A matter of scale

[J6A]

I recently picked up Great War Commander by Hexasim.  Basically it's Combat Commander ported back to World War 1 with a few changes to reflect the different situation.  Does that sound familiar to anyone?

Anyway, as I was reading the rules, I noticed that GWC is platoon scale, as compared to CC, which is squad level.  It's interesting that they made this choice.  It mirrors the change between platoon scale and company scale between PG and IA.

Not sure if this should be here or in analog gaming, so move it if it's in the wrong place.

[richvalle]

Hmm. How does it sound so far? I really enjoy CC but I have, nor really want, many WWI games. I have one IA's but have never played it or read the rules.

[Hugmenot]

I picked up used copies of CC:Europe and CC:Med recently but I have yet to play them (I could say that of too many games). I am interested in GWC but not until I play CC.

Back to PG/IA. I started playing both roughly at the same time and would have chosen IA as my main series had it the series breadth and depth of coverage. I like its tempo (how attacks develop over time) better than the tempo in PG,; it's close but it was more immersive for me. The pre-planned artillery did not bother me but I did house rule it in a couple of scenarios.

[J6A]

I am looking forward to the new artillery rules. Hopefully they come out in my lifetime.

CC is one of my favorite games. It can be very chaotic, and it's a lot of fun. I suspect GWC will be more of the same.

[J6A]

Hmm. How does it sound so far? I really enjoy CC but I have, nor really want, many WWI games.   I have one IA's but have never played it or read the rules.

As I said, mostly similar.  The maps are gorgeous, including a couple that are basically completely cratered.  There are tanks!

One thing that bugs me is that there are counters in there in more colorful uniforms that represent 1914 units, as opposed to later in the war.  But the unit values are identical, so why bother?

A couple of differences I've noticed so far, besides the tanks.

1.  A Jammed result affects all weapons firing, not just 1.
2.  There is a subordinate activation system, but only from the highest ranking leader.  He can then chain it through a bunch of lower leaders, although here a Lt can activate another Lt (unlike IA/PG)
3.  Units not in range of a leader at the end of a turn and not in an objective hex, carrying a weapon or on a friendly board edge are automatically suppressed for being out of cohesion.
4.  Each side has strategy cards, which can be used for a function or for +1 on any die roll.

I know there are supposed to be differences in the artillery rules, I haven't gotten to them yet.  

[richvalle]

Huh. The cohesion rule is very interesting.

And tanks!!! Do they get a separate line on the cards?

I think in Pacific CC jammed effects all weapons.

Chained activation... more reason to keep units bunched up and in a line. Probably fitting for WWI.

+1 cards could be fun if you can toss them in after you roll. I can see giving more to one side or the other based on better leaders, moral or whatever.


I do enjoy the chaos of CC though we use it as a 'change of pace' game. Not sure I'd want to play it all the time. We usually do a PG game or 2 (over several face to face meetings) and then CC or maybe another game system. I will say the game system isn't for everyone. You have to be willing to let the cards create a narrative and be willing to hand wave some things. It's not that your guys are NOT firing as the Russians charge across the open field at you and you have no Fire cards... they are firing just not with any great effect.