Apart from a general liking for WW2 games - for variety and tactical complexity, they are hard to beat - I wanted a few things. Firstly, I wanted to test out John's new* WW2 rules which are aimed at the one base = one section, one model = one vehicle scale of wargames. Secondly, to add a little more narrative and continuity to some of my games. I had played through the collection of One-Hour Wargames' scenarios, which are absolutely great, but they are more aimed at indidividual battles. Now I did add a little bit of continuous narrative in there, but it was a pretty small element, and I wanted more. Now, the high priest of adding narrative in my part of the wargames blogosphere is Just Jack, who almost never plays a one-off: continuous narrative and interplay between background and game is his starting point. His campaigns might be 'real' in the sense that there are strategic decisions being made, or they might be entirely narrative scaffolding. Both are useful though, especially for the solo gamer, since they frame the immediate tactical situation with over-arching objectives. So in any case, I had been planning on visiting Just Jack's Kampfgruppe von Klink campaigns - a series of campaigns of an imaginary German Kampfgruppe in WW2 - in some form or other. They didn't require vast amounts of models, so I was able to acquire sufficient Polish forces quite cheaply from Scotia and Heroics and Ros. If I have the choice I normally prefer Baccus, but it is unlikely that Baccus will get around to this theatre anytime soon. The H&R stuff is very nice - especially the new stuff, which is very useful for some of the Polish infantry support weapons - and if the Scotia models are a little bigger and simpler, they are still pretty good. Plus, although the infantry does look pretty French and they could proxy for each other in a pinch, the Polish AFV camouflage is both fun to paint and quite distinctive.
 |
| The position at the beginning of the first KG Heller battle - the 'look' (types of terrain, size of board etc.) has been pretty consistent! |
The battles themselves were really good fun. They were generally well-balanced, although well-balanced for the Five Core Company Command rules. John's rules do concentrate on different elements, with observation and support fire from mortars and artillery being apparently much more important, whereas the orders of battle for some of these scenarios were quite light on support weapons, especially HE weapons. I added some of these anyway (so, for example, both the German and Polish infantry tended to bring their platoon mortars with them, although they weren't included in the scenarios) but quite often the Germans were in need of an artillery battery, or at least a couple of sections of medium or heavy mortars, to try and neutralize Polish positions before the assault. Judging by Just Jack's reports and tactics, I infer that taking more direct risks could often be rewarded in Company Command, whereas the chances of such attacks resulting in dead infantrymen (or especially, recce troops) was just much higher in John's rules.
I won't say too much about John's rules, since they are still being developed and playtested. They look reasonably close to completion to me but it isn't for me to say. You can definitely tell that they have been written by someone who is familiar with the WRG rules, but equally they are somewhat different. There is more emphasis on indirect fire and engineering than is typical in wargame rules. The observation rules are more detailed than most but still elegant. Morale effects tend to be built-in to various other rules rather than being a distinct stage, but are none the worse for that. The hit/penetration for vehicle combat is simple but rather brilliant - John can reasonably claim to be one of the gamers who has studied the issues involved in representing this the most over the years. The interplay between command, weapon effect and observation really affects infantry combat in a way that is perhaps the best representation at this size of battle that I have seen. All of this is supported by comprehensive equipment and OoB information, but presented in the 'necessary information' format of WRG rather than the 'fluff' version of Flames of War handbooks and suchlike. So, lots and lots to really interest the gamer looking at tactical company to battalion plus actions for the 'long' WW2 period.
I should mention that John is looking to publish a different set of WW2 tactical rules: these are the ones I had some involvement in playtesting in 2023, the missing link WRG-inspired rules (i.e. if a 2nd edition of the WRG WW2 rules had been released at the same time as the 2nd edition WRG modern rules).
Going forward, I am looking to continue with KG Heller's adventures. Their forebears of KG Klink moved to the Low Countries and France next, although I am wondering if a Scandinavian campaign might be interesting. I am also wondering whether to add in some additional aspects. These might include:
1 - More genuinely campaign framing, with myself or PBEM commanders exercising some control on events and force allocation.
2 - Incorporating additional scenarios and perhaps pint-sized campaigns into the narrative, e.g. inserting KG Heller into Taking the Gembloux Gap and Caesar's Camp.
3 - Incorporate some air action into events. I do like WW2 air games!
4 - I should have followed Just Jack and put a little more effort, if not into the narrative exactly but into the personalization, at least for the officers (commissioned and NCOs) for that little bit of extra narrative flavour.
5 - Maybe I should increase the personalization for both sides, to allow for some of the Allied units to re-appear in other scenarios later in the war?
So, a good time was had by all (i.e. me!) and I hope by some of this blog's readers. Many thanks to Just Jack if he ever gets to stop by for creating KG von Klink in the first place, John for the early sight of the rules and to those who have read this, particularly those who have left an encouraging comment here or on one of the forums. I do want to take a little time to think through how I might move this on, but generally speaking, more soon, insha'allah!
*T&Cs apply.
No comments:
Post a Comment