Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
[House Rules] Command system
12-28-2012, 07:20 AM, (This post was last modified: 12-28-2012, 07:25 AM by G. K. Zhukov.)
#1
Command system
Now that I am (timidly) starting to play PG solo after several years, the history buff in me is rediscovering there is something "gamey" in the rules, something that reminds me a lot about ASL and the "bunch of counters" syndrome.

I mean in every scenario you get a pile of counters (INF, CAV, tank, artillery, you name it) plus a handful of leaders. Your troops and leaders, while obviously comparable to battalion- or regiment-sized real life formations) are usually not organized according to the TO&E of a military unit (be it paper strength or real life), like it happens in miniature games like Command Decision, Spearhead, Fistful of TOWs 3, etc.. That is, basically any leader can command any combat platoon of the appropriate type and any subordinate leaders, not caring about the chain of command.

That unfortunately reminds me a little about ASL and my never ending quest of a realistic command system that is not too cumbersome.

Let me give you an example: instead of

Battalion X with:

9 x INF
3 x HMG
2 x 81mm mortar
1 x MAJ, 1 x CAPT, 2 x LT, 1 x SGT
(or whatever)

You would have:

Battalion, with:

HQ:
1 x LTCOL
3 x Infantry companies, each with:
1 x MAJ/CAPT/LT
3 x INF
1 x Weapons company, with:
3 x HMG
2 x 81mm mortar
1 x MAJ/CAPT/LT
NOTE: units from the weapons company can be subordinated to the leader of any Infantry companyin the battalion.

I mean the CAPT in Company B should not be able activate units from Companies A or C (another CAPT's business) unless the LTCOL above him orders him to. Likewise, he shouldn't be allowed to give orders to a LT in another company, no matter the seniority difference, unless he has been appointed to command that company.

I am starting to create some unit cards (yet to be tested) for the scenario I am playing at the moment (PzGr-20 "Debut"). I am attaching a work-in-progress pdf file for your review and critique.

My intention is removing leaders from the hexboard (thus eliminating some clutter) and abstracting leader functions and activation by means of "formation cards" similar to the ones in the attached file.

This is a rather hazy idea that may well end forgotten in a few days (likely) or might lead to some serious houseruling project (not likely).

How do you feel about the above? Has any of you got the same feelings about the PG leader system? Do you know of any house rules in the line of my comments?

Thanks!


Attached Files
.pdf   Formation Card Master.pdf (Size: 40.57 KB / Downloads: 23)
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Command system - by G. K. Zhukov - 12-28-2012, 07:20 AM
RE: Command system - by campsawyer - 12-28-2012, 07:41 AM
RE: Command system - by G. K. Zhukov - 01-02-2013, 08:09 AM
RE: Command system - by rmakowsky - 07-15-2013, 01:59 AM
RE: Command system - by rmakowsky - 08-27-2013, 10:23 AM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)