The Commander Series Forum

Hi all, was wondering whether any of you tried to play at
this level.
I guess one might need to integrate the AT value 1/20
to the company amongst other things...
So guys did you try something similar? Did you find there
was a need for specific adaptations to play at this level?
(reducing the weapon range by half maybe?).
Any ideas?

In theory all measurements should be reduced but the game plays best if you just leave them as they are. We always asume that every inf unit has anti tank weapons and add them to the points cost.
For solo play I have no qualms about using one unit as a squad/platoon/company as needed to let me refight battles of various sizes.

How "best" does it work when you keep measurements as they
are? I'm planning to build my sceneries in scale with a
company unit frontage (probably 5cm=500m) which makes the
range of a rifle company(30cm = 3000m) a bit weird, at least visually.
Going to use 3mm figs for this project, and playing with a
less distorted range was one of the reasons i chose this scale
for this specific project.

I accept your point Didier, and it seems that 'simulation' is more important to you than 'game', a valid point of view.
However, if you stick rigidly to your scale, then rifles should have a range of 3cm (300m). To me, this just would not look right, but you may be happy with that.

Err well, i'm not THAT rigid and 3cm would probably
look weird too^^
I should find a compromise between 30 and 3cm then...

I think your origonal idea to halve the range would work out well. I have friends with 6mm armies that do this.

yes, i might start with this and see how it looks after few games at this scale. Thanks for the replies StormforceX

Pravda

3 of us regularly played this scale, for a long time, on many fronts (eg 1941 eastern front, 1940 in France, and Italy in 1943/4) using T&OEs for army lists and usually using HQs for Btn HQs and COs for Regiment or Divisional level.

The biggest change we discussed was in terms of the off table Artillery HE zones, and considered that shrinking them by a third would best fit in with ground scale of a 5cm x 3cm inf base equalling a company (our chosen base size using 20mm figures!!). You sometimes need to fudge support groups deployed as platoons. Sometimes it appeared we over represented Mortar and HMG support.

Carl

Thanks Carl, so you didn't feel the need to change any distance then?

No we left distances as in rules save for HE burst squares /circles, probably as we used 20mm figures and it felt ok re figure scale if not strictly correct for base size to ground ratios.

By and large broken line of sight and the need for concealment often countered the problem you pointed out above about unrealistic small arms ranges. But most of the games even when reduced to this scale meant that a tabletop at best represented only a small battlefield compared to real ranges of weapons like HMG, Mortars and Artillery.

Our biggest battle was a Russian Infantry Division on eastern front versus Italian and Romanians battlegroups. I am not sure how to post a TO&E on Pete's website for that game, and I probably only have a copy of the Russian side (although I have both Italian and Russian troops for that front!)

Carl

Thanks again Carl, i'm aware that even at this scale, what is
represented on the table is a small battlefield but i
suspect that 1 stand = 1 company is the highest level that
can be played with bkc (my guess...).

Personally i prefer that 1 stand of infantry equals to a fire team, and that 1 tank is....well, 1 tank

mannyuk99

thats the beauty of this sytem you can play it just that way if you want mannyuk99.

It plays well even if this may lead to some players / observers asking about the comparative strengths or firepower of two stands one representing a single tank and the other representing a squad of infantry. The answer is probably not to worry about these details but enjoy the game and if any inconsistencies do occur then create your own house rule to cover it.

Carl