Command Friction - Applying C3 Effects in Combat Mission - Playtest

[pnzrldr]

Bil -

 

My primary comment is echoed above by Bulletpoint - this type of system could be effectively hard-coded into the game (with significant effort no doubt) to create a realism level above those currently offered.  As such, I view it as an 'alpha' build that could form the basis for an add-on system, but until/unless you/we convince Steve and Co. to pursue it, I doubt it will gain much traction.  In assessing its marketability, it would make a substantial upgrade for tactical grognards, but might only appeal to them - I don't have a marketing assessment of the overall audience, so cannot say whether you could argue for its development from a profitability standpoint.  Without coded-in development, I doubt many will do much more than tinker with it briefly, despite the effort and thought you are applying. 

 

One thing that such a system might allow would be expanding the actions of the TAC AI somewhat.  For example, adding in movement to cover as an automatic reaction to enemy fire independent of any player input, with direction of movement based upon current task.  Perhaps even with an 'auto-split' for squads taken under fire, half returning fire and half bounding to cover.  Player takes over control again once unit completes immediate action.  Actual reaction (run for cover, ground in place, return fire, bound to cover w/or w/o covering fire) could depend upon unit type, morale, training, etc...  Would automate some of your system as TAC AI actions, and place other aspects under player control.

 

Highlights one glaring issue to me in CM C3 rules and that is prevalence of sound powered phones on WWII battlefield.  Could easily be simulated under your system by designating locations that HQ units start scenario in on defense as having phone hookups - anyone who goes there for a turn is 'in C3' like radio comms.  Would also note that when we look at CMRT it highlights the need to apply your settings based on nationality as well as other factors.  Russian doctrine obviously/famously allowed for infinitely less initiative than other nations.  German and US were not identical either, though more similar. 

 

Just initial thoughts - I'll keep percolating.

[Bil Hardenberger]

Thanks Scott.  Yes I have thought about how to approach Steve and see if this is something they might be interested in, perhaps in a GROGNARD mode which would be above Iron.. but in the past he has poo-pooed any type of command layer for CM.  Pity, but who knows what the future holds.

 

Yes TAC AI improvements would be most welcome, but I doubt that aspect would ever get coded in the game except as a direct result of the delays.

 

I like your ideas re: sound powered phones.. will have to think about the best way to represent them.  Good point.

 

Yes I can adjust the reaction times based on nationality, and I can restrict Initiative use by Russian forces.. but those types of adjustments will have to come down the line after a little more research.

 

Thanks again for taking a look at it Scott.

Edited July 25, 2015 by Bil Hardenberger

[Bil Hardenberger]

I've been working on this today in an attempt to finish it up for final release.  While doing this and in reaction to the play test and some of Warren's comments I have added the following to the Command Friction rules:

 

Warren was saying that the system was easy enough to use for the size of the test battle, but could get tough to manage with larger scenarios.  I had always intended that tasks specific to formations (Platoon sized) could use only one Task for all units as long as they stayed within C2 range.  

 

I added the rules for Formation Tasks thus:

 

Formation Tasks:  

 

Only for formations containing more than one unit (Platoon and smaller): Platoons, split Squads, MG and Mortar Sections, Tank Sections, etc.

 

Squads or teams that are within C2 to their Platoon HQ do not need to have a Unit Task assigned; they can operate using the HQ’s Task as guidance.  This rule will simplify Task assignment especially in large battles.

·         This is only available when the units are within C2.

·         Units that fall out of C2 must be assigned a Unit Task. 

o   This will be the Task that most closely matches the orders they are currently on.

o   This Task will be in effect until the unit is back in C2 and then must go through the Task change procedure to get within the Formation Task.

 

I had intended to add the following rule, this from MOS's original thread and was an idea of Odin's... so I named it after him and included it in my ruleset.

 

AREA FIRE/RECON BY FIRE (Odin’s Rule)

 

·         In order for any unit to use area fire on a suspected enemy position it must be within C2. 

·         The only exception to this rule is for units assigned a Scout Task.  As they are considered independent they can area fire at any time.

 

NOTE: Thanks to Odin on the Battlefront forums for this idea.

 

Finally, after much thought I decided to keep the ENDS NLT column in the Initiative section of the workbook, the explanation of what this is for follows:

 

ENDS NLT (Initiative ends no later than…)

 

·         This automatic entry indicates the game-time that the Initiative Task(s) must be completed by. 

·         This is to ensure that the use of Initiative is temporary and does not get used as a shortcut to change a unit’s task.

·         Once the game time matches the ENDS NLT entry then the Initiative entries must be deleted from the workbook and the unit must return to its originally assigned Unit or Formation Task.

 

I am having some trouble finalizing the workbook, but should have that ironed out in the next day or so, then I will post the test scenario and workbooks.  The final step will be the Excel tutorial and the final rules and workbook templates.

Edited July 25, 2015 by Bil Hardenberger

[MOS:96B2P]

 The final step will be the Excel tutorial and the final rules and workbook templates.

 

Thanks for all the time, thought and effort that went into Command Friction.  Looking forward to this!   

[General Jack Ripper]

Formation tasks are a good thing to have. It simulates the Company HQ calling his Platoon leaders over and saying 'okay, here's what we're going to do today', or calling over the radio on the Company net and telling everyone, 'were doing this instead'.

Nice work, I'm looking forward to the tutorial.

[delliejonut]

Can't wait to try this out

[Bil Hardenberger]

Okay, I have been working hard trying to get this to a finalized stage... the final rules are attached.

 

I have also tried to distill the heart of the rules into a few main points.. I know the rules are very long and seem complicated.. but I would like to show that at the heart it really is a simple system and can be boiled down to the following points:

 

RULES AT A GLANCE

 

At a bare minimum:

1. Units and HQ teams MUST be within C2 range in order to receive either Unit or HQ Task change

 

2. Unit Tasks must be in support of the HQ Task

 

3. HQ Tasks must be in support of the Command Task

 

4. Set the current game time in the COMMAND TAB in the Battle Log EVERY TURN

a. This drives the Change Task and initiative use times

 

5. Use the Battle Log to determine when a unit may initiate a Task change

a. Expand the New Task section in the Battle Log to schedule a Task change

 

6. Use the Battle Log to determine when a unit may use Initiative

a. Expand the Initiative section in the Battle Log to schedule Initiative
b. Units MUST have an Enemy Contact in order to use Initiative and
c. Units MUST be within C2 range to use Initiative (excepting: Units on a Scout Task)

 

7. Units MUST be within C2 range to use area fire

 

8. Any unit taking enemy fire can use Emergency React to get to a safer location.

The rules simply explain and expand on these main points.

 

I have also rejigged the workbooks, now called Battle Logs.. and I have attached a final template for the Germans and one for the Allies. 

 

The main difference is that the formation HQ teams are now on their own line.. this allows you to give the Platoon (or Company) an HQ Task and still be able to give each HQ Team a separate Unit Task if you like.  I have also cleaned up a few other issues with the code behind the scenes.

 

 

The Battle Log templates and the final Rules are attached.  Next up I promise I will do an Excel tutorial that will talk you through how to set up the Battle Log for your specific scenario.

 

I am also in the process of creating a Russian specific battle Log Template.. they will not be as flexible as the Allied and German units.. should be interesting.

 

Enjoy!

COMMAND FRICTION For CM RULES 07AUGL15.pdf

BATTLE LOG-TEMPLATES.zip

[MOS:96B2P]

Next up I promise I will do an Excel tutorial that will talk you through how to set up the Battle Log for your specific scenario.

 

I am also in the process of creating a Russian specific battle Log Template.. they will not be as flexible as the Allied and German units.. should be interesting.

 

YES!!!  This will be very cool.  Maybe the Russian Battle Log Template would also apply to Italian forces in CMFI?  Two different types of Battle Logs reflecting the different command styles between militaries that encouraged initiative and those that do not.  This should make the difference in the OODA loops all the more obvious.  

 

I was also wondering if these Battle Logs would work well for modern forces in CMSF & CMBS? If so it would be interesting to see the effect on OODA loops since US forces issue a communication device to almost every soldier.           

[Bil Hardenberger]

YES!!!  This will be very cool.  Maybe the Russian Battle Log Template would also apply to Italian forces in CMFI?  Two different types of Battle Logs reflecting the different command styles between militaries that encouraged initiative and those that do not.  This should make the difference in the OODA loops all the more obvious.           

 

Absolutely... what I am playing with is making them much less flexible, by limiting them to a max of two linked Tasks (instead of three), and only one allowed Imitative Task (instead of three), and also extending the delays for changing Tasks and for using Initiative.

 

 

I was also wondering if these Battle Logs would work well for modern forces in CMSF & CMBS? If so it would be interesting to see the effect on OODA loops since US forces issue a communication device to almost every soldier.

 

I don't think so.. the modern game would require much further thought.. maybe the Ukrainian forces and maybe the Russian, but definitely not the US with their digital comms and near instant intelligence and flexibility of command.

[Bud Backer]

I don't think so.. the modern game would require much further thought.. maybe the Ukrainian forces and maybe the Russian, but definitely not the US with their digital comms and near instant intelligence and flexibility of command.

The corollary to that is that applying this system (admittedly making things more realistic) to the Ukrainian and Russian forces would only compound the already vast gulf between US and the other two nations' forces. 

[hobo]

Really cool and I will be giving it a shot in a AI campaign next week. 

Thanks,

CP

[Bil Hardenberger]

hobo, please let me know how it goes.  PM me if you need any help preparing your Battle Log.

[IICptMillerII]

I would love to see an AAR with someone using this system, both in order to learn how to properly use the system and to see the results of the system in a battle. I love seeing stuff like this, that adds more depth, immersion, and realism to the CM games, and that the games themselves allow for this to happen. 

[Bud Backer]

I would love to see an AAR with someone using this system, both in order to learn how to properly use the system and to see the results of the system in a battle. I love seeing stuff like this, that adds more depth, immersion, and realism to the CM games, and that the games themselves allow for this to happen.

I agree. Even a Platoon(+) sized or Company(-) sized AAR would be amazing to help me grasp how this all works.

[simon21]

I played with the excel sheets a bit.

 

It's very interesting and creative.  At the same time it causes a lot of issues in that at the start of the turn the player needs to sum up all his/her C3 links.  I think to go further with this you'd need some hard coding done.

[Bil Hardenberger]

I would love to see an AAR with someone using this system, both in order to learn how to properly use the system and to see the results of the system in a battle. I love seeing stuff like this, that adds more depth, immersion, and realism to the CM games, and that the games themselves allow for this to happen. 

 

Yes I want to do a full AAR game using this system, in the near future... if I can make time in my schedule.

 

Maybe hobo will grace us with an AAR of his game versus the AI.  

[coop_71]

There are a some board games that http://www.gamersarchive.net/theGamers/archive/tcs.htmavethis feature built into the rules. The Tactical Combat System, Napoleonic Brigade System, and the Civil War Brigade System (and its descendents) all do this. TCS usually has about two reinforced brigade-sized forces fighting, commands get sent to battalions (or smaller), and platoons carry out the commands. There are command delays depending on the type of order. One key feature, which I may have missed, is that orders include fall-back positions that instruct where to go in case the attack or defense fails. Another is that if a formation takes too many losses, it's forced to stop doing the order. The last is a good way to resist pixeltruppen's tendency to fight to the last man.

The series rules can be downloaded http://www.gamersarchive.net/theGamers/archive/tcs.htm

[Bil Hardenberger]

There are a some board games that http://www.gamersarchive.net/theGamers/archive/tcs.htmavethis feature built into the rules. The Tactical Combat System, Napoleonic Brigade System, and the Civil War Brigade System (and its descendents) all do this. TCS usually has about two reinforced brigade-sized forces fighting, commands get sent to battalions (or smaller), and platoons carry out the commands. There are command delays depending on the type of order. One key feature, which I may have missed, is that orders include fall-back positions that instruct where to go in case the attack or defense fails. Another is that if a formation takes too many losses, it's forced to stop doing the order. The last is a good way to resist pixeltruppen's tendency to fight to the last man.

The series rules can be downloaded http://www.gamersarchive.net/theGamers/archive/tcs.htm

 

Yes I have seen the TCS system.. it is interesting.  

 

Regarding fallback positions.. my intent was to keep the paperwork to a minimum... so I handle this with the Emergency React rules.  A unit can stop or withdraw at any time if it is taking fire.

[coop_71]

I like the TCS system, but completing the mechanics of it (checking LOS, resolving attacks) bogs the game down. In other words, it's suitable for computerization.  If Battlefront ever does an "operational" Combat Mission, they should increase the scale to platoons and add some sort of command delay, like you're doing, or what TCS or Command OPs does.  I scare-quote "operational" because the unit size would have to go up to regiments or divisions to really be operational.

[Bil Hardenberger]

I like the TCS system, but completing the mechanics of it (checking LOS, resolving attacks) bogs the game down. In other words, it's suitable for computerization. 

 

Good thing we have CM to handle most of the heavy lifting eh?  

[chuckdyke]

I would like to suggest guidelines where to set up head quarters especially company and above my experiences are subjective but radio communications often break down when traveling and work better on elevation. Most players don't worry about C3 the scenario of Aachen in Final Blitzkrieg was typical. I maintained more or less an effective communication. Also used skilled and motivated troopers as scouts give them orders to make contact and allow them to break momentarily the C3 web and report back asap once the objective has been met. Use conscripts as canon fodder is not on in real life.  Our C3 is actually C4 as we use a computer. For a WW 2 commander have instant situation awareness by a digital screen was pure science fiction. Market Garden failed partly as Urquhart lost all contact in the beginning of the campaign. They got as far as they did because everybody was informed of the objectives prior the battle. I use this principle during the game. Give orders when there is still full C3 and allow change of decisions based on experience. Everyone in a fire-team who is isolated can take decisions up to the rank of platoon leader. Platoon leaders can take decisions up to company level especially if there is a +in motivation, After all in the military you're supposed to have knowledge ideally 2 ranks above your own. 

[Thewood1]

If you are going to go through all of that, just play the Graviteam games.  In hardcore mode, radios, wired telephones, and hand signal ranges are accounted for.  If you don't have comms or are in range of troops, you can't issue orders or get reports.  Its a frustrating and fascinating way to play.  There are all kinds of factors at play, including range, random radio drops, cut wires, experience, morale, casualties, visibility, etc.