Welcome to The Few Good Men

Thanks for visiting our club and having a look around, there is a lot to see. Why not consider becoming a member?

Western Front campaign anyone?

Concord

FGM Major
FGM MEMBER
Joined
Apr 20, 2014
Messages
3,947
Reaction score
3,967
Location
Western Australia
I am considering starting up a Western Front campaign for FGM sometime this year. Are there FGM players who would get into it?

Currently I am running an Eastern Front campaign and I'm developing a modern one as well (probably ready for launch around June this year).
These are priorities and I won't abandon them, but I feel capable of getting another one rolling, if there is interest.

Checking the Battlefront website, I only just realised there are extra expansions available for both CMBN and CMFI that I don't have, such as CMBN Commonwealth and CMFI Rome.
I am prepared to invest in these modules. However, the easiest solution may be CMFB.

Here is an overview of each game. Which one to use?
The biggest challenge of creating and running a campaign is the availability of decent battle maps that are approximately 1km x 1km (or larger - can be cut down).
Are there any FGM players who can tell us which Combat Mission game has the most maps available this size, both stock and player-made included?


Combat Mission Battle for Normandy
The base game covers the three month period following the Allied D-Day landings, from Operation Overlord in June through the Cobra Breakout in August. American and German Heer.
Commonwealth Forces
British, Canadian, Polish Allied, Waffen SS and Luftwaffe Field Division.
Market Garden
Allied forces include the full range of American, British, and Polish Airborne forces, plus British ground forces that lead the relief effort.
On the German side are ad-hoc units quickly thrown together from Heer, Waffen SS, Luftwaffe base personnel, and Naval staff units.


Combat Mission Fortress Italy
Starts with the Sicilian campaign from July through August 1943.
American, Italian, and German forces. Italian Bersaglieri, American Rangers, and the German Herman Göring Division.
Gustav Line
The Italian mainland, revolving around Salerno, Anzio, and Monte Cassino, and culminating in the capture of Rome on June 4, 1944.
All German and American forces are updated to reflect formational and equipment changes since the Sicilian campaign.
Brand new formations and equipment cover the elite Fallschirmjäger and the combat formations of the United Kingdom, Canada, Poland, and New Zealand.
Rome to Victory
Continue to fight your way through Italy from June 1944 in Rome to the Italian Alps
New TO&E that includes Indian, Brazilian, South African and Free French forces. Also added are Waffen SS and Luftwaffe Herman Goering units and new vehicles and combat formations for existing nationalities.


Combat Mission Final Blitzkrieg
Covers regions depicting the Ardennes (Belgium), France, Germany, and Holland from October 1944 through the end of January 1945.
United States Army, German Heer, Waffen-SS, and Fallschirmjäger.
 
For this campaign I may roughly follow the format of the current Brigade Battles campaign, with a large map and company sized forces.

OR I may experiment with a smaller format that involves platoon sized skirmishes on a zoomed-in strategic map.
 
@Stafford you mentioned in another thread about the idea of having a campaign where battles are only platoon sized with a few added extras.

I've been thinking about this. It could be fun (as well as quick campaign turns).
So many WW2 movies and shows concentrate on this scale.
It could be good for a bit of story telling too. Take out the machine gun nest in the steeple. Clear the farm buildings. Destroy the anti-tank gun in the woods.

So far (with Brigade Battles) my go-to size for map counters and battles have been company sized, which suits the big operations style scenario.
But at a smaller scale, it could represent a more static area of the front, with probes, patrols, and specific missions suited to platoon sized fights.

What do people think about the possibility of platoon sized battles within a larger campaign context?
 
I could create a map like I am doing for the MOUT campaign.
It wouldn't be as work intensive (partly because I've discovered that urban map making is very involved).
It could be 3km x 3km, cut into 500m x 500m map sections for each hex (6 x 6 battle zones; 36 total).

There would be open ground, but also things like farms, hamlets, ravines and gullies, patches of woods.
I'd try and design each 500m zone to have lots of tactical possibilities.

Each counter could represent a platoon, and players need to keep the platoons of a company adjacent.
Or company counters, with only a platoon engaged in each fight.
Perhaps a battalion total on each side.

Extras might be light support weapons attached to the platoon, and maybe occasionally a single tank or light vehicle.
 
@Stafford you mentioned in another thread about the idea of having a campaign where battles are only platoon sized with a few added extras.

I've been thinking about this. It could be fun (as well as quick campaign turns).
So many WW2 movies and shows concentrate on this scale.
It could be good for a bit of story telling too. Take out the machine gun nest in the steeple. Clear the farm buildings. Destroy the anti-tank gun in the woods.

So far (with Brigade Battles) my go-to size for map counters and battles have been company sized, which suits the big operations style scenario.
But at a smaller scale, it could represent a more static area of the front, with probes, patrols, and specific missions suited to platoon sized fights.

What do people think about the possibility of platoon sized battles within a larger campaign context?

Like this idea - was thinking/mulling over about how something like this would work as well.
Static sector of the front best I guess.
 
I'm just going to throw out some thoughts I've been putting together after seeing the Poll results for types of competitions.
Some of these are ideas or experiences from Campaigns past some of which go back to the CM1 and the Band of Brothers website campaigns.
(Please don't mind me, these may be over the top rules but I'm retired now and maybe have to much time to be thinking about and typing this stuff up ;) )

This is what I have so far.
- I'll work on Attacks and Assault ideas later today.

Strategic map - TBD (I'm not really a map guy)
Tactical maps with and area approximately 500 to 750 square for small and medium battles. (Add smaller maps for a Tiny Battle?)

Fog of War – Initially neither side can see the opponent’s counters. Both sides will plot their moves and a moderator then moves both side simultaneously until they stop because of orders or run out of MP’s or bump in to an opponent.

Something new perhaps called Initiative (This is something I remember from the Avalon Hill game called “France 1940”)
Rules TBD
After an Attack or an Assault type combat has been completed the side with “the initiative” can then move armor or mechanized units to complete their turn.
This would enable mobile units to take advantage of any holes in the opponents line created during the “combat” phase.

By having fog of war you may be able to have a variation of types of battles.

Meeting Engagement
If/when opponent’s units bump in to each other a Meeting Engagement is created.
Each side will not know what kind of unit was bumped in to.
- Strategic Commanders can choose to battle, hold or retreat
- If a Hold is asked for by both units both units stop where they are.
- If a retreat is asked for, there is a percentage of losses to retreater and the attacker can move forward X number of hexes (Rule TBD).
-If only one side asks for a hold, the other side can choose to Probe or Attack the Holding unit.
- If combat, depending on the level of victory, will decide the amount of information, or Intel, will be on the opposing unit (TBD).
- If combat, the level of victory can decide on how many hexes a unit can advance or be forced to retreat (TBD).
-Other units stopped by the Zone of Control (ZoC) of a retreating unit and have no enemy unit in front of them may also advance a certain distance (TBD).

- Distances units may advance after a combat will also be effected by other enemy units in the area. e.g. a unit would not be able to advance 2 hexes if after one hex it bumps in to another enemy unit. At this point no further movement is allowed and the Strategic turn ends.

Probes
- If 2 units start their turn next to an enemy unit whose type or strength is unknown a Probe type battle is called for. Depending on the level of victory will decide the amount of Intel on the opposing unit.
- Probes do not gain territory only Intel on opposing unit.
- Perhaps if opposing units call for a probe on each other a Meeting Engagement is created?

Suggestions?
 
Upon further reflection perhaps this isn't the thread to be discussing this.
I'm sorry Concord I didn't mean to be rude and bring up different rules. It's your campaign.
What I'll do is create a new thread and bring up these idea for a campaign going forward and ask for your, Stafford's, Rico's and anyone else who wants to join the discussion.

I'm sure CMBN has the most maps.
I have a boat load gathered over the years and I'll put them in a Dropbox to share with you.
 
Although I'm not ready to participate in something like this, having just come back to the CM series after many years and still trying to relearn even the simple process of playing a PBEM game. I do like the idea of the smaller, platoon sized battles as well as the storytelling potential you mentioned but a 3x3 km map is, imho, quite the project by itself.

At some point I'd even like to run my own small campaign (I've run multiple of these type games using Steel Panthers way back in the day) but I need to get comfortable with the system again. Either way, I'm certainly following along with interest.
 
It wouldn't be as work intensive (partly because I've discovered that urban map making is very involved).
It could be 3km x 3km, cut into 500m x 500m map sections for each hex (6 x 6 battle zones; 36 total).

There would be open ground, but also things like farms, hamlets, ravines and gullies, patches of woods.
I'd try and design each 500m zone to have lots of tactical possibilities.

I like the idea. Maybe a Hürtgen campaign? It wouldn't all be just a lot of trees - hilly terrain, various clearings and fire breaks, trenches, bunkers, and minefields could provide variety. Minefields would be marked for both sides of course.

The forest setting would also help explain why no (or few) tanks are present.

For inspiration for the maps, I recommend looking at the tiny scenario "When Trumpets Fade" by Kohlenklau. It's only around 200x200m if I remember right, but the terrain is well made and a challenge. So 500x500m would be a good size for forest fighting.
 
Good to see some interest in these ideas and that campaigns are popular.
Interest from players is the one ingredient that we can't do without. :)

@Gunner you are very welcome to throw around ideas here, and together we can discuss what everyone feels like doing.
I got your invitation to the Dropbox folder. Thanks for assembling the maps.
 
@Rico your rules set that you designed have been excellent for running campaigns.
The QB points system where a unit's purchase points are decided by their remaining combat strength has been working really well.

IF we end up doing a platoon sized campaign, I'd like your help and advice on the rules.
Off the top of my head, I can imagine a similar situation where either each platoon has its own strength, or losses are tied into the company strength as a whole.
I like the idea of each platoon having its own combat strength independent of the company to reflect its past losses.

The main problem is that I can see a situation where after only one or two battles, a platoon may be reduced to having just one squad or something.
This may be okay from a story telling aspect, but as a battle it might not be enjoyable for players to be commanding a single squad plus platoon leader and a machine gun.

A possible way around this would be to say that if a platoon takes more than 50% losses they are disbanded.
If they take less than 50% they are considered full strength for their next battle, with abstract reinforcements from the battalion.
The tipping point idea is perhaps a bit clunky but might work.

I haven't abandoned the idea of using companies like Brigade battles though.
Especially since it allows for more tactical options...and armour!
 
@Rico your rules set that you designed have been excellent for running campaigns.
The QB points system where a unit's purchase points are decided by their remaining combat strength has been working really well.

IF we end up doing a platoon sized campaign, I'd like your help and advice on the rules.
Off the top of my head, I can imagine a similar situation where either each platoon has its own strength, or losses are tied into the company strength as a whole.
I like the idea of each platoon having its own combat strength independent of the company to reflect its past losses.

The main problem is that I can see a situation where after only one or two battles, a platoon may be reduced to having just one squad or something.
This may be okay from a story telling aspect, but as a battle it might not be enjoyable for players to be commanding a single squad plus platoon leader and a machine gun.

A possible way around this would be to say that if a platoon takes more than 50% losses they are disbanded.
If they take less than 50% they are considered full strength for their next battle, with abstract reinforcements from the battalion.
The tipping point idea is perhaps a bit clunky but might work.

I haven't abandoned the idea of using companies like Brigade battles though.
Especially since it allows for more tactical options...and armour!

My QB points system rules were aimed at company-sized (more or less battles) with giving players ability to cherry-pick from kit and OOB (for extra added fun)

I have an idea that a concept similar to my "Cross Of Iron" narrative campaign concept from a few years back using say, a US rifle platoon in CMFB might work.

Each player commands a unit and steers it though a series of small custom-built (usually quite winnable) scenarios that string together to form an adventure campaign storyline over several days/weeks during say the Battle of the Bulge.

All casualties are tracked ... and the player is the named force commander in the OOB -- he buys it, campaign over.

Support (like tanks) can be added on or lost as per specific scenario -- unit can be pulled out of line to be refitted etc (quality drops as green replacements arrive)

Opponents are volunteers playing the Axis (with specific mission briefs) who do their best to play believable opponents. (as opposed to the AI)

It worked well with Cross of Iron set in Russia (more open battlefield) with players commanding an armoured PzGr company with an attached group of panzers who's Kampfgruppe gets cut off behind enemy lines and has to fight their way through etc etc...
 
I like the idea of each platoon having its own combat strength independent of the company to reflect its past losses.

The main problem is that I can see a situation where after only one or two battles, a platoon may be reduced to having just one squad or something.
This may be okay from a story telling aspect, but as a battle it might not be enjoyable for players to be commanding a single squad plus platoon leader and a machine gun.

There could be a pool of reinforcements that the battalion commander could distribute.. and also he could pull back depleted platoons. In any case, it might actually be fun to do a "last stand" battle with just a squad and a machinegun. Maybe with some kind of tactical withdrawal rule allowing you to withdraw if you hold for X minutes.
 
I came across a board game called Victory! by Colombia Games. It's originally a WW II game. It has a system where each team (2+) can use Production Points to build units etc.
I downloaded the rules and the scenario booklet, in the scenario booklet I came across a small scenario called the Banana War, a small scenario, description as follows:
Situation
The Federation of Tuxpan (blue) has always relied on its naval superiority to guard the
San Carlos Cannal. Recently, dramatic unrest in the small city-states surrounding the
Federation has jeopardized the safety of the canal and even the nation itself. A new
presidente has been elected and promises to consolidate the region under his military
authority. To the north, Obanto (red) has recently suffered a coup. The old royalist
regime has been supplanted by a triumvirate of aggressive communists. The People’s
Republic of Obanto vows to liberate its neighbors in a sweeping military campaign.
Caught in between, the independent city states have little hope in their home guard
units, but they will fight to the bitter end.
Map Setup
Arrange Maps 5 and 15 as shown. Home regions of Obanto (red), Tuxpan (blue) and the
independent city-states (green) are shown.


gOQZ56b.jpg

As the map above is, well ugly, I redrew the map although not as good not as good as I would like, can't seem to get a good graphic for a mountain range.

aLvBiZG.jpg


Still a work in progress.

More about the game Victory.

Game Scale
Unit types are based on WW2 technology.
Ground units are Corps, each step a Division. Air units are Wings, each step a Group of 100 planes.
Naval units are Divisions, each step one Battleship, or one Carrier, two Cruisers, or three Submarines.
Surface ships are assumed to have an escort of destroyers.
Map scale is 60 miles (100Km) per hex.
(I was thinking maybe to have a company with all it's Battalion support team's and the weapons company as one game unit).

Geomorphic Maps
The four maps included with this game are geomorphic, meaning they can be arranged in dozens of different configurations and the terrain will link together.

Fog of War
Fog of War is one of the most exciting aspects of Victory. Except when fighting a battle, the blocks stand upright, their label facing the owner. This promotes bluff and innovative strategies because players are uncertain of the strength or identity of an enemy unit. Just like all successful generals, you must be bold and decisive in an atmosphere of doubt and deception.
For additional fog of war during set up, 1 player deploys 3 units as desired, then player 2 deploys 3 units, etc.
Continue until all players have deployed all their units.

PRODUCTION CITIES
Maps contain cities which have production values of 1, 2, 3, or 4 and total production of 10pp. A player usually starts the game controlling all cities on one map.

PRODUCTION PHASE
Players simultaneously spend their Production Points (PP) to build new blocks or to add steps to existing blocks. This can only be done in supplied Cities.
 
Back
Top