes, given that they don't have any integrated AT capability 

I also wasn't sure if a unit had the choice to fire then move, or if it is always move then fire. I decided I would go for a strict interpretation of move and fire, as move then fire. However, fire then move makes more sense to me. For one, it's "shoot and scoot" not "scoot and shoot". For another, it means if you want to move into range of the enemy, the enemy gets a chance to shoot first (a kind of reaction fire).

I did make a slight rules variation to account for the mixed composition of the Panzer Grenadier Heavy Weapons companies - a mix of HMG and mortar. I only allowed them to roll 2 dice instead of the three allowed for HMG units, but with the range of the mortars.

So, overall, I discovered I really like The Portable Wargame. The two point variant made all of the difference. Going forward, for the near future at least, I'll continue to use them ,but of course, I'll probably try some house rules: limiting close combat to units already adjacent at the start of the turn and a strict fire then move requirement to see if they work even more to my liking or if they break an otherwise enjoyable set of rules.

For smaller scenarios, like One Hour Wargames on grid, I may resort to using the full strength points if the games play too quickly. However, close combat becomes less decisive  and then I would probably find myself using one of my more lethal variants.

Only more games will tell!