New modern Combat Command Box Set idea

[Robtownsend79]

Great discussion peeps. See I was thinking something along the lines of the scenarios of a supply Convoy ambush, where the Convoy must hold off the OpFor until the QRF could be on scene. Think of the "Jessica Lynch story" where her supply company made a wrong turn and ended up in the wrong neighborhood.

[panzergator]

Bottom line, Robtownsend79...

I support an effort for combat support and service support pacs.

One suggestion would be for a battalion maintenance pac with 7 M88s, 4 M113 maintenance tracks, 2 5-ton wreckers, and a HEMMT wrecker. It might include a number of trucks, as well.

The current brigade combat team is supported by an engineer unit which could be another combat team - ACES, DEUCES, ABVs, AVLBs, the Stryker Engineer vehicle, EOD, and the squad vehicle Bradleys.

A single engineer pack should be able to support at least two combined arms companies, depending on what's in it.

[kfeltenberger]

War isn't all action, it's a series of conflicts of varying scales interspersed with periods where nothing is happening. You don't use the same timescale for the quiet bits.

I understand what you're saying though I'm not sure how it would fly in the average game. For example, if we have four or five hours to game, figure a good half hour to get setup and a good half hour to get things put away, so that leaves 3-4 hours. With that limited time, I'm not sure people are going to want to fiddle around with what for most games is a non-issue or record keeping. Then again, most of the microarmor games I've played haven't lasted long enough (in turns) for ammo use or fuel to be an issue. 30-50 turns is a long time.

Now, for specific scenarios as was mentioned above? Sure, I can see that. I'm just not convinced that it would be profitable enough for GHQ to go through the expense of creating a special combat command just for that.

[CG2]

A large number of people game as you do, but others don't. The skirmishes can be linked into a series played over weeks or even months and with modern technology people don't have to be in the same room. Games don't even have to have more than 1 real player and, in fact, most people don't have access to multiple players on a regular basis as you do.

You play your way, we'll play ours.

Since GHQ don't release any info on what sells, we don't have any basis on which to judge what works for them or doesn't. The models are already there so all they have to do is design a new label for the box and take a picture so it can't be a cost thing.

[kfeltenberger]

That's all true. However, when I was associated with a local game store who focused on historical miniatures, I saw what tended to languish on the rack, and most of that was stuff that would fall into the support category.

In the end, I don't think it would be a decent seller and would simply sit on the shelf becoming 'dead lead'; money that GHQ invested and can't get a return on.

[chatto]

For modern microarmor? Turns are measured in minutes, so I'm not sure how this would be fair or add something meaningful to the game unless it was something specific to a certain scenario.

YMMV.

Fair question for me dude I prefer a longer term game, so usually looking at overall campaigns where the mission for a game may well be "ensure your troops receive their resupply convoy" whilst at the same time fighting against a force to the front.

I'm looking at this from the concept of a "grand campaign" background vs the sole battle. For actual games, the rule I suggest above may well take place if the unit has been cut off from resupply.

As always, there's nothing wrong with not using such extra rules, I see them as adding flavour for a game or two, and helping campaign commanders learn VERY quickly about the importance of supply lines and not getting cut off

[Extra Crispy]

So not *exactly* apples to apples but....

I sell modern 15mm miniatures. You know what I don't stock more than one of? Engineering vehicles, bridge layers and so on. Why? They don't sell. Trucks sell - they tow guns, carry troops and make up convoys. But anything more specialized: nope. It sits. I'm lucky to sell 2 a year. If that.

Certainly there are a few gamers who do campaigns - but I'd wager good money they make up less than 10% of gamers. But even then, supply and all that happen in the "strategic" turns with no minis involved. Logistics and supply lines are important, but not on the battle table...

[paul]

I do large scale formations like divisions and brigades and for support vehicles I've always used a philosophy to have enough to support a battalion at most. I have very few games were the support formations played a big part but that is usually because we do not count rounds or fuel. Playing a campaign game this should be critical.

[CG2]

Extra Crispy's info above is very interesting as we rarely get any info on sales. I'm not surprised by his view and, although it's much easier to field larger forces in 1/285 (and therefore a broader range), I would expect the same principle to largely hold true.

Combat Commands fall into 2 categories in my mind :

1) A handy pre-organised unit with a bit of a discount

2) Something too bit to fit into the normal pack structure - like the recent pontoon bridge.

To my mind, if you're just re-organising existing packs and sticking it in a box with a new label, I don't see why you couldn't have almost endless type 1 Combat Commands with very little effort and minimal extra cost. Some using the buildings range might be interesting too - a Middle East Village Combat Command, perhaps?

The real bonus to me is the type 2 Combat commands where you get something special and new. Obviously feature engineer units such as bridges and Landing Craft fit nicely into this category but you could see the appeal of Armoured Trains or maybe small ships or fortifications.

[Extra Crispy]

Paul:

True, in a campaign there are lots of non-combat variables. But that doesn't translate in to a need for miniatures. I've played in several horse and musket campaigns. Not once did our games require a wagon train (beyond a handful to act as an objective etc.).

So even in a campaign, the need for non-combat miniatures is still very small. Maybe on a strategic map you use a truck as a supply unit. But what role do non-combat *miniatures* play?

Most games don't require ambulances or aid stations, recovery vehicles, motor pools. In fact the game is almost all about the tooth, and not at all about the tail.

[CG2]

I agree that most gamers are about the 'tooth' but it's not all about need, it's about want. Hence my point about Jagdtigers being much more common on wargames tables than they were in reality.

Obviously Shermans and Panzer IVs are going to sell well but that doesn't mean that less common items don't sell enough to be worth making - that would apply to Landing Craft, Rumanians, Ambulances etc. It's not just about cost of course, some models are show pieces, some are there to keep customers happy and some are just because the manufacturer wanted to make it!