War-games Illustrated Magazine posted a video of Combat Patrol(TM) on their Website today. See link here: http://wargamesillustrated.net/combat-patrol-playthrough/ Thanks to Chris Abbey at Sally 4th for taking the time to travel to War-games Illustrated to show them the game.
See the Combat Patrol(TM) Web page for more information on the game, information on how to get the game, free downloads, and how-to videos.
I read a post here in which Peter Schweighofer was musing about which comes first, theme or mechanics. As he said in his post, theme gets people to the table, but mechanics keep them coming back. As a good blog post should, it got me thinking. Certainly, I have signed up for games at conventions based on the event description, theme, scenario, or historical period. Many times I have been disappointed by a game with a terrific theme that uses a set of plodding and pedantic rules and walk away thinking about the four hours of my life I’ll never get back. That is an example of what Peter is describing in his blog post.
I am always in search of the next project. For me, the answer to this “chicken or the egg” question is “it depends.” I think you need to match the right mechanic to the right theme. A light-hearted theme doesn’t fit well with a set of detailed mechanics. While many are doing it, I think that some periods and scales do not fit will with mechanics that are too simplistic. (Simplistic is not the same as simple.) So I often keep a set of mechanics percolating in my head, but instead of cramming that mechanic into my historical interest of the moment, I keep them in reserve for when they will be a good fit for a new period.
I am always thinking about new mechanics. I don’t find a mechanic and then build a game around it, however. Often I think about a mechanic for a couple of years, often while running. The card-based mechanic that I use in Combat Patrol(TM), for instance, has been percolating for over 30 years. I first saw something like it in the late 1980s. I tried it again in the mid 1990s with an abortive ACW skirmish design, called Stealin’ Chickens for Gen’l Lee.
I have been thinking about a dice-progression mechanic in which modifiers change the size of the die, not the die roll. In such a scheme, my “base” might be a d8, but if I get a +2 for some reason, that means I am rolling a d12. What I like about a single opposed die roll mechanic with a dice progression is that if one player is rolling a d4 and the other a d24, there is still a chance, albeit a small one (6%), for the d4 player to succeed. Such a mechanic generally breaks as soon as you pass d12. Each next higher sized die adds 1 to the expected value of the die. I am being a little sloppy in my terminology here, but you can think of the “average” roll on a die as the sum of all the faces divided by the number of faces on the die. As an example, the expected value of a d10 is (1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9+10)/2 = 5.5. For common dice, you can that a shortcut of adding the highest and lowest face and dividing by 2. So the expected value with a d10 is 5.5; for a d12, 6.5; for a d8, 4.5. That’s all well and good, but what happens if you are at d12 and have to apply a +1. Some people will have you roll multiple dice. The problem with that is that one die gives you a uniform distribution, but the more dice you roll the more likely you are to have a strong central tendency, as a plot of all possible die rolls starts to approximate a normal distribution. Sometimes that’s fine. In fact in Santa Anna Rules! and Wellington Rules!, I used a d20 (uniform distribution) to approximate a normal distribution on purpose. But with a dice progression scheme, I think rolling multiple dice breaks the elegance of it. Also what two dice would you roll to get an expected value of 7.5? 8.5? An option is to “cap out” out at d4 and d12, but I don’t think this gives you enough variance. Recently I found a company that makes uncommon dice, so I have d14, d16, d18, d22, and d24 to add to the normal d4, d6, d8, d10, d12, and d20.
If you are interested, here is a table I worked up that describes the attackers chance of winning (rolling higher than the defender, ties going to the defender) based the type of dice each are rolling. (The table is not symmetrical because of the ties.) (This is the kind of analysis I think a good game designer should do. I don’t think most of the “buckets full of dice folks” look at central tendency and probabilities.)
So this is an example of a mechanic that is percolating and waiting for me to get interested in a historical period where this might be useful. I was thinking about some sort of small-scale skirmish / pseudo role-playing game, perhaps gladiators. My attack attribute says I am a d10, and your defense attribute is a d8. But you have a shield, which is a +2. I am slightly wounded, which is a -1. So now for my attack, I am rolling a d8, and you are rolling a 12. I have a 29% chance of success.
I have been thinking about players searching around the table for the right die. The search for the right die might work against the speed of play desired in a dice progression mechanic. Most of us can pick out the normal polyhedral dice from across the table through years of familiarity. The newer dice tend to look very similar and may be difficult to distinguish. I can see players not liking having to hunt around the table in the heat of battle. As I rounded up the dice for this mechanic — for the time in which the right period provides a muse, and there is a good fit between that period and this mechanic — I made sure that each die type is a standard color. D14s are all green. I would have liked the colors to follow a coherent color scale, but the non-standard dice come in limited colors. The best I could do was ensure that each die type is a different color.
I was reading one of the Wally Simon books that have been published by On Military Matters. In one of the articles he describes the difficulty of getting two units to stop shooting at each other once their lines halt. This was echoed in the Nosworthy books and showed up as an optional rule in Wellington Rules. I have been mulling over a mechanic for an 18th or 19th century battle game that uses an action, reaction, reaction, reaction mechanic, not unlike Ed’s Two Hour War-games’ chain reaction system. My worry is that several players may be sitting around watching two people “do stuff.” This brings up another point. I will often come up with an idea for a mechanic and then spend the next couple of years thinking about all its drawbacks and how to address them. This is what I did with the card activation scheme in the Look, Sarge, No Charts(TM) family of rules as well as in Combat Patrol(TM). Every mechanic has pros and cons. Do the pros outweigh the cons? Are there ways to mitigate the cons?
I have long wanted to create a jousting game that was interesting enough that you are interested in playing more than once. Most use some sort of mechanic in which I choose my attack and you choose your attack (and perhaps defense) and then we ride toward each other. Sometimes there is a mechanic that affects the outcome of the run based on impetus. These games are fun for an hour or so between other games or as a filler at the end of the night when the main even ends early. But they quickly become repetitive and boring. I’ve collected many different sets of rules, and they are more similar than they are different. I’ve been tinkering with the idea of using the diagram of a finite state machine to enable players to try to react to what they are seeing the other player doing as they run down the list. The idea is something like this: I initially had my lance high, but I see that you have your shield high. From a high position, I can adjust my lance to medium high or medium left. The finite state machine doesn’t have a transition from high to low. You know that I see that your shield is high. You have the option to keep your shield high or move it to medium. What will I do? Staying the same might mean that my defense if more effective, but it might be the wrong defense. Moving might give me a better defense, but since I moved, I would get some negative modifier, since I was not “set” the whole time. I might even combine this with a dice progression scheme as described previously. This is an example of the theme in search of just the right mechanic.
My point of this rambling is that while mechanics and theme are both very, very important, you have to match the right mechanic to the right theme. You don’t want to sit down to play a “serious” war-game and find that mechanics are like Munchkin. (I like Munchkin, but you don’t want goofy artwork and silly double entendre when you are repeating Leipzig.) Similarly, you don’t want to sit down to a Dr. Who game and find that you are tracking detailed physical damage (e.g., that bullet nicked Amy’s spleen, ricocheted off of something and exited between the third and four rib on the right side), ammunition usage (e.g, you have 9 bullets left in your 9mm automatic), fatigue, or a dozen other details.
In a couple of years, I plan to start on a project for the American Revolution. (I have a few other projects to clear from the painting table and the game design queue first.) I have been thinking about doing it in 10mm so that you can do the major battles on your kitchen table. On the other hand, the sizes of the units are so small and vary so widely, that 25mm/28mm might be better. When the time comes, I’ll start by reading several books that describe the Revolution at the tactical level. Then I’ll go to a couple of conventions and play every RevWar game I can find to first see if there is a set of rules I like. Maybe I’ll just use Brother Against Brother by Herb Gundt or an adaptation of Wellington Rules. If not, then I will begin thinking about the period. What are the salient ideas that make RevWar different from the wars that immediately preceded or followed it? What mechanics can best bring out those ideas?
So, is it theme or mechanics that are important? Both are equally important, but it is more important that the mechanics and theme fit together.
Most games put on by the HAWKs are kid friendly, but we often dedicate a table in the HAWKS room to games specifically targeted at younger gamers. This year we put on three of them.
Dave ran a game using Blood and Swash from the Big Battles for Little Hands book. A dragon has been slain on a remote island. Before the official troops arrive, the “government” has issued six exclusive contracts to bands of fearless treasure hunters to gather as much treasure as possible. The kids ran round the table fighting each other and looking for caches of goodies.
I don’t which kid won the game, but they all seemed to have a really good time.
The showcase event was our annual Armies for Kids Giveaway. The game is restricted to kids 10 and younger. This year it was a WWII game using Milk and Cookies Rules from Big Battles for Little Hands. The paper houses you see in this picture were lovingly hand crafted by Chris Johnson, as were the hills. The figures and tanks had been donated to the HAWKs. Through a number of painting seasons we painted and based the units.
Milk and Cookies Rules were written for kids as young as five years old. It has all the basic elements: movement, fire, and morale. It is written for periods ranging from ancient warfare to WWII. Units consist of four bases. The rules use six-sided dice. There are sometimes saves if the target unit is in cover. Pretty straightforward stuff. The game lasts about 90 minutes.
The young man in the black shirt spent a fair amount of time marching and countermarching with his tanks, but he seemed to have a great time.
The girl on the right was probably her side’s MVP. At one point she had troops in both of the two buildings in the middle of the table, which was the objective of the game. While she was eventually driven out of the far one, she remained focused on the objective throughout the game. She reminded me of my own daughter who when she was younger would often win at these convention games — and games not set aside for kids — by staying focused on the objective.
When the game is over, the kids take home the army they played with during the game. They also take home an opposing army, a set of hills, a set of buildings, and the rules and quick reference sheets. They also get a tote bag full of other goodies, like paints, brushes, rulers, and dice. That is what is mean by Armies for Kids. When the game is over, they have everything they need to play war-games with their buddies at home. Every once in a while we get some feedback from a parent that the armies from previous years are getting a lot of use. We would love to hear from a teenager or young adult about their experiences after Armies for Kids.
This has been a huge success. You should see the looks on their faces when we give them all the goodies at the end. Most of the parents know what’s coming, but the giveaway is a complete surprise to most of the kids.
I think this is the sixth Armies for Kids Giveaway we have done as a club in as many Historicons.
After Armies for Kids, I ran another 90 minute kids’ game, using the War Rocket rules from Hydra Miniatures. We had a lot of fun. One side had to blow up some important satellites while the other side had to defend them.
These kid-focused games take a lot of work and a certain amount of patience, but they are fun. They are our attempt to do something about the “graying of the hobby” other than grousing about it on TMP.
In addition to the Combat Patrol(TM) games already noted in a previous post, the HAWKS ran many great games at Historicon 2016.
In this scenario the British, Spanish, and Portuguese were trying to capture two key bridges from the French. I didn’t watch the scenario in detail, but I am pretty sure the the Allies beat the French.
In the Look, Sarge, No Charts family of rules large chart cards are replaced by labels on the backs of the bases and some special dice. While a number of gamers have a visceral reaction to the labels, this greatly speeds play. Those how have tried the rules seem to agree. I make my labels in a more neutral color which makes them just a bit harder to read but improves the aesthetics greatly.
In this picture you can seem some of Dave’s bases have the more neutral colored labels, and I don’t think they stand out at all on the tabletop. They are certainly less visible than a bunch of large pink rectangular chart cards on the table.
Normally Greg Priebe runs the kinds of games that seem to attract the few female gamers at the conventions. Since Greg wasn’t at Historicon 2016, one played in Duncan’s WWI game and my Warsaw Uprising game, two played in Don’s WWII Battleground game, and four played in Eric’s Hogwarts capture-the-flag game. Eric has now taken the crown from Greg for the most women in a HAWKs game. (Greg has had more in the past, but he wasn’t at Historicon to defend his crown!)
I don’t really know anything about how the game ran, except that everyone seemed to be engaged to the end and seemed to be having fun.
Don ran a historical scenario in which the Americans were forcing a river crossing against German opposition. Don had his usual Battleground WWII / Don Hogge groupies plus a few newcomers.
Duncan Adams ran two WWI games with his 1914 variant of Look, Sarge, No Charts, which takes element from both the WWII and ACW version of the rules in a very effective way. The pictures below probably mix the two games, but you will get the idea…
Duncan places dozens of small hill on his terrain to represent small folds in the earth and partially counteract gamer questions about “why can’t those guys see or shoot at those other guys.” This is Duncan’s way to compensate for the “pool table” effect, and it works very well.
Bill Acheson organized a track of games based on M.A.R. Barker’s Empires of the Petal Throne / Tekumel mythology. There were a couple of land battles and a naval battle. This one was a gladiatorial style skirmish with six-inch tall action figures as proxies for the various strange Tekumel characters. Bill is really good at repurposing toys for war-games.
Steve Gelhard ran a game using his popular WWI rules. The terrain and figures looked great. All the players seemed to really enjoy themselves.
Mike Byrne used Force on Force to run a game based on modern Iraq. Patrick Byrne also ran a modern Chechnya game on the rubbled city terrain, but sadly I didn’t get any pictures of that game.
Duncan and Dave ran a 10mm Fate of Battle game based on a portion of the Battle of Orthez in the Peninsular campaign. Duncan had spent a weekend making the specifically-shaped hill for the scenario.
The blue masking tape does not represent a river. This was used to mark the edge of the playing area.
Don ran a large Muskets and Tomahawks game. These rules are easy to teach and learn. The players seemed to really enjoy themselves. I’m sorry I didn’t get more pictures.
I didn’t get pictures of every HAWKs game. I didn’t arrive until later on Friday, and I was running four games back-to-back on Saturday. As usual, I think the HAWKs made a strong showing and ran a lot of fun games. The HAWKs room had 41 scheduled games (which is a bit light for us) run by 11 game masters. I personally ran five; although, I had only planned to run four. I don’t have the final numbers of events that were run at Historicon, but 40-50 (the HAWKs room average) usually constitutes between 5% and 10% of all the games at the show (not counting tournaments). Rumor has it there were ~550 games, so let’s say the HAWKs ran 7.5% of the games at Historicon 2016. If there were 2000 attendees, that means that 0.5% of the attendees (HAWKs) ran 7.5% of the games. I consider that a strong showing for one club. Few if any will show up in the glossy UK gaming magazines, but I think they were of at least average aesthetic quality and above average game quality.
What is the HAWKs room? For almost 20 years, we have run enough games at the big three HMGS East conventions to justify putting all our games in the same room. This does not mean that there aren’t other games run by non-HAWKs in the room; it means that if you are looking for a fun game run by a HAWKs member, you don’t have to wonder where to look. It also means that we can easily find each other if we are sharing terrain or playing aids or forget something. Over the years we have developed a loyal following, and there are folks who spend most of their time at the conventions in the HAWKs room.
If you like the HAWKs room, you will also enjoy our two-day mini convention in late September. See www.hawks-barrage.org.
I ran three Combat Patrol(TM) games at Historicon 2016. All turned out very well. In two of the games there seemed to be someone who was struggling with the card-based mechanics, but after a couple of turns everyone was pretty much self sufficient and running the rules themselves. I was relegated to the role of answering the occasional question. In addition to my two Combat Patrol(TM) games, Eric Schlegel and Kurt Schlegel each ran a World War II game on our rubbled city terrain using the rules. (We set up a rubbled city table on Friday and ran six different scenarios (with different rules) on the same terrain.) Also, Duncan Adams ran a Napoleonic game using the rules.
You can learn more about Combat Patrol(TM): World War II here.
Duncan Adams ran his very entertaining Napoleonic game using a modified version of Combat Patrol(TM). These variants will be published in the near future as a supplement to Combat Patrol(TM): World War II. In this scenario, the battle focuses on the two opposing skirmish screens between the two formed units. One formed unit is a line of infantry. The other is an advancing column. The idea is to fight your way through the enemy’s skirmishers and pick away at the officers and men in the formed units.
Killing enemy skirmishers score no points; that is merely a means to an end. Points are scored for wounds and kills on the formed battalions. The game was tied, with each side gaining twenty-six points after the planned seven turns. The distribution of hits forced the French to take seven morale checks and the British to take five at the end of the game. The Brits passed all of their morale checks indicating that the line held and was ready to receive the French charge. The French passed the first six morale checks but then received a “pinned” result on the seventh one. As interpreted at the battalion level, the French failed to close, so the game was declared a British victory.
You can see that the formed units are represented by “blocks of troops.” This is a convenient abstraction that keeps the focus on the skirmish fight, is easier than moving hundreds of figures that do not contribute to the focus of the game, and also acts as a game timer. The column advances six inches per turn. This means that the advancing skirmishers need to keep advancing or get bowled over. When the column is close enough to the line, it shakes out in to line, and the game ends.
My first game was as a fill-in GM. Greg Priebe was scheduled to run a Star Wars game using Combat Patrol(TM), but then work and family issues prevented him from attending Historicon. I offered to run his Star Wars game, since I am familiar with the rules. Greg had already done all the work to create the stats for the different Star Wars weapons. We didn’t have to use the body armor rules, since Stormtrooper armor doesn’t seem to have any effect except to look cool. The scenario involved a rebel smuggling ship that was shot down by the Empire and crashed into a city that had been destroyed by the Sith many years prior. The game was three sided, with the Empire, rebels, and a “scum and villainy” faction landing forces to collect the valuable artifacts scattered around the table by the crash of the smuggling ship. The scum and villainy faction even had a captured walker. The game was quite fun, and all the players got a good introduction to the innovative mechanics of Combat Patrol(TM): World War II.
The results of a hit in Combat Patrol(TM) can be a wound or incapacitation. In the picture above, you can see a white band around one of the Stormtroopers. This indicates that he has been wounded. When the number of wounds equals or exceeds a figure’s Endurance attribute (three, in most cases), the figure is considered to be incapacitated and is removed from the game. In this picture you can also see command dice next to two different Stormtrooper teams. The one on the right is gray. By convention, this is “normal.” I use these gray dice, because they tend to blend into the background and do not distract from the aesthetics of the game. The die on the left is black. That team had previously taken one or more morale checks, and one of the results indicated that the unit was “pinned.” To remind players, we place this black die on the unit. This indicates that the unit may only activate on black cards from the Activation Deck until it rallies.
Though I am not sure I set up the scenario the way Greg had intended, the game was pretty even. The scum and villainy faction found 8 treasures, the Empire 7, and the rebels 6.
In this picture you can see some of the cards from the Action Deck in Combat Patrol(TM): World War II. These cards are used to resolve movement, firing, damage, hit location, effects of high explosives, and morale. As a result, there are no chart cards to clutter the the table. The previous pictures were not staged or cleaned up for the photos. This is what a table looks like during a game.
Eric Schlegel ran a Stalingrad game in the rubbled city. This scenario involves a German attack on a Russian-held area. The Soviets are classed a Green troops for firing accuracy, which greatly restricts their effects. They have an anti-tank gun, a minefield, and a submachine gun squad, which helps a bit. In the play test a couple of weeks ago, the Germans successfully infiltrated and captured the required five buildings they needed. Below are some pictures from Eric’s game.
Saturday morning I ran a World War II game. This game involved an American paratrooper platoon defending two barricades that were blocking a German advance. The Germans sent an understrength panzer grenadier platoon to take the town and dismantle the obstacles.
The Americans had two squads of paratroopers. Each team (or half squad) also had a captured panzerfaust. The American squads had belt-fed M1919 machine-guns. The Americans also had a bazooka team. The attacking Germans had two SdKfz 251 halftracks, a Hetzer, two squads of panzer grenadiers, a panzerschreck team, and an extra light machine-gun.
The town is a mix of Crescent Root buildings and the excellent Sally 4th corner shops building I blogged about previously. The cobblestone area is from a craft store and came with the cobblestone pattern on it already. Most of the trees are from Battlefield Terrain Concepts.
We were a little light on players, so I took one of the German commands. We decided that we couldn’t take the town in a head-on attack. The Americans knew the direction we would approach and could sight in their weapons accordingly. I took one squad, the machine-gun team, and the Hetzer. My job was keep the Americans entertained. JJ broke his squad into two half squads and put one on each of the halftracks. Then as the game began, he pushed them down the right edge of the board to get behind the Americans.
The first halftrack disgorged its infantry on the American flank, but the Americans were able to quickly relax and chewed up JJ’s infantry in the field from the second floor windows and the rear terrace of the corner shops. The second halftrack continued past the bloodbath into a patch of woods behind the American position, where its infantry dismounted.
In this shot, you can see that the American bazooka team is repositioning based on our flanking maneuver. It eventually got a mobility kill on my Hetzer, which greatly limited its ability to contribute to the fight.
In this shot you can see that the halftracks and infantry have gotten behind the Americans. At this point, the Americans were surrounded. The Germans had taken many casualties. I had half my infantry gunned down in an open field trying reach the protection of the white walled area in the upper right of this picture, and JJ’s infantry took a bloody nose in the field surrounded by the hedges, but we had also severely attritted the Americans and had them surrounded. At this point the Americans conceded. I think the game was a big success. Everyone had a good time, and the game might have gone very differently. I am happy with the scenario.
Saturday evening I ran a game based on the Warsaw uprising. The Polish underground saw the Russians approaching Warsaw and rose up against the Nazi occupiers. The Russians then stopped outside the city and let the Germans kill most of the Poles capable of resisting the Russians’ subsequent occupation of Poland. This scenario involved the Germans trying to clear a path through this portion of the rubble city while the Poles were trying to inflict as much damage as possible and slow the German advance.
The Poles began with six four-man teams on the table, and each turn they deployed one or more additional teams. These reinforcements could pop up anywhere on the table, but they couldn’t be within line of sight of the Germans when they did so; someone would have to move at least once before shooting at each other. The Poles did a nice job of trying to hold back the Germans, but luck didn’t go their way. There was one Polish player who seemed to have a sniper in his team; every time he fired, he got a fatal head shot on a German.
Again, note the clean look of this table with little table clutter to spoil the aesthetics of the game. The table is a mix of Crescent Root, Amorcast, Miniature Building Authority, and scratch-built buildings. The rubble piles are made from model railroad blast. The ground cloth is from Cigar Box Battles.
I thought I took more pictures of the table than this, but I was having some trouble with my camera. In this picture you can see advancing German infantry, a dead Pole in the center of the table, and some other Poles in a rubbled building on the right.
All three games that I ran, the two that the Schlegels ran, and the one that Duncan ran were successful. The players picked up the rules quickly, and everyone seemed to have a good time. As mentioned previously, at first one or two people struggled with the unique mechanics of Combat Patrol(TM), but eventually they all got it. Interestingly, the guys who seemed to have the most trouble were the ones who approached me after the game about how much they liked the system.
Sunday morning tends to be pretty light at Historicon, Cold Wars, and Fall In. A few years ago there was a push to add Sunday morning games. The HAWKs responded. We typically put on at least two Sunday morning games — which constitutes about half the scheduled games. This year Eric ran his car race game using Jamie Davis’ Future Race rules and Duncan ran a WWII naval game, using his “Charted Seas” rules.
Charted Seas uses the combat mechanic from Uncharted Seas, a modification of the activation mechanism from X-Wing, and ship data from the Axis and Allies collectable miniatures game. I’m not all that interested in “modern” naval games, but this mashup really works well.
Eric ran a car race game through the desert that, based on the whooping and hollering, was a huge success.
If you haven’t played Future Race, you are missing out on a terrific game — and the only worthwhile thing to come from Star Wars Crapisode I. Originally conceived to have pod races using Micro Machines pod racers, we have used the rules for air boats on the swamps, dog sled races, and flying carpet races — in addition to the pod races for which it was intended.
While these games were going on, JJ, Don, and I played in a game of the 1978 Source of the Nile game (before it was licensed to Avalon Hill) run by one of the original authors. We had a very good time. My expedition got lost in the desert. My guide and half my askari and bearers wandered off looking for food and water. Then a freak storm struck the desert, and most the rest of my expedition ran off. A rhino killed my last bearer, and hostile natives killed my last askari. I wandered out of the jungle, dehydrated and babbling, with only my musket and notebook, but I still managed to eek our third place. I haven’t played Source of the Nile in 25 years. It definitely has an old feel to it, and I think it could benefit with an update to more modern mechanics, but it was a fun and nostalgic game.
There was a recent post on TMP about whether people have experimented with painting figures in other than color. That reminded me of these figures I painted some years ago. At the time, I had grand plans of doing a whole game in black and white except for the camera crew to give the game that old movie look. I was even going to make the scenery as flats like on a movie set. These five figures are as far as I got.
Greg, Chris, Geoff, Don, and I constituted the HAWKs expeditionary force to Nashcon in Franklin, TN, this past weekend. Our adventure began Thursday afternoon, when everyone converged on Rally Point Surdu to pack the rental minivan with terrain, drinks, snacks, and HAWKs.
As a group we ran six games at Nashcon. In order to fit all the terrain and figures for this many games into a minivan with five gamers, we had to be quite clever about planning. This meant re-using terrain between games. We ran three games on the same jungle terrain (two WWII Pacific theater skirmish games and a Dr. Who game), two on the same Paris 1814 terrain (Paris 1814 and a fantasy battle), and one with its own terrain (British march from Concord to Lexington).
We set off a little before noon, stopped outside Lexington for the night, and arrived about 1000 on Friday — plenty of time to set up out first games, go get Chinese food for lunch, and return to start our games on time.
Don and I used the same terrain to run two WWII skirmish games. Don used Battleground WWII by Easy Eight for an American raid on a Japanese radio outpost. The raiding force consisted of Marine raiders and Army paratroopers. Despite heavy casualties, the American seized the compound. Then I ran a Combat Patrol(TM) game featuring a Japanese counter attack to recapture the facility.
While Don was running his Battleground game, I played in Bob Duncan’s excellent Spanish American War naval game, using his Gunboat Diplomacy rules. Below are a few pictures of this game. Bob scratch built all of the ships in this game. It was fun, but we Germans were soundly defeated.
Below are some pictures from my Combat Patrol (TM) game. The players seemed to catch on to the unique mechanics of Combat Patrol(TM) without much difficulty. The game went well. We started where Don’s Battleground game left off. The Americans had just seized the radio facility and had not consolidated on the objective when the Japanese counter attacked with a platoon of infantry and a Chi-Ha tank. The Chi-Ha quickly suppressed the airborne bazooka team, but the Marine bazooka team was able to get off a good shot that brewed up the tank. Two squads of Japanese were being chewed up by an understrength Marine squad in the jungle, but then the Japanese launched a very effective banzai charge that nearly wiped out the Marines. A funny movement (for me as GM) arrived when one of the Japanese players called for mortars on some airborne troops. Then the player who called for the mortars decided to charge the Americans — in the blast radius of the mortars he had himself called. When the mortar shells landed, the only figures in the blast zone were the Japanese who had called for the mortars in the first place. About half the Japanese squad caught in the burst radius was wounded or incapacitated. In the end, it was determined that the Japanese were unable to recapture the facility, despite having inflicted many casualties on the Americans. I think the game went well, and the players seemed to enjoy it.
While I was running this Combat Patrol (TM) game, Geoff played in a terrific looking pirate game. The guy running the game had purchased these fully rigged models. Then he told me he floated them in a tub of water and dye to find the waterlines. He then used a Dremmel to cut off the bottoms. The result was fantastic. According to Geoff, the game was a lot of fun.
Below are three shots of other games at Nashcon that caught my eye.
Saturday Greg, Chris and I ran two Look, Sarge, No Charts games. The first used Fate of Battle and was the Napoleonic battle of the defense of Paris in 1814. Russians and Prussians advanced to take the heights around Paris. The second game used Bear Yourselves Valiantly. It was a replay of the Paris game. The Russians and Prussians were replaced by humans, dwarves, giant ants and swarms of other creatures. The French were replaced by elves. The Russians and Prussians were unable to get over the heights and into the outskirts of Paris. On the other hand, the “allies” were able to breach the elven defenders and get into the outskirts of their capital. I think the players enjoyed the games. As usual after a turn or two, we game masters had little to do as the players were doing everything themselves. We just had to call off activation cards and answer questions.
Saturday evening, Geoff, Chris, and I played in Greg’s Dr. Who game along with several other folks. The scenario involved a group of developers that were turning the site of Don’s and my WWII games from Friday into a luxury hotel on a jungle island. While doing so, they run into Japanese who do not know the war is over as well as a Dalek in the jungle. Hilarity ensued. I had Duke Morrison from my various Pulp games, and I eeked out a victory over Boss Ebenezer McSneed (Geoff) and the Doctor.
As usual, the HAWKs Expeditionary Force enjoyed Nashcon. We thank the convention organizers for running this excellent event.
Since I was in England for business the weekend before Partizan, I stayed an extra couple of days to attend my first UK gaming show and also run two participation games of Combat Patrol. Bottom line: I had a terrific time!
My trip to Partizan began Saturday morning at the King’s Cross train station in central London. 75 minutes later, I was in Newark on Trent at the Newark Northgate train station.
I left my mammoth suitcase with suits and other business attire in my London hotel and just travelled with a small overnight bag. An hour’s walk from the train station brought me to my hotel.
The Grange Hotel in Newark was very nice. The woman running the hotel was extremely helpful. The hotel was clean and well appointed. The included breakfast the next morning was excellent! The room was small, but it had a private bathroom with a shower, and it came with free internet. I relaxed in my room for an hour before walking to the Newark showgrounds. I was supposed to meet Chris and his wife there at 1600 to help set up their booth, so that we would be ready Sunday morning when the convention began.
Partizan was held at the George Stephenson exhibition hall at the Newark showgrounds. It was a very nice venue. I thought it was going to be a 2 mile walk to the showgrounds from my hotel. The GPS on my phone, however took me on a circuitous route, across areas of busy highway traffic with no pedestrian walkways, and to the wrong side of the grounds. I had to then set out cross country to get to the open gate to the showgrounds. I left at 1400, thinking I would grab something light for lunch along the way and still arrive early. I passed no food opportunities, and it took me a full two hours to get there. Still, it was a good walk, and I enjoyed it.
I helped Chris set up the terrain for our Combat Patrol participation games while his wife, Ann, laid out the booth. This was my first chance to see the Sally 4th buildings in person, and I think they are very nice. I bought one to bring home and assemble. They have photorealistic sheets to apply to the buildings. These give a very nice look and also hide the exposed tabs on the MDF buildings.
After setting up for the show the next morning, Chris, Ann, and I had curry, and then they dropped me off at my hotel where I watched an episode of Foyle’s War and went to bed.
The next morning, I had a full English breakfast and walked around the hotel’s traditional garden while waiting for my cab to take me back to the convention. I highly recommend The Grange.
Below are three wide views of the Stephenson hall during setup Sunday morning and later in the day. Partizan ran from 1000 until 1600 on Sunday. It was a very short event that was very fun, but it didn’t give folks time to play in more than one participation event and also do any shopping. It was over before I knew it.
The food during the convention was different than what we would be accustomed to in the US. Instead of hotdogs, meatball subs, and the like, the caterer had pasties, curry, sausage rolls, and other more traditional food. They also had a beef burger (a.k.a. hamburger), cheese burger, chili chips (fries), and cheesy chips (again, fries). I was pretty busy and didn’t try any of the food. At one point Ann offered me a salmon and cream cheese sandwich on a roll that hit the spot and tided me over until dinner.
Combat Patrol Participation Games at Partizan
A major reason for me to attend the show was to promote Combat Patrol. Chris has been a huge advocate for the rules in the UK. He provided all the figures and terrain — in fact crashing to paint a platoon of American armored infantry in the ten days leading up to the event. Participation games are relatively rare at UK shows, where the focus has traditionally been on the trade stands (vendor booths) and clubs running demonstration games. Partizan is trying to make a large number of participation games their trademark feature. There was an area off to one side, labelled the “Participation Zone,” where a number of game masters set up games. Also, in the UK, since participation games are rare, it is also uncommon for folks to sign up for a participation event before the show. For the Combat Patrol game, however, we had three people signed up ahead of time. The down side of this informal approach was that it appeared a number of the participation games did not take place. They were set up, and GMs were standing by, but there didn’t seem to be a set start time, so I think many of the GMs never got a quorum at any one time to begin.
I ran two participation games. The first was supposed to begin at 1000, but a lot of folks wanted to get into Partizan and do a quick sweep of the vendors before starting a game — including me — so we didn’t begin until 1100. The first game involved German infantry trying to dislodge American paras from a French village at D+2. The second game had the Germans occupying the town and a unit of American armored infantry with halftracks trying to push them out. The scenarios were more about showcasing the rules and letting folks give them a go than about a carefully crafted and balanced story.
We had four players in the first game, and we had three players in the second game. In some cases the players were folks who had already purchased and read the rules but thought the participation game would be a good jump start. In other cases, the players had seen the Web discussions and wanted to give them a try. I have to say that I was happy to see a number of folks buy sets of the cards and rules as a result of these games.
The Sally 4th booth was right on the edge of the Participation Zone. Ann was doing a brisk business much of the day selling the excellent Sally 4th terrain products and the equally excellent Combat Patrol game.
While I was using half the table for the participation games, Chris was on the other end of the table collaring passers by. When people walked up, he would give them a few-minute briefing on the rules and demonstrate small arms fire resolution. This was a very good model, because it enabled Chris to reach those folks who weren’t able to devote three hours of a six-hour convention to playing a game. Apparently the concept that really resonated with many of the Brits was the idea that the figure hit by a shot is randomized across those figures in the target area, preventing someone from sniping at the forward observer, key weapon, etc.
This is a shot of the first game of the day. I got too busy to take any good pictures of the second game. All of the players took the game in the spirit in which it was intended. They were playing the game to win, but they were also interested in just trying out the rules. They were friendly and amicable. Before the second game, while I was explaining the rules to four players, one of them mumbled an obscenity under his breath and just walked away. Apparently there was something about Combat Patrol that elicited a visceral response. It was actually good that he chose to walk away before the game so that he didn’t ruin it for the others, but it was a little surprising — to me and to the other players.
A highlight for me came in the second game when I had moved over to walk a player through his first go at combat resolution. We flipped some cards and went through the process. Afterward he looked at me and said, “That was…” I thought he was going to say “bad,” “complicated,” “odd,” or something negative. Instead he said, “… really simple.” The look on his face told me that he had had the Combat Patrol epiphany! He and his buddy ended up buying copies of the game, and he joined the Yahoo Group before I got back to the US.
Other Random Photos
Below are additional pictures and some musings about Partizan. I wasn’t careful to note the periods, clubs, rules, etc. for these games as I was taking the pictures. I don’t know for sure, but I am guessing there were about 16-20 demonstration games and a like number of participation games at Partizan.
This game caught my eye. It was a demonstration game, and most of the day it seemed to have just two guys playing with each other. The figures are made from full sized clothespins and some horse silhouettes cut from MDF or thin plywood.
Recently there was a bit of a kerfuffle at Cold Wars in the US about perhaps sending someone to a UK show to figure out how to bring up the aesthetic standard of games at Historical Miniatures Gaming Society (HMGS) East shows. I saw some terrific looking games at Partizan as well as some not so pleasing games. On balance, I thought the aesthetic standard was about the same on both sides of the pond. Those games put on by clubs as demonstration events were generally to a pretty high standard.
I think the thing that surprised me most about a UK show was how demonstration events were conducted. My concept of a demonstration event is what we did as a club several years ago at Ft. McHenry. We had five or six of us playing a War of 1812 game in a small room near the flag pole. We had some posters on easels to describe what we were doing. We had two of our club members hovering nearby to explain what was going on to interested people, answer questions, and encourage people to try the game for a turn or two. When someone was interested, one of our folks handed over his command and then acted as coach/mentor to that person until he was ready to depart. At that time, the club member would resume control. For the demonstration events at Partizan, my impression was that it was largely guys in a club playing a game together, but in a public forum. I saw very little interaction between the demonstrators and the passing gamers. I stopped at several tables to take a photo or two, but no one stopped playing their game to see if I had questions or to explain what they were doing. I supposed I could have interrupted them to ask questions, but that seemed somewhat awkward. I didn’t want to be the rude Yank interrupting everyone’s fun.
I have always felt that naval games are at a distinct aesthetic disadvantage compared to land games, because there is relatively little you can do to provide points of interest on the table. This game was interesting from the sheer number of ships on the table. This game and the large game behind it were both demonstration games. You can also see that the vendors were arrayed around the gaming area, which is something I really like. A reason I have come to enjoy the smaller regional conventions in the US in the past few years is that I like this model of the vendors being interleaved with games. Players can pop over and ogle between turns, and vendors have something of interest to observe when their booth is not full of customers. It somehow seems more collegial to me.
I thought the terrain in this participation game was particularly effective. Having grown up near Detroit when the winters were harsh and long, I can say that deep winter can feel gray like this.
Below are a few random shots of demonstration games.
In summary, I had a terrific time at Partizan and thank the organizers for putting on the show. UK shows are along a different model than US shows. Given that I was there as much to sell my own product as I was to just participate, I found six hours too short. I hit the vendors as a commando raid, but didn’t really get to browse and see if something jumped out at me. Chris and his wife were tremendously helpful and friendly, as were most of the vendors and participants. As someone who enjoys pub food, I found the selection of food items interesting and different. The George Stephenson center was very well lit, and the high ceilings seemed to mitigate the game floor noise that we experience at many conference venues in US shows. I would definitely return if my schedule and resources permitted.
For me Partizan was a tremendous experience.
A number of people have agreed to develop supplements for Combat Patrol(TM). Supplements in active development are Napoleonic Wars, The Falklands, several British colonial periods, and modern Afghanistan and Iraq. Several of the supplements have elements common to each other. For instance, several of these periods require rules for close formations and cavalry. To help ensure that these supplements are consistent with each other and the intent of the base rules, I hosted a play test day in my gaming room. We had initially hoped to get in three games, but ended up only running two.
Everyone converged on the “war room” at 0900, but we spent the better part of two hours just talking about Duncan’s Napoleonic supplement, how to deal with closed order troops, cavalry, charging, etc. It was a good session and set the stage for a successful play test.
I have found that a play test event like this needs to be a small group of the right folks who are okay with changing the rules on the fly, can offer suggestions that remain in keeping with the tone and intent of the base rules, understand the desire for simplicity and consistency, etc. In this case I only invited those folks who were interested in writing a Combat Patrol(TM) supplement. To me it was important that I got everyone on the same sheet of music.
Our intent with this supplement — and all of them really — is to change as little as possible from the base WWII rules. There needs to be a compelling reason to make a change or addition for period feel. Otherwise, we want to make sure that supplements are as consistent with the base rules and with each other as possible.
Our intent was to test as many aspects of Duncan’s supplement as possible. One of the reasons to select a play test group carefully, is that you also need folks who won’t get too wrapped around the axel about trying to win the game or scenario anachronisms. In the case of the photo (above), we used Mexican lancers as part of the British force, because those are the only lancers Duncan had in 28mm, and we wanted to test the lancer modifiers to the basic melee rules.
In order to test a wide swath of the rules, we had lancers, regular infantry, Rifles, hussars, etc. The scenario involved a small British detachment defending the house at the top of the picture with the rest of the British riding to their rescue as the French try to seize it.
In advance of Chris’ farmhouse defenders, Chris had deployed a section of infantry in open order in the woods to slow down Zeb’s French. Zeb advanced slowly through the woods in formed lines, while Chris spread out in open order. Eventually Chris was driven from the woods. One of his soldiers was left behind accidentally as most of the section fled the woods and ran toward the farm yard. Once the “rear guard” was out of command radius, be became “pinned,” and Chris couldn’t extract him, but the figure, who we dubbed “Crazy Jenkins” held of several of Zeb’s attacks for several turns, slowing the French advance.
As a major focus of this play test session was to test the cavalry rules, Zeb and I conspired to create a cavalry battle in the center of the table. Unfortunately as my lancers advanced and deployed, Zeb activated first and charged my lancers with his hussars. As luck would have it, he was able to gain impetus and I was caught stationary. The results were ugly for me.
Duncan’s intent was for these melees to become confused fur balls that would take a turn to two to resolve. Our thinking is that much of the confusion of a melee is generally abstracted away at higher levels of abstraction, but we want this to be explicit in Combat Patrol(TM): Napoleonic Wars. You can see elements to three cavalry units in this picture: Zeb’s French hussars are in the center and left, my lancers are in the center, and my hussars are toward the bottom.
Slowly my numerical advantage over Zeb begin to tell, and he collected a lot of morale markers (the pile of green chips). His cavalry scattered, and I moved to reorganize my cavalry and work around the exposed flank of the French infantry.
I attacked this French infantry unit on the flank and rear, but the French passed their Reaction check and were allowed to face their second rank to the rear. The results were ugly for my cavalry. While we still need to tinker with the modifiers to melee a bit, in general, the new rules for close order vs. open order, cavalry in melee, and cavalry vs. infantry seem to work well. We are still thinking about the advantages and disadvantages of being in close order.
Duncan has come up with a mechanic that I like for cavalry. There is no charge bonus, per se. Cavalry must spend the last four inches of its move going straight ahead in order to receive an impetus bonus in the melee. Remember: this is a skirmish game, not a tactical game. In my “charge” around flank of Duncan’s infantry, I did not have impetus, which hurt me in the subsequent melee. I think it worked pretty well.
I had smashed my cavalry against Zeb’s cavalry and Duncan’s infantry, and Duncan and Zeb still had two untouched sections of infantry. Chris was is sad shape in the farm yard with Zeb’s battered by still good infantry closing on him. At this point, we had accomplished our play test goals and had a clear winner, so we called the game and set up our second play test.
The second game was a play test of Greg’s Falklands supplement. After we cleaned up I realized that I didn’t take any pictures. Greg has ordered a platoon each of British and Argentinians for the Falklands, but for this play test we used his UNIT troopers from his Dr. Who games for British and my WWII US for Argentinians. The terrain was mostly barren and rocky. We used Top Malo as the play test scenario. As the Falklands war is much more like WWII than the Napoleonic Wars are, there were fewer optional rules to test. We tested the new weapons for the Falklands, and we tested rules for night fighting. According to Greg’s research the Argentinians had better night vision than the British, but the British employed them better. Greg’s rules seemed to reflect this well. By this time, Zeb had had to leave, so we had the four member of our club with the most notoriously cold dice facing each other in the dark. In the real battle the British set the Top Malo house afire with M72 LAWs, but Chris and I got “out of ammunition” results with most of our sections when we tried to use our LAWs, meaning that we ran out of them. With the Argentinians having better night vision, and our LAWs depleted, we had no choice but to advance to close range across largely open ground. The results were predictable. Greg and Duncan soundly defeated us; although, Chris made excellent use of his M203 grenade launchers to soften them up. Sorry I don’t have any pictures to show, but with all the surrogates for figures and terrain, it wouldn’t have looked very Falklands-like to purists.
It was a successful day. I think we’ll have the Napoleonic supplement ready to share with a slightly wider group of play testers in a few weeks. Greg and I need to think a little more about night fighting, but the basic concept we employed seemed to be okay. I hope to schedule another play test day to focus on Iraq and Afghanistan and perhaps another Falklands or Napoleonic test. We had hoped to have The Falklands done before Salute, but the real world has gotten in the way.