
Modern Rules
Moderators: dnichols, GHQ, Mk 1
-
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 4:57 am
Modern Rules
Anyone have experience with these rules? If you do, can you give your input, good, bad, ugly? I found them years ago, read through them back then, but never played them. Is there something better available now?


-
- E5
- Posts: 153
- Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 5:35 pm
- Location: Michigan
I've played Close & Destroy quite a few years ago. I felt that the way the rules are set up it made it extremely difficult to kill a Soviet tank but was way easier to kill a M1. It just didnt feel "right" to me. I also own Combined Arms and Tactical Command. Never got around to playing either but have read thru the Combined Arms numerous times. I think where Close & Destroy is 1 to 1 based, Combined Arms is more 1 to 5 or something like that. I cant tell you to much about Tactical Command. As for Tacforce there is a gentlemen that visits here often and he has re-released a new Tacforce version all on his own. He is the resident expert on Tacforce as far as I know. He also has his own company for producing buildings and terrain in multiple scales. Sorry I couldnt be more help. Best advice I can give is study each rule set and decide to just set up a quick game and play each. Years ago I played the dunn Kempf at Ft Hood and I also had a copy of Engage & Destroy which I liked very much. Now I personally like Modern Spearhead and Force on Force.
Peace thru superior firepower
-
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 4:57 am
Thanks for taking the time! Very helpful information.
I’m aware of the updated rule set that was created. Sounds like he has done a really good job bring the rule set to a current level. He’s also done some really nice stuff with his company. The buildings are amazing!
I’m aware of the updated rule set that was created. Sounds like he has done a really good job bring the rule set to a current level. He’s also done some really nice stuff with his company. The buildings are amazing!
rdenman62 wrote:I've played Close & Destroy quite a few years ago. I felt that the way the rules are set up it made it extremely difficult to kill a Soviet tank but was way easier to kill a M1. It just didnt feel "right" to me. I also own Combined Arms and Tactical Command. Never got around to playing either but have read thru the Combined Arms numerous times. I think where Close & Destroy is 1 to 1 based, Combined Arms is more 1 to 5 or something like that. I cant tell you to much about Tactical Command. As for Tacforce there is a gentlemen that visits here often and he has re-released a new Tacforce version all on his own. He is the resident expert on Tacforce as far as I know. He also has his own company for producing buildings and terrain in multiple scales. Sorry I couldnt be more help. Best advice I can give is study each rule set and decide to just set up a quick game and play each. Years ago I played the dunn Kempf at Ft Hood and I also had a copy of Engage & Destroy which I liked very much. Now I personally like Modern Spearhead and Force on Force.
-
- E5
- Posts: 7288
- Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2004 11:22 pm
- Location: Jacksonville, FL
Tac Air: used the board for an Operation/Strategic game, then use the rule set Combined Arms for the tactical game. Each hex was represented a mile (2 or 2.5 feet).
.
Sand, Oil & Blood: played some 2.5 decades ago. Dont remember much.
.
Close & Destroy: were going to play it, so very detailed as I recall.
.
Combined Arms: played this a bunch. Each figure represents a platoon. We adjust the rules a bunch, then more adjustments. Using same or adjusted armor data and missile mechanics. Changed rate of fire. Tried to arrange for 1 to 1 games. Played a bunch in the 1990s and early 2000s.
.
Sand, Oil & Blood: played some 2.5 decades ago. Dont remember much.
.
Close & Destroy: were going to play it, so very detailed as I recall.
.
Combined Arms: played this a bunch. Each figure represents a platoon. We adjust the rules a bunch, then more adjustments. Using same or adjusted armor data and missile mechanics. Changed rate of fire. Tried to arrange for 1 to 1 games. Played a bunch in the 1990s and early 2000s.
Chris
-
- E5
- Posts: 115
- Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 12:10 pm
- Location: Los Angeles, CA
I still use Challenger 2000. Very detailed and for a new user it is complicated. But once you get acclumated with the rules functions. It is fun. My armor group out here did a redue of the rules adding additional vehicles and some updates to the rules.
Another rules sets i use is Jim Days MBT by GMT Games. Converted the hex equal 100 yards to miniatures aspect. GMT Panzer is great for ww2 miniatures game play. Both rules have a great support and is refered to the living rules due to updates you can download from MGT Site.
Even the older versions of Avalon Hills MBT and IDF. Works well for miniatures play.
Another rules sets i use is Jim Days MBT by GMT Games. Converted the hex equal 100 yards to miniatures aspect. GMT Panzer is great for ww2 miniatures game play. Both rules have a great support and is refered to the living rules due to updates you can download from MGT Site.
Even the older versions of Avalon Hills MBT and IDF. Works well for miniatures play.
----------------
"On The Way!!!!"
"On The Way!!!!"
-
- Posts: 31
- Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2009 8:54 am
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 4:57 am
-
- E5
- Posts: 3834
- Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2004 11:02 am
- Location: Riverside, CA
-
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 4:57 am
I love the modern stuff. Late Cold War to current time. I just recently joined that group. Was able to find some good stuff there.
redleg wrote:What time frame and countries and types of units are you looking for? We can probably cover just about everything between all the members of this forum! There's also a FaceBook group called "Modern Military TO&E's (WW2 and Later)" that has some pretty good information.
-
- E5
- Posts: 3834
- Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2004 11:02 am
- Location: Riverside, CA
Check this website out as well. it has a lot of detailed info about the US Army units for that time period. No pictured though, just straight TO&E documents:
https://fas.org/man/dod-101/army/unit/toe/
https://fas.org/man/dod-101/army/unit/toe/
-
- Posts: 30
- Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2017 3:55 am
Wasn't this a topic sometime back? I think that there was a crew here on the forum that was doing an updated version of the moderns. I think that Red Leif was one of them, maybe? Is there any update on these? I have been looking forward to them for a long time!cama wrote:I wish someone would revise the GHQ rules like the WW2 set and bring them into the 21st century. The new WW2 rules are a refreshing re-write of good core rules. I normally like 1:1 scale, but can live with the 1:5 scale, and the occasional anachronism such as 1-2 Firefly tanks being in a Sherman troop in 44/45.
-
- E5
- Posts: 100
- Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 6:57 am
- Location: Arlington, TX
I have taken over revising the modern rules for GHQ. Some big changes coming. Looking for some help out there for updated TO&Es s well as new weapons stats.There have been a lot of new weapons and TO&Es appearing since the publication of the first edition. I can probably tackle those two tasks myself but it would dramatically effect the publication date.
-George Chrestensen (WWII Microsquad designer)
-George Chrestensen (WWII Microsquad designer)