First I prefer blogging for the visual aspect of the hobby. For anything else, especially rules discussions, a forum is in my opinion better suited.
Second, and this one is closely related to the first one, I'm generally more interested in the painting part of this hobby anyway.
So, why this post then? Well, today I had a game with my mate Chris (https://christopher-bunkerhill.blogspot.com) that turned sour almost from the beginning and I remembered a discussion on Twitter initiated by Henry Hyde (https://battlegames.co.uk). Henry, or better his mate, experienced almost the same as I did in that game today.
So to actually understand what I'm actually rambling on about you should probably first read the Tweet in question *click*
At the time when the discussion on Twitter was in full swing I really didn't really pay it too much attention, being somewhat put off by the vehemence with which some people pleaded their case.
Now, before going on I feel I have to say my gaming buddy Chris is a very relaxed and leaned back kind of gamer. We both play more for the sake of the experience and having a good time than for winning. As long as it's a fun, challenging but fair game for both we're both OK if we loose the encounter.
So, with this out of the way what exactly did happen today? Well, we were running the 4th game in our ongoing "There Are Many Rivers To Cross" campaign for Chain of Command. In all the three previous games Chris had already floored me nice and proper and actually pulled off a successful Blitzkrieg, meaning we were now fighting for table four while still in campaign turn 3 (more on that later). But till today in each game I had had the feeling that I might at least have a chance.
The mission itself was the "Blitzkrieg" mission from the newish "Blitzkrieg 1940" handbook. In essence the Germans had to move two of their units off my table edge before I could accumulate enough Chain of Command dice to stop them.
Well, knowing I'm bad at rolling dice (and I mean really bad, like still below average at the best of times) I didn't count on getting those dice anyway. Meaning my primary plan was to stop the Germans by breaking their morale.
In the Patrol Phase Chris managed to somewhat outsmart me and got one of his Jump Off Points (red) relatively far forward while I had one of mine (blue) somewhat carelessly put too far forward behind the building in the middle.
This in itself wouldn't have been too bad if Chris wouldn't have taken a pre-game barrage as one of his support choices. For the first two phases I wasn't able to deploy anything on the table and when I finally managed to get on a single (!!!) 2" mortar team he had his base of fire already well established and also managed to close down my forward JoP. My mortar was only able to deploy smoke (off target of course) before Chriswould bring forward his troops even further.
In my next phase I actually managed to deploy an entrenched section which I let put down covering fire against his LMG in the building at his table edge and the frontage of the section which had closed down my JoP. A short shootout ensued during Chris' next phase (In short I lost a few men from the section as well as the mortar for no gain in return) and I actually managed a double phase... only to not bring anything on the table AGAIN!
Disclaimer: At this point I actually resigned myself to defeat but knowing if I withdrew without at least inflicting some casualties I'd almost certainly loose the next (and then last) game anyway so I decided to cling on.
Having rolled a double phase Chris then decided to advance with two sections into the field on the top right of the table while at the same time pouring fire into my poor section with his other two sections on the lower table edge. This promptly killed one more men and put some shock on my single section. Again it was my phase and for a change I brought on one more section which immediately fired on one of his sections in the open. I didn't roll too bad but Chris managed to save almost everything bar one kill.
To cut a long story short here shortly after that he exited his two sections off the table edge without me having done any more significant damage (or having brought on any other unit for that matter).
So, in a nutshell the pre-game barrage, combined with my abysmal dice rolling (just one full CoC-dice at the end of the game, still first turn and almost none of my troops on the table) had ruined my game. To be fair something similar could have happened in any other game (e.g. in Bolt Action when player A has almost all his dice drawn at the beginning of the first turn and then again only at the end of the second turn). So why am I so... well, dismayed? Hacked off?
Well, first of all it's 1.5 hrs drive to my mate, so 3 hrs in total carved out of my already sparse spare time just for getting there. And then having had virtually no chance at all. I could just as well have spent the time painting or playing PlayStation or watching TV and would probably have had a better time.
And second because it's exactly these mechanics which in essence defeated me today (Chris in fact didn't need any clever generalship today) which I normally love about Chain of Command.
A few weeks back I listened to Battlechat #43 titled "What Do We Want from Our Games?" in which Henry muses about the issues he and his mate had experienced in their game of CoC (see Twitter Tweet above). Before todays debacle I didn't really get his point. Thinking "oh well, if it'd have been me I'd have just rolled over when I realised I had no chance and then use the time to play the next game in our campaign". Actually I thought the pre-game barrage was only an issue in one-off games as its usefulness would naturally even out over the course of a campaign. But today I knew I had to eventually pull off a victory to at least stave off the inevitable for a little longer because if I lost the game we'd fight for the last table in the next game. Even worse I now have to win at least three times on table 5 so my engineers would have a at least have a slim chance of damaging the bridge in campaign turn 6 (a roll of 5+).
In our, due to my mood somewhat muted after-game banter we agreed the pre-game barrage needed a fix. In our opinion it's not really under-rated as such as it's not so bad when you don't suck at rolling dice, but it's such a "no-brainer" in a way that I wouldn't leave the house without one if I was the attacker. It potentially breaks the game or at least ruins the fun for one or actually both gamers for the cost of just two support points.
So having recognised our problem with the barrage we're thinking about maybe introducing a mandatory roll if the barrage is available.
Somewhat along those lines:
On a roll of 1: No barrage available choose another support option for one point instead
On a roll of 2-3: No barrage available choose another support option for the same value as the barrage
On a roll of 4-6: Barrage available
So should you actually have endured my rather long winded ramblings and read the whole thread I'd actually like to know if you've encountered similar with one of your rules of choice? How did you go about it? What do you do in such cases where a mechanic seemingly dominates a game (not the rules as such) in a way it ruins the whole experience?
I'd be delighted to hear of your experiences.
As you know I totally agree with you on the game we had and how frustrating that was for you. A three hour drive for an underwhelming experience isn't very fun and even more so when you were looking forward to what is our favorite game.
ReplyDeleteI like our solution for the pre-game barrage although like I said in my message I think perhaps we shouldn't have additional penalties other then it's not available so 1-3 not available choose another option and 4-6 it's available. However, if you want to make pre-game barrage a risky choice then we can try what you listed above. I'm fine with both, but we should do one of those to reduce this becoming to common.
Christopher
CoC has moments like these and I can understand the frustration. Personally I can live with it (I even like it) and I’m always looking for a tactical solution rather than a house rule to deal with it, but it’s a long way to drive to end up so disappointed.
ReplyDeleteI'd prefer a tactical solution as well, but there's unfortunately not much you can do when not able to deploy almost anything at all on time to stop your gaming partner. And I wouldn’t mind so much if it'd have been the first time in this campaign.
DeleteI have only played COC a number of times (and prefer it over bolt action) but primarily play games at the regimental level and with 20mm.
ReplyDeleteI have been on the end of a pre game bombardment option with Rapid Fire for our three day big game of Operation Goodwood, I commanded the right flank and in the pre game bombardment (features were the target) I lost four tiger IIs (leaving two vehicles) and pinned all of my infantry, wiping out two battalions and pinning the rest of the infantry units, this caused cascading morale checks to my supporting units, my armoured regiment SS panzer grenadiers promptly left the table, so more than 50% of my force were destroyed in the first move, so it can be problematic for the beginning of a game.
The only way around it is to have the bombardment set before figures go on the table, targeting locations rather than troops. A option could be like Rapid fire, for pre game bombardment it uses a clear soft plastic grid for artillery targeting 9 x 3inch numbered squares, and you use a D10 to place the rounds, so you normally do not even hit your feature, the zero is a failed round.
my two cents for what it is worth.
cheers
Matt
Thanks for the suggestions Matt. Some interesting ideas. Unfortunately it seems CoC uses a slightly different approach to bombardments as this one takes places before the game and hinders your troops from entering the table. So they need to take a test if they arrive.
DeleteIs this Map 5: The Open Road? To me it looks like you had the forces start at the opposite sides? Could be wrong about that but from the Lard Mag I would have thought the Germans patrol markers start on the dotted red line beyond the building which is on the left in the picture above. I know it is not what you ask in the blog but you mention it early on, your patrol phase does look like it added more pressure against you, possibly another factor that may have helped swing it more the other way. Just a thought!
ReplyDeleteYou may be right. We were a little irritated as the map wouldn’t fit the scenario description and in the Blitzkrieg supplement the attacker starts from the table edge while the defender deploys his markers from about a third inward.
DeleteOh wow, this is the sort of experience that would leave me smarting for days, not because of the loss, just the pointlessness of the experience.
ReplyDeleteTo be fair it's not the fault of the game. The mechanic works just like it should and I wouldn’t have minded it much if it'd have been a one-off game or the first time this happened in the campaign.
DeleteNick I do understand what you are saying.
ReplyDeleteLate war Barrages can also be a killer to the game.
cheers JOhn
Oh yes, they can. I actually quite like the mechanic but feel it shouldn’t be as readily available as is. Funnily enough in the core rulebook the Lardies restricted the use of the barrage for certain scenarios. I don’t know why they didn’t do the same for pre-game barrage and Stukas in the Blitzkrieg supplement.
DeleteLooking this game a frenchman would say: "ce n'est pas magnifique mais ce la guerre
ReplyDeleteI haven't played this campaign so I cannot specifically comment, but I grew up mainly playing (and still mainly play) 2nd ed 40K where silly mechanics can easily ruin a good battle plan. We just roll with it usually and have a laugh.
ReplyDeleteFor historicals I think it is difficult--obviously in real life the Germans steam rollered the French so how do you make that into an interesting game for both sides?
If a campaign had been one sided we would usually not change individual rule mechanics but would introduce a "bonus" scenario to try to help the losing party even up the odds. For example in a recent Eldar vs Dark Angels campaign, the Dark Angels were losing badly and obviously going to lose the campaign. We decided on a bonus scenario which if successful would allow the Dark Angels to deep strike some Deathwing into the final game, this would effectively mean they still lose the campaign but the final game is a bit more fun to play for both parties (it's not much fun playing on when you've obviously beaten your opponent badly, but you also want to finish the story of the campaign too....
Excellent idea actually and something to think on for the next campaign. I'm generally with you that the western allies were steamrollered in '40 but on a platoon level you still should have a chance. Not necessarily to drive the Germans out but to stage a successful withdrawal for example. Dunkirk springs to mind here.
DeleteNow that a few days have gone I'm not as set up anymore. But still I think it might have been an oversight by the designers that something like the barrage is available on any map of the campaign while it is restricted in most others. Funnily enough the use of Stukas is restricted.
No matter, it’s maybe just as much a case of us wargamers being used to being spoon fed nowadays. So we should have thought of something like this beforehand ourselves.
I do agree at platoon level tactical victories should certainly be possible in games like this--good point.
DeleteI have seen the responses on social media so I guess the lardies are not conceding any oversights. I think mechanics like this would be really hard to write rules for because of course there is also the chance you roll really well and end the barrage before it has any real effect....
Glad you like the idea of the bonus game...I hope it ends up being a useful suggestion!