Rule Set Suggestions for Modern Micro Armor

pvt64 · Post by **pvt64** » Fri Jan 13, 2012 8:52 am

Looking to see peoples suggestions for rule sets. Have tried a couple, but really have not found one I like enough to settle on. Thought?

dougeagle · Post by **dougeagle** » Fri Jan 13, 2012 10:25 am

I prefer GHQ's modern rules. But I have played and like FFT2 and their latest FFT3. Both are good. Modern Spearhead...did not care for at all.

Thomaso827 · Post by **Thomaso827** » Fri Jan 13, 2012 8:16 pm

I'm in the same boat, looking for a good 1-1 set, but not so detailed as most of the skirmish rules. I want to base fireteams in the same fashion as Flames of War, and want to run a company of troops at this level. So far, things are either 1=a squad or platoon level, or skirmish with so much detail that running a company bogs things way down. In the process, I have found some very interesting skirmish sets, but nothing I'm willing to run for a convention game. Considering something like the Iron Ivan moderns rules and just modifying the basing to fire teams. I'll need to keep track of casualties anyway, so most of the rest of it should work okay for players to each run a platoon.

Tom

pvt64 · Post by **pvt64** » Fri Jan 13, 2012 9:41 pm

I agree on Modern Spearhead. Sorry, I find GHQ's to be a bit confusing. MAybee it is me. That's why I'm still searching.

Thomaso827 · Post by **Thomaso827** » Fri Jan 13, 2012 11:38 pm

Somebody pointed out Cold War Commander to me, so I need to look into that further. It has 3 scales, the last being 1-1, so may work for my needs.

Tom

pvt64 · Post by **pvt64** » Sat Jan 14, 2012 12:32 am

I have Cold War Commander and is the one I currently am going with. Just looking for other options. I'm looking at the 1 casting is a platoon level.

dougeagle · Post by **dougeagle** » Sat Jan 14, 2012 8:39 am

I thought Cold War Commander was okay, but in the end, it reminded me too much of FoW...too much dice rolling. Since when can a tank fire 3 shots in a row....

not likely. It was an okay set of rules, fun for sure, but didn't care too much for it.

Sorry, I find GHQ's to be a bit confusing

What part do you find confusing with it? I had problems with it at first, but after a few rounds of playtesting they were quite fun.

Thomaso827
I'm in the same boat, looking for a good 1-1 set, but not so detailed as most of the skirmish rules

If you're interested in this level of gaming, one system that peaked my interest, especially in WWII, and I think Mluther would agree, is by the Fat Lardies called Charlie Don't Surf. Well, Luther plays their IABSM which is set in WWII. CDS is much like that, but for Vietnam era. I won't go into too much detail about the game as I don't want to infringe on GHQ, but I will send you a pm.

Panzerleader71 · Post by **Panzerleader71** » Sat Jan 14, 2012 11:13 am

I use Cold War commander and Blitzkrieg Commander for my micro armour games. They are dirt simple, easy to teach and to grasp, and in their own way create fairly realistic out comes.

"Since when can a tank fire 3 shots in a row.... not likely."

How many rounds can a tank fire in 20-30 minutes (time scale used in BKC/CWC depending on organizational level of game)? Besides, the designer has never said CWC/BKC was a combat simulation, it is a game pure and simple. If you are a rivet counter then you won't like BKC/CWC, but if you are looking to put in a battalion sized game in an afternoon it will be the system for you.

"I thought Cold War Commander was okay, but in the end, it reminded me too much of FoW.."

On behalf of myself, Pete, and everyone else over on the BKC/CWC forum allow me to say "ACK!...Choke"

dougeagle · Post by **dougeagle** » Sat Jan 14, 2012 9:26 pm

"Since when can a tank fire 3 shots in a row.... not likely."

How many rounds can a tank fire in 20-30 minutes (time scale used in BKC/CWC depending on organizational level of game)? Besides, the designer has never said CWC/BKC was a combat simulation, it is a game pure and simple. If you are a rivet counter then you won't like BKC/CWC, but if you are looking to put in a battalion sized game in an afternoon it will be the system for you.

Oops...I was actually refering to Flames of War and the fact that a Panzer III can fire its 50mm 3 times in single turn. I wasn't clear enough I guess. But yeah I agree, BKC/ CWC are fun systems indeed.

"I thought Cold War Commander was okay, but in the end, it reminded me too much of FoW.."

On behalf of myself, Pete, and everyone else over on the BKC/CWC forum allow me to say "ACK!...Choke" Confused

We all have our differences in rules. Again I wasn't being clear. I was referring to the fact that there are large amounts of dice rolled is all. As for game simplicity, yes it is simple and fun, but when playing with 1:1 scale, the amount of dice turned me away from it. My own prerogative.

Panzerleader71 · Post by **Panzerleader71** » Sat Jan 14, 2012 10:21 pm

dougeagle wrote:[.
"I thought Cold War Commander was okay, but in the end, it reminded me too much of FoW.."

On behalf of myself, Pete, and everyone else over on the BKC/CWC forum allow me to say "ACK!...Choke" Confused
We all have our differences in rules. Again I wasn't being clear. I was referring to the fact that there are large amounts of dice rolled is all. As for game simplicity, yes it is simple and fun, but when playing with 1:1 scale, the amount of dice turned me away from it. My own prerogative.

I can understand that. The system is an abstract one, which is why I think it is really good for playing out large Battalion (or higher) level games. However, the abstraction would make a company (or smaller) level game a little unwieldly I would think.

whoa Mohamed · Post by **whoa Mohamed** » Sun Jan 15, 2012 12:57 am

Tac Force was really a nice set of rules and it was put out with GHQ/GDW.
too bad GHQ Has not released an updated version....

bound for glory · Post by **bound for glory** » Tue Jan 17, 2012 9:41 am

funny the mention of tacforce. in the mid 80's ghq was looking into updating the game. don't know what became of the idea. the main problem is the cards. for those who never played tacforce, the game had a rectangle card for each vehicle, and you had to line up the firing vehicles card with the target vehicles card to find the number needed for a hit. strange concept, but it was fun. the other problem with tacforce was that the only vehicle cards were warpac and us. no other nato cards.
a good set of rules is search and destroy. it came out in the late 1980's and had the main book and then they made an air/helo book. good game, but again, there were plans to make updated books and it never happened.
at one point, our club was working on a mordern rules. in the early 1990's. what we did was take our favorite ww2 rules, jagdpanzer, and use the stats from challenger 2. it worked pretty good. i was hoping with the pending re release of jagdpanzer, they would pick up the plans to release the modern version, MBT. but i won't hold my breath...

BattlerBritain · Post by **BattlerBritain** » Tue Jan 17, 2012 3:23 pm

I've tried quite a few sets of rules for Moderns. But as with most things it all depends on what you want out of them.

Do you want a quick game that you can play with your mates in an evening or do you want to take weeks evaluating where every round goes and use the rules like an encyclopedia?

I tend to try and go for something that is quick and easy to play and once I get used to it add more 'chrome' and see how it flies.

So I've ended up using a boardgame called 'Team Yankee' and made up the stats for other vehicles as needed, ie for me 'The Brits'. All stats for a nation fitted on 1 side of a piece of A4. And the results even for this seemingly low-complexity game seemed to came out very similar to that of more complex rules. It just played a lot quicker.

For a 1:1 battle we played 2 full Battalions of T-72s and a Bn of BMP vs M1 Tank Co + Mech Co in about 3hrs. Lot of scrap metal after that one

But I've also played Lock 'n Loads 'World At War' series of boardgames using an enlarged copy of the board and GHQ tanks as the counters. That looked great and played well as well. And it was quick and easy to play. But I have my doubts about whether the results were 'realistic' though.

I've played MBT (as well as Panzer/Armor/88 ) and it didn't enthuse me to continue playing it. I disagreed with lots of the armour thickness values and besides, the armour thickness on a tank isn't exactly the same at every point for every single tank to the nearest millimetre. So saying that tank type A can take out tank type B at exactly this range every time is just wrong. You need a bit a 'jitter' in the values, and that's best done with a bit of varitaion that is best resolved with some dice. So I'd like to see MBT have a bit of variation (not too much) in penetration values and also variation in armour thickness. From discussions on the MBT forum on Comsimworld I think they may be doing that for the upcoming MBT2. Although that may still be a bit of a way off.

There's also a variation of the Battlefront WW2 rules for Moderns and that seems to play OK. They handle the formation and morale side of things quite well.

Hope this helps,

Battler

bound for glory · Post by **bound for glory** » Fri Jan 20, 2012 2:06 pm

can you give an example of the armor stats for, say, an m1a1 and a t80? i'd like to see how they are done. i don't know much about mbt.