Soft vs Hard

I suspect this is going to cause some comments. I should say from the outset I'm not attempting to cast any doubt on the bravery of anyone. That being said, on to the main part....

I'm busy painting up some Germans for Chain of Command to use in the rather excellent Blitzkrieg 1940 campaign supplement from Two Fat Lardies. Actually my "cunning plan" is to add to the stuff I already have for Stalingrad, as the infantry are pretty much interchangeable so all I need is some new (earlier) vehicles. This is turning out to be predictably more complicated than first envisaged, but that is something for a later post.  All that got me thinking about how we wargamers value hard stats, and tend to disregard the soft ones.

I'm going to use two examples to explain this. The Char B, and the Douglas TBD Devastator. 

The Char B is well regarded by history and wargamers. On the table top it is an absolute beast, with an excellent 47mm gun in the turret to engage armour, and a short barrelled 75mm howitzer in the hull to shoot softer targets. The 75 is rather strange in that it is fixed - you aim the gun by aiming the tank - actually the driver aims and fires the 75mm using a complex but quite responsive steering system. The Char B also has very heavy armour, particularly on the front. When we read about it, and French tanks in general, the usual comments are that the tanks are excellent but the French deployed them in "penny packets" which meant the Germans could concentrate their tanks and beat the French monsters piecemeal.  You can't read about the Char B without getting the story of  Captain Pierre Billotte and his attack at the village of Stonne, where his tank Char B1 "Eure" on it's own managed to break through the German positions and destroyed thirteen Panzers which he caught in a line on the main street, which seems to support the "good tank" theory. Bilotte said he ordered his hull gun to engage the last panzer while he used the turret gun on the lead one, and then having blocked both ends of the street with wrecks proceeded to work his way down the column, apparently taking 140 hits that bounced off his thick armour in the process, before calmly heading back to his start point. 

This is a preserved Char B, actually in Stonne as a memorial to the battle.

Stirring stuff. The problem is, that really seems to be it. I've been reading through German reports and after a week or so of frustration, it seems pretty much that Billotte and his rampage is almost unique, and when we look at French tanks fighting German ones, even the mighty Char B, they are totally useless. Germans do lose lots of tanks, but not to French tanks. The French anti tank gunners and artillery both perform very well, but the tanks do almost nothing.  So what about the penny packets? I really can't see any evidence this is the case. Billotte may have carried out his devastating lone ride on his own, but he started with a company of 7 tanks and managed to lose the other 6. In fact he is a good example of what went wrong as he was the Company Commander yet he got separated from the rest of his unit and due to the poor communications and some sort of brain fade he ends up on his own. Company Commanders really shouldn't do this. It is true that French tanks were often outnumbered, but even when they were not, they don't seem to have performed very well against other tanks.

The thing about the Char B however is that although the "hard" stats look good, gun, armour etc the soft stats, the things we don't really represent well in wargames, are awful. Really awful. These problems are twofold. Firstly visibility. All tanks have visibility problems, French tanks are probably the worse of the bunch because unlike everyone else the French didn't believe in turret hatches and instead fitted their tanks with a domed cupola. The Commander couldn't stick his head up to look around. Instead the French had doors in the back of the turret that the TC would have to squirm through to see outside. How bad this feature is cannot be over stressed. German accounts speak of Panzers simply driving past French tanks at ranges of 80-100 meters and the French apparently not even seeing them.  If he did see something he then would have to get back in the turret to communicate with the crew, and that's when the real (second) problem starts. 

This pic above shows a Char B being loaded onto a tank transporter at Saumur tank museum. You can clearly see the commanders rear turret "door \ seat". 

The second problem is that the Commander isn't just the commander, he is also the gunner for the 47mm AND co ax MG. He also loads them. He is also supposed to command the tank, instruct the rest of the crew and if he is a platoon or Company Commander, direct the other tanks too. He doesn't have a seat in the turret either, unless he has the rear turret hatch open and he sits on the outside.

So let's talk through an engagement scenario.  The commander is sat outside, protected a little from fire directly to his front by the bulk of the turret, but against shell splinters or anything approaching him from any other angle he is totally exposed. His B1 is advancing slowly - it's not a fast tank, and anyway unlike most tanks the driver cant get instructions about where to drive very well because the commander, on his turret door seat, can't see forward where the tank is driving. This may help explain the number of pictures of Char Bs abandoned in roadside ditches. How he communicates with the rest of the tank crew from that position is something of a mystery anyway. Hopefully he sees his target - so he quickly shimmies back into the turret - losing his view of the target in the process, and remember his tank is moving, and he has no seat, so he is getting thrown around inside a metal box banging his head on the walls no doubt. Now he has a choice - he can either rotate the turret - and at least here the APX turret is electrically powered, then lay the gun on target, or load the gun. On this last one he does have some help - there is a radio operator below him in the hull who can at least pass him the shells for his 47mm, and the gun is primarily an anti tank gun so choice of ammo is not that much of a problem. So he loads the 47mm AP the radio man  has passed up to him - and then where is the target? He has three options. He can jump back out onto his turret door \ seat to get a fairly clear view, or he can use the rotating cupola and try to locate the target through the very narrow slits in it, or he can use the gunners sight. The best view is of course from the rear turret door, but there is a war going on out there. The view from the cupola is very limited, and the gunners sight is basically a telescope that has excellent focus but almost zero field of view. If he uses the cupola once he has located the target he must move out of that position into the gunner's position - losing the target again, but hopefully if he has got the turret lined up and both the target and his tank haven't moved far he can use the gunners sight and take the shot. If he misses, or more likely  momentarily loses sight of the target when the gun goes off six inches from his ear, he has to reload, then re-acquire, aim then.....

You can see where this is going. In this light the German stories of French tanks just stopping in the middle of a field and apparently allowing the panzers to just drive around at their leisure and shoot them in the rear starts to make sense. In comparison a PzIII has a three man turret. The Commander has a split hatch with rotating cupola. Even in combat he can drop the bulk of his body through the hatch and fight the tank "head up" to maintain visibility and situational awareness. He has internal communication with his crew via headsets and a throat mike. His job is to command his tank, and coordinate with the others in the platoon, nothing more. The gunner has nothing to do other than follow his commander's instructions til he locates the target, and then shoot. After each shot he can keep the target in his sights because the loader will load the gun for him. My money is on the panzer - every time. So what happened at Stonne?

To put this in context, Stonne was a very intense fight. The village changed hands 17 times in three days. French sources compared the close and vicious infantry fighting that took place there to Verdun in the First World War, and some Germans compared it to Stalingrad. 

According to reports Billotte approached down the road and suddenly came face to face with this column of panzers at 30 meter range. Now at this point the story starts to sound a bit strange. I can believe he didn't see the panzers, given the problems with his tanks visibility, but it seems a stretch that they didn't see him in his rather large tank. It also seems strange that he could order his driver to do the "shoot the rear tank" trick and shoot a tank thirteen tanks down a column when at the same time the panzers cant just turn around and drive away? Are they really parked nose to tail in the middle of a battle? If they are - how do you shoot the thirteenth - surely the line of fire s blocked by all those parked panzers?? Remember, the Char B cant fire the 75mm on the move............. It just seems strange. I also can't find any German reports that directly corroborate this event, though they do note the loss of 25 tanks in the three day battle. This map claims to show the route taken by Billotte, and if it's accurate, his gunner could not see the other end of the column.

Here is the village today on Google Earth - the road layout remarkably unchanged from 1940 though many of the buildings that lined the road have now gone.

Maybe not all the tanks claimed were killed on the day, maybe some are victims of the earlier battles and get included in the total anyway? Then again, if the Germans do sit it out and try and shoot the Char B in the face their chance of success isn't that high. I also wonder how much the Bonny Tyler factor kicked in. At the end of WW2 France was very much a country riven by internal division and self doubt. After the disaster of 1940 there was a great deal of finger pointing and scapegoating. In some ways this is still happening today, with various explanations being offered for the French collapse in 1940. This is understandable, and a nation in such a position, as Bonnie famously said "Needs a Hero". Billotte is a great candidate, a dashing tank commander who also happened to be the son of a high ranking general (sorry I forgot to mention that). 

My second example is a plane that all wargamers know is a pile of crap - the Douglas TBD Devastator, a byword for mediocrity.

In two major engagements in 1942 the Devastator Squadrons achieved almost precisely zero (pun intended) and lost the vast majority of their planes in doing so - losses at Midway topped 90%. Actually that's a bit unfair as the TBDs did manage to cripple the light carrier Shoho at Coral Sea, but.....

The problem is when you look at the hard stats the TBD isn't that bad. OK it is certainly slow, particularly in comparison to Japanese aircraft or land based planes, but this can also be compared with the British Fairy Swordfish, an antiquated biplane that still managed to give useful service through WW2 and accounted for damaging \ sinking several battleships and 20 odd submarines, and the Swordfish makes the Devastator look decidedly sprightly. Why did it do so badly?

The answer is, really, it didnt. At Midway there were six new TBF Avengers based on the island. The Avenger is acclaimed as one of the better torpedo planes of WW2. but they lost 5 out of 6 trying to attack the Japanese fleet, and achieved no hits. This pattern is repeated regularly with torpedo bombers throughout the war - against any sort of fighter opposition they simply fail to perform, to the extent that in the USN retired most torpedo squadrons or converted them to bombing units. To some extent the Japanese are the exception, their superbly trained crews pushed their Kates through to point blank range before dropping, but also suffered crippling losses in the process so they simply could not do it again.

I think the Devastator's bad rep is therefore not really to do with a measurable deficiency in equipment or capability, the "hard" stats, but more about the environment and circumstances they were deployed in, the "soft" factors we find hard to represent in our games. Char Bs have good "hard" stats but lousy "soft" ones, so do much better in games than their real performance would justify, Devastators are seen as a disaster without recognising that any plane that has to fly low, slow and in a straight line to make an attack will get mauled by an even vaguely capable defence 

So there you go, some musings on hard and soft stats and factors that maybe we should be more aware of. There are many other examples, equipment that has a bad reputation with gamers (Sherman) but were loved by their crews because they were easy to live and work in.

All of which wont help when that bloody Char B rolls down the road, but at least I can say in "real life" it would probably just have been abandoned in the nearest ditch.

Cheers

WorLard - Durham part one - Coastal Patrol

Yesterday I attended "Wor Lard", an annual gaming event arranged by the chaps at Durham Wargaming club where the day is dedicated to the games of the Two Fat Lardies, and indeed attended by Rich Clarke, the face of TFL, and others.

It happens in the Vane Tempest Community Hall in Durham, itself an interesting building as it once was the headquarters of the Durham Militia, but has since been converted into a community centre, which, as they say, is nice.

The Dread Portal!

The format of the day is simple. Everyone is asked in advance what they want to play from a broad menu of current and past TFL hits, you turn up, have a chat, and then get your gaming head on. One game in the morning, break for lunch and snacks, another in the afternoon, wrapping up at around 5:30 in time for a pint at the local hostelry followed by a curry. In many ways an unreconstructed perfect day for me.

My first game was Coastal Patrol - MBTs and Eboats in the Channel and all that, very much a "happening" period due to the popularity of Warlord's Cruel Seas. The scenario was pretty standard fare, E Boats returning from a patrol run into a pair of Fairmiles who are covering an Air Sea Rescue Launch inserting an SOE agent, all complicated by a patrolling R boat with a previous history of trigger happiness so everyone is under strict instructions to identify targets before shooting.

CP uses an action system - each turn a ship dices for how many actions it has, usually between none (Captain asleep at the wheel or otherwise distracted) to three. These are the usual things like change speed, order a turn, attempt to spot, shoot, etc etc.

The game was a blast, and ended with a fairly comprehensive win for the Kriegsmarine when they managed by sheer fluke to blow up the ASR launch within an inch of making it's escape. German gunnery dice were damned impressive throughout, and two critical hits on the bridges of the Dogboats caused them both to be ineffective at the crucial moment as the crew struggled to replace the COs, cut down in a hail of 20mm cannon fire.

Blinds in play

E Boat evading

Contact ! 

An E boat "blind" skilfully weaves between the Fairmiles

So the inevitable comparison with Cruel Seas (CS)? - disclaimer - after just one game of Coastal Patrol! (CP)

Lardies are usually held up as a paragon of "play the period, not the rules" and tend to produce much more "realistic" (tm) rules to Warlord, and Warlord\ Cruel Seas has taken some criticism for this, particularly over their torpedo rules, so I was interested to see how they dealt with the challenges inherent in fast attack games.

Firstly, night. CP immediately assumes the game is set at night, which is the norm for the actual engagements. CS is pretty silent on this, but there is some hand waving going on about the short in game ranges representing the problems of poor visibility and mostly being at night. CP uses a system of blinds to represent this and adds an interesting layer of confusion - "is that a target?" "is it a friend from another flotilla?" etc. This is fun, BUT there is an unavoidable layer of complication in any double blind system tracking who can see what and has identified what. That does make for in interesting game, but also imposes a practical size limit on the number of boats a side as more than 4 or 5 would probably swamp the system. One interesting CP rule is that firing your automatic weapons loses your target in the glare of the muzzle flash, so you have to reacquire taking actions - a nice touch that adds quite a bit of tension. Searchlights - searchlights in CS work in ways that defy logic and physics, it really is just a head shaking moment. CP uses a template that works, if you are stupid enough to use it because although you can see your target, everyone can see you. Nuff said.

The actual firing systems are poles apart. CS uses a number of dice based on each of the weapons firing, CP aggregates firing points devolved by the guns that can bear, meaning an average E Boat was throwing 4 or 5 dice. CS uses a simple hit points system, with possible critical hits, CP a progressive damage system where you basically shoot things off the target until it burns down, blows up or sinks due to flooding. Both systems work, but CS does make your boats extremely short lived where in CP in theory you can take a lot of hits on non essential bits. Dealers choice.

Turning. Another area CS takes some flak for is the way boats turn. There is no real excuse for this - a tanker at 15 knots should not be able to turn twice as far as a E boat at the same speed. CP uses a simple turning circle which takes a lot of hassle out of the game. I hate turning circles personally, but they do work.

Torpedoes. CS takes a LOT of criticism over it's torpedo system, which many feel is too complicated and not realistic, requiring the torpedo to move through the water, dice to hit, dice to explode. CP uses almost the EXACT same system, with one major exception being torpedo hits are pretty much universally fatal, something CS gets very wrong. The similarities between the two systems are striking, which does make me wonder how much the criticism of CS is due to an anti Warlord bias from the naval wargames intelligentsia in their stuffed armchairs (me included)?

Aircraft. CP doesnt have them. This is perfectly sensible. Why would you have aircraft intervening in a night engagement between coastal forces? CS goes all "Hollywood" here, which is fine if you like that sort of thing, or would be if the air attack rules had been better written, which sadly they are not.

On the subject of size, CP and CS both focus on small boats - up to Corvettes and Minelayers, but unlike CS it looks as though the player base has enough understanding not to want to include the Bismark.

Both games have a fair amount of clutter - both use ship cards to track damage for instance, but CP is noticeably "chart heavy", much more so than CS, which is certainly a factor in CS's favour.

So overall? The thing about Cruel Seas is, it is undeniably fun. No matter how much I dislike elements of it, and there is a lot to make you scratch your head in puzzlement, I've not had a game which was not fun. There's a lot to be said for that, even if you have to switch your brain off in places. Coastal Patrol is also fun, but takes a slightly more refined and thoughtful approach.

So either or? - Why not both? I have every intent of giving Coastal Patrol a try using my Cruel Seas models. I assume CP was written with the traditional 1:600 models in mind (which we used today) but there is no reason why it wont work with Cruel Seas 1:300 models, and vice versa.

Coastal Patrol was published in 2011 as part of the TFL 2011 Summer Special, available on line as a pdf for the princely sum of £6.49 from the two Fat Lardies web store. Well worth a look as it contains a veritable boat load of other good stuff https://toofatlardies.co.uk/product/2011-summer-special/.

So that got me through the morning. Next post will hopefully cover the afternoon where I struggle to save Roman Civilisation from the waves of unwashed barbarians.......

Carry on up the Urals - or when is too big too big?

I'm still on my Black Ops fad, and with an eye on the imminent release of the Two Fat Lardies modern version of their excellent Chain of Command rules I have been thinking about other stuff to go with my "Modern" Russians (ok Modern-ish). I searched the net for some soft transport - always useful to have around on a table, but there didnt seem to be that much out there - plenty of options for AFVs but nothing after that. Then my mate John came to the rescue - sort of. He had some die cast Ural trucks he had bought for a now defunct project. They were 1:43 which is a bit big, but would I like one?

Yup!

So here it is (Cheers John)

My first problem is getting an idea just how big they are. Here are a couple of shots which show versions of the real thing. As you can see, the front wheel-arch and mudguards are about shoulder high. That's a BIG truck!

My donated die cast is clearly a bit too big! However mulling over the problem John suggested that if I lowered the suspension a bit maybe that would work ? And a project was born.

I dismantled the truck and went to work with a Dremel

I relocating the axles as far up as I could - about 8mm in this case. It looks a mess from underneath but is pretty much invisible from other angles. This has brought the whole model down to a much more reasonable height - though it still looks BIG it now looks a bit more in proportion with the figures, who can now see over the mudguards without using a ladder :-)

That done the next step is to repaint it. I wanted to keep the clear plastic windows, so I removed them and sprayed the now disassembled cab and chassis in a nice Russian green before reassembling.

I have to admit I like the look of the new Ural "Lowrider" and I think it will make a nice addition to our games.

Slippery Slope or From Wales to Ireland via Roman Britain in several confusing steps

Just back from Asgard Games in Middlesbrough where we had another game in the Dux Brit campaign.

But first a quick explanation as to why I need to buy some more figures. I’m writing this down just so I can get my head around it J

I decided to try Dux because it offered a couple of interesting and quick gains. Firstly the idea of a campaign based game where each on table fight had something to connect it to the rest. Secondly, it was by TFL and they seemed to be on good form producing types of games I like, and thirdly, and most attractively, this was going to be both cheap and easy game to get into because I could use the figures I already had painted and based up as Welsh for Saga as my Romano-Britons, so the only expense was the rules – can’t go wrong!

Want to bet?

When I had the rules it became clear that while this was all ok in principle, in practice I would have a problem as most of my Welsh were lightly equipped and trying to pass them off as a Shieldwall when most of them had bucklers or no shields at all was a stretch too far. So I bit the bullet and bought some suitable Romano British infantry – just a dozen to stand as shieldwall, then I got some plastic Gripping Beast Dark Age infantry to provide the bulk of the Levy, and then another couple – ok , eight, figures from Footsore to be the Elites. At this point the only part of my Dux force that was actually from the Saga Welsh was 4 skirmishers with javelins (which should really have slings) and the three Nobles.  

I had plenty of spare plastic figures from Gripping Beast so I decided to convert four to slingers. May as well as they would only join the “lead & plastic pile” In the end I used some old Wargames Factory Persian arms and slings rather than the GB ones as they looked “meatier”. I gave them the same rush paint I did for the Levy and they all went through with me to Asgard today for our next campaign turn, so only the "Welsh" Lord and his Nobles would be used of the original Saga force.

The well laid plans………..

So when we gathered it became obvious that due to other commitments we had managed to get only one raider player to attend – yup, three Romano Brits were there, but only Steven was available to represent the Saxons etc, and his warband was still recovering from his last attempt to cross the border.  We all say around looking a bit dazed as this was something no one had really predicted, and it was agreed we maybe should look at getting the British players access to a Saxon army just in case that happens again,  then I heard myself say “I think I can do an Irish list if someone can lend me some cavalry – I don’t have any Irish as such but I do have these Welsh guys I got for Saga……….”

A short while later I found myself commanding an Irish raiding force looking to capture a Roman Noble from a border tower. 

Mark was the defender, and here is his noble returning from patrol in the badlands with his command of two units of warriors.

Here is the rest of his force, happily ensconced in his border tower.

And here are some suspicious looking raider cavalry who have just appeared !

The game went quickly. Mark sallied forth with his main force in an attempt to link up with the returning patrol but they were intercepted first by the light cavalry, which they drove off

and then by a much more aggressive force of Irish (with Welsh accents) and their Lord, intent on gaining Honour and Glory. The Irish also kept up a steady rain of harassing javelin fire interspersed with a sling-stone or two.

The Irish charged, and in a quick and brutal melee overwhelmed the returning patrol, but their leader failed to get himself that all important war wound to show off back home. Their captive safe in their hands they then asked if the British wanted to contest their withdrawal. Mark decided it was not worth the risk, so the raiders made good their escape.

Great little game, and good to see campaign causing both players to play the long game.

Rob & Steven them played their raid – again against a border tower, and this time Steven got away with a noble hostage who he has already ransomed back to Rob.

So with a bit of flexibility we got a couple of good games in and fun was had by all. Only problem now is I need some Welsh ..err sorry Irish Cavalry to complete that Irish list now, you know , the one that was going to be a good stand in for the Romano British that meant I would not have to buy and paint lots of figures to play the game – you do remember don’t you?

Thanks to Steven, Mark Rob and the rest of the Guys at Asgard for a great day gaming. Next week there is no campaign turn as some Numpty has organised a Dropzone Commander demo, but the week after we hope to be back to the borders, protecting Christianity and the Empire!

Protecting Civilisation - Dux Brit Campaign at Asgard Games

I think I mentioned we were looking at playing Dux Britanniarum from TFL?

My gaming schedule is a bit disorganised but when I dropped by Asgard Games in Middlesbrough during the week Steven (the owner) mentioned they were just starting a campaign. I politely enquired if there were any spare slots (ok it was more like begged) and he was happy to oblige, with the first game being set for today (Sunday).

I turned up to discover I was now responsible for protecting Auld Clut against the ravages of Saxons and Picts. It's not a bad place - two provinces on the very edge of Roman Britain (the wrong side of Hadrian's Wall!) and the food is deep fried, but there are worse I suppose :-) 

Steven then very kindly decided to raid my province with his Saxons - Game On!

The Saxons were aiming for a village to plunder, the Romano Brits hoping to head them off before they could steal the family silver. 

The Saxons were having a bit of a bad day - they started with fairly low starting morale roll, which was made worse by an ill advised speech by Steven that went down like a lead balloon. Brit Morale on the other hand was pretty good, so I decided to get stuck in and start the on table part of the game without further ado. 

Steven had the main part of his force running for the target village but detached two groups of warriors to try and delay the Brits who were starting on the flank - rushing to defend the locals.  The Saxons needed to search the houses and find at least 2 units of plunder, and the Brits were keen to stop them - glory is fleeting but a chicken is a chicken!

Sadly the Saxon delaying force got a bit enthusiastic - charging one of these groups out of a copse and into a group of Brits. Unfortunatly a second group of Brits was very near at hand and these joined in the melee. Outnumbered 2-1 the Saxons fought gallantly but broke due to accumulated casualties and shock- not good for already shaky Saxon morale, but at least they had killed 4 Brits for the loss of only three of their own and a wounded leader.

Aftermath of first clash - Brits reorganise as the main Saxon force reaches the Village - meanwhile remnants of the first Saxon group go to check the boats are still secure :-)

At this point the Saxons had another unpleasant shock. A well thrown javelin from some British missile troops plunged towards their Lord as he lead his men forwards. His loyal Champion and banner bearer saw the missile at the last second and threw himself in the way, giving his life for his Lord, but his loss crumbled Saxon morale again.

The Saxons reached the Village and started to look for anything of worth, but even the chickens were hiding.

Knock knock......

Meanwhile the second Saxon delaying group was caught by the British Elite group who threw some pretty amazing dice, killing 5 in one round of melee, and capturing the wounded Saxon Noble.

That was enough to break Saxon morale and they broke and legged it back to the boats leaving the Romano British Lord in possession of the field, the Glory, and indeed the chicken!

Lord of all he surveys Centurion Titus Aduxas and his gallant Warriors!

The post raid results were good for the Romano Brits, losses have been replaced quickly and the Lord has impressed the locals so much four youths have joined his band to act as skirmishers - indeed the Commander has gained a soubriquet "the Good", which while lacklustre is a bit better than "The Bald" which was the original result before modification :-). Meanwhile Steven and his Saxons will have to spend two months recovering their losses before they can raid again.

Great game and a great little shop with some nice members - well worth a visit. While I was upstairs in the gaming room here the shop was busy with a couple of 40K games. I took a couple of general pics to show the layout and general hustle & bustle - not bad for a Sunday. Steven has three tables upstairs in his gaming room and another two downstairs, with tea & coffee facilities. He stocks a wide variety of games and figures and if you want something he doesn't have in stock he can usually get it for you in a couple of days. The shop is located very close to the Middlesbrough bus station so it is quite easy to get to. Recommended - in fact I will be back there on July 5th for a Dropzone Commander event.