PAGES

Thursday, October 4, 2012

Cold War Gone Hot - Force on Force


Gary stopped by for Wargame Wednesday this week. I’m still obsessing about Force on Force and determined to get my head around the rules. So I set up another quick infantry skirmish – this time with some longer lines of sight!

The action was between some Soviets and British in a fictional “Cold War Gone Hot” confrontation.

Berlin, September 1988

SITUATION

The Soviets have launched their attack on the west. Berlin is in ruins. A Small band of British Paras is holding on to the last of the area held by NATO.

SCENARIO

Duration: 8 turns
Initiative: Soviets have initiative for first two turns, then test thereafter.
Fog of War: Deternimed normally by Reaction Tests
Table Size: 5’x4’

SOVIET MISSION

Push through the British position and  enemy from the area.

SOVIET FORCES
Initiative Level: D8
Confidence Level: Confident
Supply Level: Normal
Body Armour: None
Troop Quality/Morale: D8/D8

Soviet Forces

1x Leytenant AK-74

1x Serzhant AK 74

6x Soviet Rifle Teams, each with:
- 1x Team Leader AK-74
- 2x Riflemen AK-74
- 1x mchine-gunner RPK-74

BRITISH FORCES
Initiative Level: D8
Confidence Level: Confident
Supply Level: Normal
Body Armour: None
Troop Quality/Morale: D8/D8

British Force

1x Medic

3x Fire Teams, each with:
- 1x Team Leader SA-80
- 2x Riflemen SA-80
- 1x mchine-gunner LSW


THE GAME

I took the Soviets and Gary took the British. He had half the table to set up in I set up close to the opposite edge.

(Remember: click on the pictures for a bigger version)


Soviet Rifle Teams 1 and 2 on the Soviet left flank. In the back ground you can see Teams 3 and 4 taking up the center.


Soviet Teams 4 and 5 on the right flank.


The British defence line running down approximately the center of the table. From left to right Fire Teams A, B, and C. Fire Team B, in the center, is accompanied by the Medic.

All the British started the game “Hidden”.

TUN ONE

Soviet Teams 2 and 5 were declared to be on Over Watch.


To start things off I took Team 3, in the center, and rushed them forward to the builing facing them.


This drew fire from British Fire Team A and one of the Russians went down. Morale check was passed, the team continued to the backside of the building….

Question… Now I declared that all I was doing was running across the street with a tactical move (no declaration of  shooting – as no one was visible) if an enemy team interrupts and fires, do I get to shoot back in a ”round of fire”…?


Soviet Team 4 then moved up to occupy the building vacated by Team 3.


This also draws fire from British Fire Team A – which knocked out another Russian. Soviet Team 4 returned fire with little effect.


Over on the left Soviet Team 1 hopped a wall and dashed for the cover of a big pile of rubble. None of the British responded.

Team 6 back on the right also crept forward, but couldn’t be seen by anyone so elicited no response.

TURN TWO

After performing First Aid Checks both Soviet casualties from the previous turn were DEAD! Both teams, however, passed their Troop Quality Tests. Apparently nobody really liked Ivan or Gigori much anyway…

Once again Soviet Teams 2 and 5 were declared to be on Over Watch. British Fire Teams B and C remained Hidden.


Starting on the right Soviet Team 1 moved forward to occupy the ruined building ahead of them.

British Fireteams B and C ambushed. Their fire was, however, ineffective.


Soviet Team 2, which was on Over Watch, and Team 1 returned fire. British Fire Team C took one casualty and was pinned by Soviet Team 1.


Soviet Team 6 moved into the building they were adjacent to and crept forward to bring fire on British Fire Team A. Their fire was ineffective. As British Fire Team B reacted, Soviet Team 5 (on Over Watch) returned fire causing one casualty. The British, firing last in the sequence, shot up Soviet Team 6 pretty good causing FOUR casualties!


Soviet Team 3 crept forward and brought some serious fire down on British Fire Team B casuing THREE MORE casualties!? (I know the Mdeic in the picture is tipped over too… that was a mistake, he was okay…).


British Fire Teams reacting to this, nearly wiping out Soviet Team 3!

TURN THREE

As all of Soviet Team 3 was down there was no one to administer First Aid. The Soviet Sergeant was on hand to organize First Aid to Team 6; one was seriously wounded, the remaining three were lightly wounded. The British Medic patched up Fire Team B as best he could. One died, one was seriously wounded, one was lightly wounded and the last one only thought he had been shot – the bullet had passed through his respirator case.

No soviets were declared to be on overwatch. I wasn’t sure if I could put a team that had just received serious injured. A team that had just done a first aid check and ended up with Seriously Wounded are only allowed to react to fire. We wondered if this meant only fire at them or any fire…? We decided to go with any fire, but it didn’t’ make sense that they could be on Over Watch – they could however use “Opportunity Fire” to respond to any firing in their LOS….

Soviet Team 4 moved up in the center to occupy the position Soviet Team 3 (which were all casualties) had occupied and fired on British Fire Team A. British Fire Team A decided to react by returning. Soviet Team 6 used opportunity fire to react to this, British Fire Team B also reacted to Soviet Team 3’s fire.

Both Soviet teams went first. Team 3 caused one casualty in British Fire Team A and pinned them. 


Soviet Team 6 went next causing two more casualties and forced the remaining member to Pull Back. We assumed he had to leave his wounded comrades behind…


British Fire Team B shot up Soviet Team 4 causing one casualty and pinning them.


Soviet team used this opportunity to rush British Fire Team C – B and C were only reacting to fire (due to seriously injured teammates) and Fire Team A was not firing back after the heavy exchange with Soviets to the right.

Soviet Team 1 passed their Troop Quality Test and went for it. We weren’t sure if the British Fire Team, which, having suffered Serious Wounds, was allowed defensive fire. I though I’d allow it just to see what happened. As it turned out they failed their Troop Quality Test and weren’t able to anyway.

Soviet Team 1 assaulted first, causing one casualty and a drop in morale. The British fought back with little effect.


In the second round the Soviets finished off the remaining Paras…


Checking afterwards all three were killed (no POWs) – though I suppose the Soviets could have captured the Seriously Wounded Para that had been previously wounded and was lying in the position…


AT that point we kind of called it. The soviets still had three full strength fire teams and two others that were still somewhat functional.


British Fireteam A wouldn’t have been able to do a First Aid Check at the beginning of Turn Four as there were no surviving members in contact with them – the one, which had pulled back, would have to spend all of Turn Four pulling himself together before being allowed to return to his wounded comrades. By that point the Soviets would have likely crossed the street and overrun the position anyway.


Again I spent way too much time trying to look stuff up. I had re-read the rules after last weeks game… and discovered a number of things I’d done wrong – and made sure I got them right this time. But it WAS a week ago, and new things game up… and I couldn’t remember stuff. I still think it’s a great game and eventually I’ll get my head around the whole reaction process and figure out the fiddly bits and it will all go much smoother and quicker.

Testing for the other casualties that hadn’t been checked for during the game there were two more soviet KIAs and another Light Wound. The British from Fire Team A that had been abandoned turn out one each of KIA, Serious Wound and Light Wound. The final tally:

British
KIA: 5
Seriously Wounded: 3
Lightly Wounded: 2
Okay: 3

Soviets
KIA: 4
Seriously Wounded: 2
Lightly Wounded: 4
Okay: 14

Coming soon on Tim’s Miniature Wargaming Blog:

More French Foreign Legionnaires or other modern stuff… 

10 comments:

  1. Good report - Again, some comments:

    "Question… Now I declared that all I was doing was running across the street with a tactical move (no declaration of shooting – as no one was visible) if an enemy team interrupts and fires, do I get to shoot back in a ”round of fire”…? "

    - Yes, units that are being shot always shoot back (unless they´re irregulars)

    "No soviets were declared to be on overwatch. I wasn’t sure if I could put a team that had just received serious injured. A team that had just done a first aid check and ended up with Seriously Wounded are only allowed to react to fire. We wondered if this meant only fire at them or any fire…? We decided to go with any fire, but it didn’t’ make sense that they could be on Over Watch – they could however use “Opportunity Fire” to respond to any firing in their LOS…. "

    - Good question - I don´t have any idea. In fact, I realise I´ve played this part of the game wrong until now, as I completely forgot the TQ-Check after Serious wounds and its implication. I think your solutions sounds plausible, but it might be worthwile to post the question in the AAG-forum.

    "Soviet Team 1 passed their Troop Quality Test and went for it. We weren’t sure if the British Fire Team, which, having suffered Serious Wounds, was allowed defensive fire."

    - You always get to do defensive fire, even if you´re taking care of casualties. Imagine the situation.... :D
    'Pete, the Russians ar comin´ fer us! Shoot'em!'
    'Sorry mate, can´t shoot right now!'


    "Checking afterwards all three were killed (no POWs) – though I suppose the Soviets could have captured the Seriously Wounded Para that had been previously wounded and was lying in the position… "

    - Yep, I guess they´d take the wounded guy as POW.


    I think the Paras should have retreated from the Soviet assault, especially if they´re the last standing group - elastic defense ;)
    With one man less than the soviets and no defensive fire, receiving the assault doesn´t make much sense.

    As you played with equal forces, the Soviet superiority posed a real challenge for the British. To give them a chance to win the game, you´ll have to adjust the victory conditions. They cannot "win" the game in a classical sense (e.g. defeat all soviets) but they can win the scenario (e.g. delay the soviets long enough to buy time for other units to reorganise/retreat/resupply/reinforce...) - even if suffering heavy losses or "losing" the game. If you choose the right victory conditions you can have a blast even when playing "unbalanced" scenarios. That way, the analysis of casualty-ratios isn´t the only standard for measuring sucess and the tactical implications of the action suddenly become important.
    And it also changes the way you play the game - if its "wipe the British out as fast as possible without bothering about losses" you´ll be a lot more reckless then having the objective to "take the position with minimum losses".

    Wiping out the British in Turn three is definitely a 'primary objective completed' for the Soviets - but maybe their six incapacitated soldiers are too much to keep the offensive rolling, making it a strategic win for the British - which could be reflected by getting more VP for the Soviet KIA/WIA then the Soviets get for their Mission Objective.

    It all depends on the victory conditions. ;)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks so much, BG!

      I didn't put too much thought into the scenario - it was just an excuse to throw some minis on the table and try and work through some of the rules... But yes, if we'd been playing it to determine a winner/loser I would have figured out some VPs for Soviets controlling areas or exiting guys off the table in X number of turns, and British getting points for denying said objectives and causing Soviet casualties, etc...

      I think Gary stood his ground in the Close Assault just to see how the Close Assault rules worked. If the Paras HAD scarpered when the Soviets charged into close assault, however, I'm guessing they would have been forced to abandoned their seriously wounded chum and their TQ/Morale would have dropped to D6/D6...?

      I also assumed that a single surviving guy (over on the other flank) that was forced to Pull Back as a result of a second pin result also would have been forced to abandon casualties. If we'd played another turn he would have also suffered the TQ/Morale loss? (at least until he was able, if possible, to return to his chums and administer first aid...?)

      Delete
    2. Well, according to the rules the units always drag along their seriously wounded mates. Only if you deliberately choose to abandon them, you´ll suffer from the penalty associated with it. In most circumstances, it doesn´t make sense to do this - the penalty is very high in comparison with the gains (no Casualty penalty - e.g. not TQ-check for fast movement).

      I guess you could explain it when taking a more abstract view on the battlefield - firefights usually drag out quite long (watch some combat footage on youtube or play some Operation Flashpoint / ARMA if this sounds strange) - there´s probably enough time for some single guy to drag his three downed mates into safety while suppressing the enemy, while the Russians are hesitant to advance, not knowing exactly how many they´ve killed. Or maybe half of the team struggled towards safety on their on, being only lightly wounded or stunned...

      Or, if that doesn´t sound right to you, you could introduce your own houserules. ;)

      Delete
    3. Ah, I must have missed the bit about dragging wounded along... Though I think I automatically did that with that very first Soviet that was shot crossing from one building to the next... I will have to find that.

      Thanks again!

      Delete
  2. Actually, it´s not explicitly written in the rules - I´ve just tried to find it.

    Check here: http://ambushalleygames.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=7950&p=57269

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh perfect! I was just going to go looking on the boards and FAQ! Thanks again!

      Delete
    2. It is also in the FAQ... I just read through that again...

      Delete
  3. Interesting scenario and in my view a good playtest scenario. When I looked at the forces involved, though, I felt that the Brits should hold the Russian attack fairly easily. This was based on the old rule of thumb concerning the attacker/Defender ratio in assaults upon fortified positions: three to one. The set up I inferred to be a built up area rubbled by previous bombardment or street fighting. Two to one didn't seem enough.

    What to make of that? Well, the three to one might depend on a lot of things, supposing that such a superiority is indeed essential. Taking our 6 to 3 ratio in this action, if 3 Soviet fire teams can engage the attention of 2 British, then the remaining 3 SFTs can storm the remaining single BFT. That of course presupposes that the Soviets, at minimal cost to themselves, force the Brits to develop their full strength and position.

    I can see how rule sets at this level of action can be so extremely complicated/complex.
    Cheers,
    Ion

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The British didn't really have a "prepared position". They had pretty much the same cover at the attacking Soviets (Hardcover +1 Defence Dice). Because they were static while the Soviets were moving up (for the first two turns) they had the additional benefit of "In Cover" (another +1 to Defence Dice).

      Had they more time to prepare a defensive position (build sangars in the rubble or otherwise reinforce their positions with sandbags, etc) They could have been given +2 Defence Dice for a n "Improved Cover" or +3 Defence Dice for a "Fortified Position" - either of which could have considerably reduced the casualties from Soviet advancing fire and necessitated a larger attacking force to guarantee success...?

      As you say it can be extremely complicated/complex...

      Delete
  4. That's one of the good things about writing a bat rep for a game you're just learning -there's always a friendly voice willing to let you know where you went wrong.

    ReplyDelete