A Tale of Two Portable Wargames and Smaller Grid Space

For some time, I have been contemplating the benefit of a smaller square for my grid. 6" feels right, but limits the grid to 6 x 6 most of the time (It can go 8x8 on my 4' square plywood, but I can't easily set that up and leave it out). 4" doesn't look quite right with the large scale CTS armor, and is a bit small even for 1/43-1/50 vehicles, although it has the benefit of a 9x9 table. 5" allows me to go with 7x7 (4.75 would give me 8x8 on my card table, but I don't feel like messing with fractions when measuring).

So, Friday, I painstakingly set out little stones to indicate 5" squares and setup Tabletop Teaser #1 (yes, again). For some ambience I kept the lights low and used the light from my little houses:

Soviet infantry and HMG companies guard the town while their commander entertains a visitor.

I turned the overhead light on to get a picture of the entire table.

The commander, furious about all of the noise that has ruined his evening, comes out to find the Germans at his doorstep.

The Germans managed to capture the bridge before the Soviets had a chance to blow it up. The 5" grid seemed to work well enough.

Was it better than the 6x6 game? Not significantly.  

However, it did allow me have a little more space to maneuver, for units to fall back to avoid taking damage, and turned a one grid space woods into a three grid space woods, which I rather liked. However, in terms of fun, I think it was about the same. Then again, I have fun just pushing figures around my table next to my laptop and rolling dice, so my standard is pretty low.

Next, I set out Tabletop Teaser #3, The Advance Guard Action,(available here) to try out the smaller square/more squares further. I had never played this one before which made it harder to judge the impact of the grid. 

The sides have identical forces but at "mid-day" they may receive reinforcements.

The Lend-Lease recon unit is visible on the Soviet side.

German motorised infantry race for the town.

Each side has reached its primary objective and threatens the enemy at the other.

The Soviets assault the German defenders in the town. A rather uninspiring picture of a tank battle.

The struggle for the town.

The Soviets force out the Germans and get comfy.

The German attacks on the Soviet positions near the bridge are repelled and the Soviet infantry occupies the cover of the woods.

The German reinforcements arrive.

But are outgunned by the Soviet reinforcements.

The Germans are running out of steam and have neither objective in hand.

Although their armor was able to drive the Soviet armor out of the town, they were flanked and destroyed by the second Soviet armor unit. Their force whittled to nothing, they abandoned the field.

The Germans had very little success in this one and when they reached their exhaustion point it really was the end for them - as by that rule, they couldn't advance to either objective. The Soviet T-34 reinforcement drove the last nail in.

This scenario definitely benefited from the extra squares - motorized infantry (subbed in for the light infantry) and recon units (light cavalry) chew up ground quickly.

The only time I really felt the smaller space was off was when enemy tanks faced off in adjacent spaces - their butts had to hang into the squares behind them even as their fronts nearly touched. Still, a minor inconvenience, and I do have a number of 1/50 scale tanks (just not for the Soviets although I have finally found some reasonably priced sources for resin prints of them) if it really bothers me. 

Is it worth sacrificing a few feet of my ground cloth to make a second grid cloth so I don't have to put out little stones? I think so. So, that's next on the docket.

First Shots Fired on the Italian Front

Finally managed to finish my Austrians (Armies in Plastic WWI Germans) - all the bits that were bothering me have been retouched and a suitable gloss applied.

Of course, it wouldn't due to just let them sit and so, I commenced with my first infantry contact on the Southern Front using Trench Hammer.

The scenario is based on a actual historical event - three Austrian stormtrooper assault patrols burst out of hidden tunnels in the snow to surprise lightly held Italian positions. Ideally the Italians would have a machine gun on the table as they did in real life, but I am awaiting mine from England, so it will be awhile yet. 

In the meantime, two Italian rifle sections and their "leader" stand watch or mostly just complain about the cold and the incompetent fools who think this icy section of rock is worth protecting.

The eyes! The eyes! (they freak me out)

Without warning two Austrian stormtrooper assault patrols burst forth from the snow! (In Trench Hammer terms, one unit is a bombing section, and the other unit is being treated as an Assault section)

The Italians are caught completely unprepared and the stormtroops advance rapidly, firing rifles as the bombers prepare to unleash their fury.

As they get closer the Italian officer is able to get his men to start firing.

As the first units of Austrians reach the trench, another assault patrol bursts forth from a hidden tunnel. (Another unit I classified as a Bombing section)

A struggle ensues for control of the trench but the Italian infantry on the right give a good accounting of themselves, driving off two of the Austrian units.

The unit on the left on the other hand was forced to abandon the trench, which the Austrians took quick advantage of.

The Italian infantry on the right raced down the trench and close combat ensued. After forcing them back, the Austrians closed to assault again but it was not enough and the Italian defenders were victorious.

In Trench Hammer units are sections and have specific purposes - as they did historically in the British and German armies at least. Generally speaking each side fields a platoon with some support (which I don't have yet). Since Austrian stormtroops don't have a platoon organization to speak of, the assault patrol of 9 men being the basic unit of the company, this is an ad hoc attack assembled from three assault patrols. 

These troops are a specialist type of their own but are not directly accounted for in the rules. For German stormtroops the rules suggest making most of the sections Bombing units and so that's what I went with (After all, the Austrians were trained by the Germans).

The Alpini are Dulcop and were not painted by me - I just painted their bases (well some of them) to match my preferred green. They will do for now, but they will eventually get some paint.  I'm also not set on the basing I used here - I may move to 2 figures on a 2" square like I use for WW2.

Speaking of, painting, getting the Austrians done and on the table has inspired me to get back to painting. I will either extend my Austrians - possibly with some ordinary rifle infantry (assault patrols often led the way for regular army units) - or some of my unpainted Bersaglieri.

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!

A Bridge Over Troubled Waters

Table Top Teaser #1 is one of my favorite scenarios. So I thought it'd be a good test of my Frankenstein's monster of a grid-based rule set for WW2 for 1 base = 1 company. Friday night, I broke out the card table and setup.

With a 6x6 grid, the table gets very crowded very fast despite the attacker's piecemeal arrival (the attacker has quite a few units for so few grid spaces). In my first game, several German units suffered losses very quickly due to an inability to fall back(I use the hit result table from The Portable Wargame) without colliding with another unit. But, because they have staying power, the situation didn't improve for the remaining units.

I chose to ignore the exhaustion point because had I not, the game would have been over by turn 5 or so.

Turn 6 or so - the last arrivals, er, arrive.

I reset the table and tried again using the two-hit variant for strength points originally proposed by Ross Mac and incorporated into Developing the Portable Wargame. This was a much more exciting game. The Germans still suffered some losses early but as they were eliminated whole cloth, it left breathing room for the remaining elements to maneuver. 

This isn't really an issue with the rules so much as recognizing that a large (for me) scenario in a small space, where stacking is not allowed, requires adjustments.

The Soviet defenders had lost two complete units by this point.

But on turn 10, they managed to blow the bridge . Admittedly, stranding their HMG company and a tank company on the other side of the river. Sacrifices for the integrity of the Motherland.

It occurred to me after the game, that in essence, my rules are really just a modified version of The Portable Wargame. 

I use a different firing mechanism (Similar to Memoir of Modern Battle (Cordery) and Hold the Line! units roll 3 dice to hit at 1 space, 2 at 2 spaces, and 1 at three or more spaces - the limit being dependent on the unit type), all hits count, hits are 4 or 6 in the open, 6 in cover, MGs hit on 2/4/6 or 4/6 against targets in cover (these are Morschauser's "to hit" numbers). Close combat is more violent than in The Portable Wargame, with infantry rolling 4 dice, and others rolling two or three, with the same hit numbers given. The number of dice doesn't change regardless of the hit points remaining. This makes close combat potentially decisive and possibly swingy even with mismatched units - closer to Morschauser (who, if it's not clear, I am a big fan of) than The Portable Wargame. There are some other rules changes that I like (units have to fire before moving, a unit can't initiate close combat unless they start adjacent to the enemy unit, and a few more).

All that said, as much as I *like* my modifications, I think I really ought to give The Portable Wargame a try again as written, but this time with the two-hit variant to see if that difference makes the rules-as-written close combat more acceptable to me.

WWI Italian Front Organizing Considerations

Returning to contemplation of my WWI Italian Front project, I realized I had completely forgotten what my rationale was for the Austrian poses I had selected to paint That may have worked to my advantage as it forced me to dig through my source materials again and think through my intentions with this project.

According to Hell in the Trenches (Morisi, 2018), an Austrian sturmpatrouillen (assault patrol) consisted of 9 men:

• One patrol leader
• Two Grenade throwers
  
• Three Grenade bearers with rifles
• One sapper
• Two  riflemen to protect the rest "of the platoon" (these 9-men patrols are said platoons ).
  

 

At 1:1 the above could represent the aforementioned assault patrol. There are plenty of scenarios suitable for just an assault patrol or two. For a game of Trench Hammer, which I want to give a go, what does it represent?

Every base above represents an assault patrol in this case (the bases are "sections" in the rules, so say 10-15 men paper strength). What does four assault patrols represent? It's not quite anything in particular.

There is an example on page 173, of a company in the 31st Division crossing the Piave, and it consists of 12 sturmpatrouillen. So, while this is hardly definitive, the picture above represents  approximately 1/3 of a sturm kompanie It's not a singular unit the way a platoon would be in another army or time period, but rather, it's four independent patrols that, for the sake of the game, I'm putting under a singular leader.

To represent the proportional weaponry/functions of the individuals in an assault patrol, from left to right, I'm assigning the following unit types for Trench Hammer: 

1. Leader
2. Offensive Oriented Infantry (from the Trench Hammer Expansion Pack )
3. Bombing Squad
4. Another base of Offensive Oriented Infantry
5. Trench Raiders / Assault Troops. (Trench Hammer doesn't have a Sapper / Engineer unit type that I can find, but Assault Troops can clear a path through wire, so that seems like a fair choice).

All are rated as Experienced to give them an edge. 

Whether I stick with Trench Hammer or switch to single figure games (H.M.G. where 9 figures is an Austrian company, for example, or GASLIGHT,  or One Hour Skirmish Wargames, for 1:1 low figure count, for example) remains to be seen. Trying to find the right niche for these figures/this period, that isn't already occupied by my WWII collections or by my Great Game collection, is the challenge. However, this is a suitable starting point I think.

Alas, this rather enjoyable mental exercise was undermined by the discovery of just how small the ICM 1/35 MG crew figures are in comparison to AiP figures:

The figure is a British gunner with an Adrian helmet from the Italian Infantry equipment set.

These figures are just far too small even for my low standards of compatibility. They are a good bit slighter than my 1/35 Soviets and Germans for WWII even. So, plan B for the MGs (Irregular Miniatures British MG team with gun with a head swap) it is.

Three Solo Boardgames

Although I hadn't been playing figure games (until last weekend), I had and have been doing some more board wargaming. All of the below are designed for solo play, which is a welcome change from managing both sides.

 First, I broke out the venerable Long Range Desert Group. It's a game I have played maybe a dozen times. Every time I find the victory conditions annoying - this time, I did not get enough kills to win, despite capturing the objectives.

Enemy Coast Ahead: The Doolittle Raid has been played before as well. I'm still playing the six starter scenarios that only make use of the attack maps. I have yet to branch into any of the approach or planning stuff. These mini games are fun though and a narrative develops naturally - pictured below we see a Zero has latched onto Doolittle. Thankfully, the pilot was a terrible shot, and Doolittle managed to shake the Japanese fighter over Yokosuka, before turning for China.

The latest and currently on the table is Pavlov's House. The board has three sections  for different levels of the action. It feels both personal - the Soviet counters have names and in most cases, photos, of the defenders  - and operational as you decide whether to send supplies to the defenders or setup anti-aircraft guns to prevent further destruction of your communications or supply barges, for example.

This is my first full-length game after playing a few trial turns the other day.

My defenders are in good spirits, despite one comrade becoming the victim of a German sniper,  but the German attacks have begun to intensify. Unfortunately, my machine gunners are apparently blind. On the plus side, my anti-tank crews are some of the best the Red Army has ever trained, at least when it comes to knocking out Pz II's and III's.

Thank goodness I bought the card table!

The game is not at all complicated and turns play quickly. The rulebook is mercifully well written and is clearly designed for use during play. There are three handy reference cards as well (not pictured) that are useful once you know mechanics of various actions. I'm not quite there yet for everything but the included page number references on the cards means I don't have to flip through the book to find the info I need.

Of course, as miniature gamer I can't help but look at these games as useful fodder for  toy soldier scenarios or campaign generators as well, but that's a thought for another post.

On the Grid Again

 Friday the dam burst and I played a flurry of games on a grid - spurred in no small part by my acquisition of a foldable card table.

It measures 38 in. square, which with my current grid cloth is still just 6x6 of 6 inch squares. But that's fine for One Hour Wargames scenarios with small forces.

I set out Scenario 14: Static Defence  - a favorite of mine  - and I tried some rules I had written up over the course of the preceding week. 

In this iteration, weapon companies were split up into attachments to rifle companies.

Soviet ATR companies can engage armor up to 1 space away. Other infantry have to close assault it.

I played two games like this. They were Ok but they weren't quite what I had hoped and had some flaws I found bothersome.  I combined them with some ideas from The Portable Wargame and tried again.

That was better but still not quite right. So I gave The Portable Wargame a chance as written - but using three hits per unit.

Soviets held off the attack on the town - which was the German target. They instead captured the hill rather accidentally.

That still wasn't quite right, for me. So, I scribbled some ideas down and slept on it.

Saturday morning, I set up a new scenario (Scenario 20: Fighting Retreat) because I needed a change from the last one.

Dramatic sunlight.

Classic Toy Solider MG team holding off the Soviet advance.

Very close to what the end of the last game looked like. The Soviet advance collapsed due to losses. I set exhaustion at 50% of strength points due to the small totals for each force.

The end result was exactly the kind of game I had wanted to play. I played twice even, just to be sure.

In the end it was an amalgamation of my own preferences, Hold the  Line, Bob Cordery's Memoir of Modern Battle and The Portable Wargame, and a little Morschauser (4's and 6's to hit and 2/4/6 for MGs).