Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
DAR BB33, Once More Into the Funnel!
#11
I'm 90% sure I'll be living in Illinois by the end of September. Once I'm stateside it will be a lot easier to arrange a real-time VASSAL game, and I'm definitely down for the 3 person 3-way refereed double-blind I was talking about earlier.
...came for the cardboard, stayed for the camaraderie...
Reply
#12
(09-07-2017, 11:33 AM)Shad Wrote: I'm 90% sure I'll be living in Illinois by the end of September. Once I'm stateside it will be a lot easier to arrange a real-time VASSAL game, and I'm definitely down for the 3 person 3-way refereed double-blind I was talking about earlier.

Any idea what part of Illinois Yet?
"...I Spent Half My Money on Wargames - Women and Whiskey - The Other Half I Wasted..."
Reply
#13
(09-07-2017, 12:33 PM)Dan Storm Wrote: Any idea what part of Illinois Yet?

Looking like ~2.5 hours WSW of Chicago in Knox County.
...came for the cardboard, stayed for the camaraderie...
Reply
#14
(09-07-2017, 10:28 AM)Dan Storm Wrote:
(09-07-2017, 01:22 AM)richvalle Wrote: Yeah, did that triangle double blind thing ever take off? I was wondering how it worked out.

I do like the look of your system though I have no one to try it out with. Sad

I can be your guinea pig / arty fodder if need be...

Lets get you working on Vassal before we start doing anything fancy. Smile

And since you beat me in our first game I wouldn't count you as fodder!


(09-07-2017, 10:35 AM)Coniglius Wrote:
(09-07-2017, 01:22 AM)richvalle Wrote: Yeah, did that triangle double blind thing ever take off? I was wondering how it worked out.

I do like the look of your system though I have no one to try it out with. Sad

If we can do it via Vassal, I'm game to try that. We had a good time with our Vassal game last year!!

We did! And a good breakfast together as well. Smile I thought we were going to do another one but I think you were busy at the time. It's going to require learning a new set of rules. 

Plloyd, not to hijack your thread but do you have a copy of those rules you can post? I thought I had them but it looks like I just have a copy of DoubleblindPG by Brian McCue. From what I remember when looking at it before you have different spotting rules with those OP counters. 
Reply
#15
(09-07-2017, 12:33 PM)Dan Storm Wrote:
(09-07-2017, 11:33 AM)Shad Wrote: I'm 90% sure I'll be living in Illinois by the end of September. Once I'm stateside it will be a lot easier to arrange a real-time VASSAL game, and I'm definitely down for the 3 person 3-way refereed double-blind I was talking about earlier.

Any idea what part of Illinois Yet?

You know... most people are moving OUT of Illinois.   Smile
Reply
#16
The double-blind rules are in the 2010 article I wrote. It comes with counters, but a several pennies & dimes will work in a pinch.

The game rules we use are over on another thread. They have held up pretty well over the years. One small hole that Philippe found, and on small alteration that no one would notice. Plus the charts, that no one seems to need clarification with.
... actually you Americans are probably the most dangerous people in the world. This is because you treat war as a job, and your culture has an excellent work ethic.
-- paraphrased from John Keegan's Fields of Battle

Reply
#17
(09-07-2017, 11:40 PM)plloyd1010 Wrote: The double-blind rules are in the 2010 article I wrote. It comes with counters, but a several pennies & dimes will work in a pinch.

The game rules we use are over on another thread. They have held up pretty well over the years. One small hole that Philippe found, and on small alteration that no one would notice. Plus the charts, that no one seems to need clarification with.

Thanks!

The OP rules look easy enough. The only thing I'm missing are leaders with no markings on them. Shouldn't be hard to make them. 

I really like the concept of not seeing everything on the board. 


I'll have to take a look at your modified rules. Though I'm not sure I want 3rd ed, 4th ed and plloyd ed all stuffed into my head at the same time.  Smile
Reply
#18
I think I still have the file for named leaders. I was going to make another one anyway. The old one started as an odt doc, and is a little hard to expand. If I make it in Inkscap, I can use the countersheet extension man make a lot at once.

You don't need all those other rules, just use mine! Idea Seriously though, they give you more tactical considerations and produce more historically likely results. Not perfect of course, but pointing in that direction.
... actually you Americans are probably the most dangerous people in the world. This is because you treat war as a job, and your culture has an excellent work ethic.
-- paraphrased from John Keegan's Fields of Battle

Reply
#19
Ok, I read though the commented rules and just read the red parts (say that 10 times fast...). A few comments / questions.

Integral Leaders - what determines who has them? Units like Guards I'm guessing?

5.6.2+ Transporting weapons. I already have to re look these up every time I want to use them. It looks like you made it a bit easier to limber/unlimber/ move morts and guns?

AFV's with one man turrets. Do you just know what units these are or do you have a list?

8.3.4 an example there would be nice.

9.5 Friendly fire. This came up in my Face-to-face game with Dan. I also said that the other units in the same hex as the firing BF unit would not be effected.

11.2 Efficient AT guns... whoah. I've always wondered why they were not. That adds some punch to them.

13.2.5 Flank fire while moving. I like it!

16.2.2 Vehicles seeking cover. Does that only take one AS and if they fail can they keep trying next AS?

A thought I had while reading these. Have you ever considered an 'advance after fire' type of move if the DF it does eliminates all the defenders? It seems reasonable but allow Op fire against the move.
Reply
#20
(09-08-2017, 01:19 AM)richvalle Wrote: Integral Leaders - what determines who has them? Units like Guards I'm guessing?
This rule was directed at recon units and armor units without tank leaders. It gives units the ability to make a Combat move, but an Assault move (there is a distinction). Recon units are always semi-dependent anyway. Leaderless tanks have too many deficits for what we considered to be a reasonably historical outcome (keep in mind they almost always lack armor/gunnery efficiency). We let them keep maneuvering in small groups. Remember that small pockets of tanks running around will increase your FoW problems too.

(09-08-2017, 01:19 AM)richvalle Wrote: 5.6.2+ Transporting weapons. I already have to re look these up every time I want to use them. It looks like you made it a bit easier to limber/unlimber/ move morts and guns?
Yes we did. The rehook/repack problem really bugged us. It made very little sense to us. A limbered weapon is basically a personnel unit that cannot move. Most of us have hooked up trailers, when the thing is ready to go, it's ready to go. Largely supported by historical accounts of 'bug outs' by artillery units. Mortars are mostly point the baseplate and stick on the tube, and you don't even need to break most of them down to get into a truck.

(09-08-2017, 01:19 AM)richvalle Wrote: AFV's with one man turrets. Do you just know what units these are or do you have a list?
I know which units these are. I can make a list. Generally most French built tanks before the AMC35 & Souma 35, Soviet light tanks (T-37, T-60 & T-70), Pz I and a few others.

(09-08-2017, 01:19 AM)richvalle Wrote: 8.3.4 an example there would be nice.
I'll make one up and put it over in the thread. I 'll put a link here too.

(09-08-2017, 01:19 AM)richvalle Wrote: 11.2 Efficient AT guns... whoah. I've always wondered why they were not. That adds some punch to them.
Yeah, us too. There are may accounts and doctrinal references as to how just a few AT guns can be quite a lot of tanks, von Thoma's report especially. Other accounts reference how difficult operations in a turret could be. AA gun were included simply because they pump out a lot of rounds, very fast.

(09-08-2017, 01:19 AM)richvalle Wrote: 16.2.2 Vehicles seeking cover. Does that only take one AS and if they fail can they keep trying next AS?
They can keep trying every AS they get. The expectation is that they would achieve 'Dug In' status in about 2 turns. Digging in a tank actually takes a long time. Since clear doesn't mean featureless (in the real world), they can look for mounds, small depressions, and maybe do a little bit of position improvement.
... actually you Americans are probably the most dangerous people in the world. This is because you treat war as a job, and your culture has an excellent work ethic.
-- paraphrased from John Keegan's Fields of Battle

Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)