BB RULES

Concord

FGM Lieutenant
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Apr 20, 2014
Messages
2,147
Reaction score
1,875
Location
Western Australia
Turn Rate
6+ pw
Games
2-4 games.
Email
concord@iinet.net.au
Keep it simple, go with +1 MP for all units.
I think so too.

Not bad, but everyone could do this all the time. If you do there'll have to be a reduction in strength to the defender.
Maybe a 10% hit.
Of course, a side that constantly retreats is going to lose ground, and taking ground is part of the victory conditions (capturing the large towns).

Go with that or units from the same regiment or battalion can only attack into the same hex.
Yeah maybe. Although keeping at 2 and having potential GM regimental extras is nice and simple.

My two cents, try to rename the units in the game please, the 2-2-1, 3-1-2, 3-2-1 system has, how could I put it, has no soul. Looks like code.
I'd like to ZOC's in the rules, but I guess I have to run my own campaign to see it. :)
Any ideas for naming?
The info on there is purely a unit ID number. I suppose I could give each unit a 'nickname'.
Going to be a hassle though. There's 54 counters that need to be changed and then exported.
 

Nathangun

FGM Colonel
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Mar 6, 2012
Messages
6,964
Reaction score
2,491
Location
Dublin, Ireland.
Turn Rate
3-5 pw
Games
2-4 games.
Email
nathangun@gmail.com
Any ideas for naming?
The info on there is purely a unit ID number. I suppose I could give each unit a 'nickname'.
Going to be a hassle though. There's 54 counters that need to be changed and then exported.
Hmm off the top of my head, 1st Grds-2 Bn-A Com, might not fit on the chit.
Has the regiments are colored coded you not did the regiment name, so how about just the battalion and company designation, like 1st Bn-A Co.
 

Kraut

FGM Sergeant
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Mar 9, 2020
Messages
191
Reaction score
195
Location
Germany
Turn Rate
6+ pw
Games
2-4 games.
My rules Suggestion would be that the (or some) infantry units will be closer to the frontline at the start of the campaign.
 

Gunner

FGM Lieutenant
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Apr 16, 2013
Messages
1,921
Reaction score
1,023
Location
Blue Point NY
Turn Rate
3-5 pw
Games
1 game.
Email
tramos1@optonline.net
I'm just sitting here sheltering in place and kind of playing with different ideas.
They're kind of a compilation of past Campaigns and 20th century board games.
Although none of these may be practical I'll run 'em up the flag pole as it were.

For movement you could make a +1 for each adjacent unit bypassed.
e.g.



Have an HQ unit that attached units must stay with a certain hex radius, say 4 or 5, to stay in command/supply.
Could penalize a unit by having no brigade assets in an attack, slower MP’s, lower ammo or some such things.

All adjacent units must be attacked. (Goes back to board games)
In this example the Germans are attacking and all units are at 100%
Infantry at 1000pts
Armor at 1500
Points are before Brigade assets are divvied out
The Germans want to take the woods north of the town but all units in line must be attacked
Where and type of attack is decided by the Germans.



Battle A is an Assault at 2500 to 1000pts (2.5 to 1)
Battle B is a Probe at 1000 to 1000. (1 to 1) A probe is chosen to reduce battle casualties.
Battle C and D are probes 500 to 1000 each (1 to 2)
Battle E is an Attack (1.5 to 1)

As far as ending a battle early:
A) Before the battle starts a defender can decide not to fight and just take a certain loss, say 10% or something and retreat a hex without the Attacker taking any losses.
B) The Defender is given an on map Exit zone from which he can Exit or Retreat at any time giving the possibility of casualties to both sides.

As for Battles C & D
A) Before the battle starts the attacker can decide not to fight and just take a certain loss, say 10% or something and retreat a hex without the Defender taking any losses.
B) They must fight for a certain time frame (in theory to hold the units in place so they cannot support adjacent units), say 15-20 minutes before calling a ceasefire.

A question is could it be possible to keep the maximum ratio 2 to 1?
If an attacking unit(s) such as the case in Battle A perhaps they must “hold back” 500 points as a “reserve” or something.
It certainly wouldn’t hurt going forward pocketing those points for a future battle.
 

PhilM

FGM Lieutenant
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Sep 11, 2013
Messages
1,770
Reaction score
767
Location
UK
Turn Rate
3-5 pw
Games
2-4 games.
Email
philmaynard1@mac.com
I've never run a campaign, and am not doing so in this one, so I'm wary of suggesting anything that will make things too onerous for the GM ... but ...

The one aspect of the way the first turn played out that seemed really "off" to me was that the Axis units (some of them, at least: hope I'm recalling correctly ...) were able to move adjacent to one of our (Soviet!) units and then attack it with 100% strength, whilst completely ignoring, and taking no penalty from, another adjacent Soviet unit that would have been in its rear, but which it was able to ignore until the next turn ...

I think that some "ZOC" effect must be in place for this circumstance: e.g. allow all to proceed as before, but enforce that the attacking unit must be assumed to deploy a certain percentage of its strength (30%?, per each adjacent unit ...) to face off the "ignored" enemy unit, and can thus attack its desired target enemy unit with 100% - 30% of its current strength.

Perhaps getting too complicated, but extend this to say that, if the - in this example - Axis unit stays where it is after its attack, and is in turn then attacked by the "ignored" Soviet unit, the Axis unit can only defend with the 30% of its strength that was earmarked for this purpose in the turn before ...

Don't know if that's any use or not ...
 

Concord

FGM Lieutenant
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Apr 20, 2014
Messages
2,147
Reaction score
1,875
Location
Western Australia
Turn Rate
6+ pw
Games
2-4 games.
Email
concord@iinet.net.au
Thanks for your ideas and suggestions guys.

By far the number one priority (especially given the number of units in play) is simplicity.
This is to avoid the campaign becoming a chore - for me, but also for the CO's.

The simple addition of +1MP for moving into a hex adjacent to enemy units will eliminate much of the problem.
Infantry will quickly grind to a halt with their 4MP allowance, and even armour won't be able to weave through units very far.
 

Concord

FGM Lieutenant
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Apr 20, 2014
Messages
2,147
Reaction score
1,875
Location
Western Australia
Turn Rate
6+ pw
Games
2-4 games.
Email
concord@iinet.net.au
The key to all of this is to make the CM battle end of things enjoyable ... have some thoughts/ideas -- will post later -- quite busy work (from home as usual) day.
Looking forward to hearing your ideas @Rico when you get time.
 

Concord

FGM Lieutenant
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Apr 20, 2014
Messages
2,147
Reaction score
1,875
Location
Western Australia
Turn Rate
6+ pw
Games
2-4 games.
Email
concord@iinet.net.au
@Panzerknacker @Nathangun @Rico (and anyone else)

So far the rule change that is agreed upon is the: +1MP to enter a hex that is adjacent to enemy unit(s).

The limit of 2 units that can attack a hex is another one I am considering.

@Gunner and @PhilM I have re-read your posts.
Not sure I like the idea of a unit being forced to attack adjacent unit(s).
I can picture a situation where units are moved to the front to defend the line rather than launch an attack.

I am turning over ideas that address the concern about an attacking unit that has an enemy unit to its rear or flank and what could be done about that.
I am not entirely convinced that we need to actually address it, but will give it due consideration.

Also considering implementing the idea of - if a unit retreats before a battle, they take 10% damage.

@Rico hoping you might have some ideas to throw into the mix as well.
 
Last edited:

Concord

FGM Lieutenant
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Apr 20, 2014
Messages
2,147
Reaction score
1,875
Location
Western Australia
Turn Rate
6+ pw
Games
2-4 games.
Email
concord@iinet.net.au
@Panzerknacker @Stafford @Shorker @Wellsonian @eniced73 @Coopes @Sgt Grunt @Panzer_Kraut @JTimo @Kraut
@Nathangun @Rico @Vatutin85 @Redbully @PhilM @Gunner @jobu88 @Fredrocker @olaf @MeatEtr

Movement rules update
I have updated the movement rules to include:
+1MP to enter a hex that is adjacent to enemy unit(s)

Adjacent enemy units potentially restricting attacks
Based loosely on books, movies and games I have played, I'm not going to make any rules that restrict a unit attacking an enemy while other enemy units are adjacent.
I am willing to have another look at this, but I want to keep things very simple.

Units retreating before battle
I have updated the 'Retreat' section of the rules: The defending unit takes 10% damage to their strength percentage during the retreat (rounded down to the nearest 10).
This is to avoid constant retreating at no risk.
A defender may still elect to retreat despite the damage, if they are facing superior forces or in danger of being cut off, but it is not without a price.

Restrictions on number of attacking units into a hex
2 of the 3 battles have been completed in this first turn of the prototype.
The results of the third will be calculated shortly as well.
Each was 3 vs. 1 armoured. All outnumbered companies were destroyed.

The results were well within expectations, given the odds.
Shorker attacked in fairly open terrain with some mixed cover and suffered 10% losses to all 3 companies.
Wellsonian was tasked with assaulting a large town and each of his companies suffered 20% casualties in the urban environment.

Given the nature of the campaign's sequential turns, sides will naturally try and stack odds. Extreme odds could become the norm.
This would decrease the enjoyment and competition for every defending player.

To balance this, I have updated the rules to restrict attacks to a maximum of 2 units.
Under the section 'Units': Up to 2 units may attack into a hex (but only 1 may occupy it if the battle is won).

At a stretch this could be justified in a historical context as being due to command and control issues,
or the need to avoid undue concentration of forces, or the common practice of keeping some units in reserve.
Regardless, I think it will make for a more enjoyable competition while still retaining some realism.

Does this all sound okay? Any other rules tweaks needed? We may be close to launching BB Redux.
 
Last edited:

Rico

FGM Lieutenant General
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Nov 5, 2009
Messages
10,051
Reaction score
5,368
Location
Johannesburg, South Africa
Turn Rate
6+ pw
Games
2-4 games.
Email
ricoschacherl@gmail.com
Sorry -- been awol on this discussion (keep distracting myself with other stuff and campaign ideas) ... looking good. The proof is always in the playing it out.

I have three possible suggestions:

1. Stagger the arrival of units on the map, so creating a meeting engagement that builds from opening skirmishes to a main battle.

2. Simultaneous orders/movements/attacks: No FOW (understand you want to keep the DM workload down) -- but the taking turns, each side can maneuver/act as if the enemy isn't moving/acting at the same time -- so can pile in on one attack without worrying what the enemy might be doing at the same time.
Both CO's issue orders: movement and attack -- DM plays them out (as neutral uses throw of dice to resolve simultaneous moves -- could use ME battles if opposing units enter hex at same time)

Optional: they can also assign mech units a "reserve status" which means these can move at half movement rate to support a defending friendly unit or a friendly attacking unit which is in trouble) -- this can be done in a quick support phase after the initial orders have been played out.

3. I would suggest each Btn get an additonal HQ Counter that contains a battery of set artillery support, say: battery of 120mm mortars or 75/76mm guns (with a range of 4 hexes) -- this is assigned to support a friendly unit of same Btn attacking during the orders phase, or any of defending friendly units in same Btn when being attacked when in defence.

This could be a smaller counter that can stack with a combat unit or by itself (if attacked by enemy it is automatically overrun) -- has 3 movement points and two modes:
a. movement
b. deployed (takes +1 Mp to deploy and be ready to fire in support)

have tried all of the above -- sounds more complicated than it actually is when trying to explain it.

Anyway, your call what you want to go with :)
 

PhilM

FGM Lieutenant
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Sep 11, 2013
Messages
1,770
Reaction score
767
Location
UK
Turn Rate
3-5 pw
Games
2-4 games.
Email
philmaynard1@mac.com
Sorry -- been awol on this discussion (keep distracting myself with other stuff and campaign ideas) ... looking good. The proof is always in the playing it out.

I have three possible suggestions:

1. Stagger the arrival of units on the map, so creating a meeting engagement that builds from opening skirmishes to a main battle.

2. Simultaneous orders/movements/attacks: No FOW (understand you want to keep the DM workload down) -- but the taking turns, each side can maneuver/act as if the enemy isn't moving/acting at the same time -- so can pile in on one attack without worrying what the enemy might be doing at the same time.
Both CO's issue orders: movement and attack -- DM plays them out (as neutral uses throw of dice to resolve simultaneous moves -- could use ME battles if opposing units enter hex at same time)

Optional: they can also assign mech units a "reserve status" which means these can move at half movement rate to support a defending friendly unit or a friendly attacking unit which is in trouble) -- this can be done in a quick support phase after the initial orders have been played out.

3. I would suggest each Btn get an additonal HQ Counter that contains a battery of set artillery support, say: battery of 120mm mortars or 75/76mm guns (with a range of 4 hexes) -- this is assigned to support a friendly unit of same Btn attacking during the orders phase, or any of defending friendly units in same Btn when being attacked when in defence.

This could be a smaller counter that can stack with a combat unit or by itself (if attacked by enemy it is automatically overrun) -- has 3 movement points and two modes:
a. movement
b. deployed (takes +1 Mp to deploy and be ready to fire in support)

have tried all of the above -- sounds more complicated than it actually is when trying to explain it.

Anyway, your call what you want to go with :)
I like point 2. , especially ... think that's much better, with some unknown / unintended consequences for the CO's plans ... provided that it doesn't make it too complicated / time consuming to run ...
 

Concord

FGM Lieutenant
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Apr 20, 2014
Messages
2,147
Reaction score
1,875
Location
Western Australia
Turn Rate
6+ pw
Games
2-4 games.
Email
concord@iinet.net.au
There's 2 problems with simultaneous moves unfortunately.
The first is that with 54 companies on the go, every turn will be an absolute time sinkhole for me to calculate, which I cannot afford.
Secondly, say you have 3 armored companies moving along, fast. One of them 'crashes' into an enemy unit...and the rest mindlessly keep going as per their orders.
Or one side realizes that the enemy side is doing a big push on the flank, so they want to halt or change course.
The only alternative to units mindlessly following orders ignoring enemy moves is to check with both commanders every MP expenditure to see if they want to modify their orders.

A fog of war mechanic is actually doable, but again, it involves more work.
At the moment I simply update the map, and post it in the open forum.
FOW would involve me making 2 maps each turn to post in each sides' secret forum.
I'd need to turn off all the graphics of enemy counters out of view for one side, and then do the same for the other.

I've been on a razor's edge about the FOW issue many times in my mind. Is it worth the extra hassle? Maybe.
 

Rico

FGM Lieutenant General
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Nov 5, 2009
Messages
10,051
Reaction score
5,368
Location
Johannesburg, South Africa
Turn Rate
6+ pw
Games
2-4 games.
Email
ricoschacherl@gmail.com
There's 2 problems with simultaneous moves unfortunately.
The first is that with 54 companies on the go, every turn will be an absolute time sinkhole for me to calculate, which I cannot afford.
Secondly, say you have 3 armored companies moving along, fast. One of them 'crashes' into an enemy unit...and the rest mindlessly keep going as per their orders.
Or one side realizes that the enemy side is doing a big push on the flank, so they want to halt or change course.
The only alternative to units mindlessly following orders ignoring enemy moves is to check with both commanders every MP expenditure to see if they want to modify their orders.

A fog of war mechanic is actually doable, but again, it involves more work.
At the moment I simply update the map, and post it in the open forum.
FOW would involve me making 2 maps each turn to post in each sides' secret forum.
I'd need to turn off all the graphics of enemy counters out of view for one side, and then do the same for the other.

I've been on a razor's edge about the FOW issue many times in my mind. Is it worth the extra hassle? Maybe.
Cool -- like I said -- your call :)
 

Concord

FGM Lieutenant
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Apr 20, 2014
Messages
2,147
Reaction score
1,875
Location
Western Australia
Turn Rate
6+ pw
Games
2-4 games.
Email
concord@iinet.net.au
FOW could be each unit can see a range of 2 hexes or something.

Looking at the map from turn 3 as a reference.
There's actually more than enough counters on each side to create a front line from top to bottom (20 hexes high, 27 companies).

So what could FOW do to enhance the campaign?
You could have units held back as a reserve strike force or reinforcements without the enemy knowing.
If the operation ended up spread over a number of areas with dark areas of unknowns it could add some excitement and unpredictability.

FOW might encourage the sides to spread out a little bit, which would add some variety. Hmm (trying to convince myself that it is worth the extra hassle - might be).

BB T3 russian move end.jpg
 

Rico

FGM Lieutenant General
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Nov 5, 2009
Messages
10,051
Reaction score
5,368
Location
Johannesburg, South Africa
Turn Rate
6+ pw
Games
2-4 games.
Email
ricoschacherl@gmail.com
Well, let's say recon range is 3 hexes, so from an Axis point of view, the only Russian unit visible is the 3-2-3 south of Surma -- all other units invisible.

So clear the map of all Russian units off the map and see how that would affect the German command decision process without knowing where say, the bulk of the enemy mech units are, for instance?
 

Rico

FGM Lieutenant General
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Nov 5, 2009
Messages
10,051
Reaction score
5,368
Location
Johannesburg, South Africa
Turn Rate
6+ pw
Games
2-4 games.
Email
ricoschacherl@gmail.com
As an extreme example of use of narrative campaign and full FOW (with added DM added intel tid-bits and curve balls), here examples from my Heraklion campaign a while back (it got ship-wrecked by RL issues at the time :( ) -- a British parachute attack on a small fictional Med island in 1943.
Shows how each side would see the battle unfolding... (or unfolding fiasco ;) ) ... first battles have been resolved, the main airfield (hex I4) captured ... reserves for both sides are arriving -- second wave sea landings for Allies and Axis scraping together naval and air transportable reserves to throw on to the island.

Wsa a LOT of fun ... but also a LOT of work...

Here the last Campaign TURN 5 -- pre-orders SITREP report and the operational MAP for the Allies

H-ALLIES-turn5A.jpg

Allies-report-11-sitrep.gif

Here the last Campaign TURN 5 -- pre-orders SITREP report and the operational MAP for the AXIS.

H-AXIS-TURN5a.jpg


Axis-report-11-Sitrep.gif
 

Concord

FGM Lieutenant
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Apr 20, 2014
Messages
2,147
Reaction score
1,875
Location
Western Australia
Turn Rate
6+ pw
Games
2-4 games.
Email
concord@iinet.net.au
On a map the size of BB, I will need to be checking each order for accuracy of movement point expenditure,
but also comparing the jpeg image supplied by the CO and working out if units come into contact with enemy units they couldn't see when they wrote the orders.
So far it has been pretty easy without FOW...both CO's can see the layout including enemy units, and I simply check the MP expenditure.

Once that is sorted and I save the psd file with the moves, I will need to export 2 maps - one for each side.
I'd need to check the radius of each unit and turn off the graphic layers of enemy units outside visible range.

Not a herculean task, but it will easily double the time I spend on orders with the map.
I need to weigh that up against the fun factor.

Love your counters artwork. I should have considered using a single figure to represent infantry, but I was influenced by the old board game Squad Leader.
 
Top