Steve over at Sound Officers' Call has been using and hacking Peter's ww2 hex rules for a while now, and we have really got excited over the potential of these to use old Command Decision/GDW First Battle scenarios at multiple tactical levels - a solution to problems at Battalion right through to Brigade/Division level, that we have been looking for, for a long time.
Existing rules of course solve this issue to a large extent, although with caveats - not least of which is (1) ease of disagreement - not only between players, but on the basis of design decisions made - such that experts hack the systems because there are so many variables - and (2) players rarely focus on one system, UNLESS said system offers a multiplicity of outcomes at different levels and within different C20th periods/locales, and thereby encourages familiarity, without simplicity.
These hex based rules (assuming we have access to hexes of course - which I have luckily had at 60mm wide for decades, machined onto MDF and also at 100mm loose) offer a beautifully simple means of doing the following:
I can do a very large scale ww3 group game in the Fulda gap - movement is controlled and 'un-cheatable' as we use hexes to delineate.
I zoom in or out in terms of scale, and add rules/ranges/capabilities to reflect same. This means i can do 73 Easting at one tank/unit, OR I can do Market Garden on multiple 4x3 boards at company or battalion/unit level.
Does it seem like a hex board wargame? Yep...i don't care.
The rules are kept deliberately simple. but not simplistic - what they do however , is zoom in on the differences between the opponent's weapon systems on the day - so no, I don't have lists of factors which outline the difference between a T34 and an M1 Abrams - I don't need that. What I do need to know is do systems / command make a difference for one side over the other, then design accordingly.
Thereby, what I can do in a single scenario environment is (1) work out how differences in command - or equipment - may allow one side to fire/move while another can fire or move; (2) outline the differences between relative weapon systems on the same battlefield.
Recon units are harder to hit.
1 hit requires a quality check (I took this out to make it simple in the trial game below - but it would work in a longer game); a 2nd means disruption which limits disruption and can be removed with reorganise roll; a 3rd denotes destroyed.
Play Sequence is Game clock; Indirect Fire; Combat; Move; Reorganisation/Rally
Steve has adapted the original to hit with a very flexible system involving (1) no. of dice and (2) then to hit numbers for said dice.
Modern weapon systems can move and fire - ww2 can move or fire.
I adjusted command in the game below based on flexibility, so though Syrian systems were using T72s in the Bekkaa, they would fire or move, whilst Israeli M60s could fire and move. we could translate same to Fulda Gap, whilst changing the number of units that can activate in an earlier ww2 situation. All of this is easily hacked.
As movement and range is hex based - this all remains very flexible.
A setup whereby units are platoons, Syrian armoured and BMP companies moving against Israeli M60s and ATGWs
1/300 Heroics and Ros M60s
Israeli units move to take high ground, and pour fire on advancing Arab units
On the Israeli right, armour moves to take high ground - utilising command flexibility, plus advantages of high ground and falling shot, to increase probabilities of first shot hate and kill. This would blunt the Arab advance on that flank quite quickly.
M60 company takes hits from ATGW fire (min range applies)
This system remains very flexible, time-friendly and critically easy to teach to younger gamers and conversely to groups drinking beer!
After my views on the recent Napoleon movie, I did consider that modern movies might not be for me…until Dune Part 2 came along.
I read the Frank Herbert books many times as a kid, saw the 1980s David Lynch version (one of the 4 people that liked it) , and though Part 1 of this current Denis Villeneuve iteration was visually stunning, I found it a little dry toward the end.
I was however, absolutely delighted with how enjoyable and (still) absolutely visually stunning, with added appeal of great performances for the most part, Part 2 was.
Thoroughly recommended if a Dune fan, and even if not. Really good parallels with the message, if not the ethos of the book, with very few changes made for dramatic effect – and those that have been made, seem very effective (unlike Lord of the Rings Franchise…Battle of Pelannor Fields, ah’m lookin’ at you!).
Though of course the narrative is canted to appeal a little more to modern audiences, but whether Denis Villeneuve meant it or not, he has kept the core message of thenovels re. ideology, true/false Messiah narratives (be they spiritual, corporate or philosophical), and the inevitable corruption attributable to both.
Look for:
Ornithopters
Paul's speech to the southern Fremen (wow - and no powerpoint)
A wee bit of Krav Maga ;)
Geidi Prime effectively Black & White - stunningly done
Great performances from the younger actors - and the old hands were being shown up I thought...
Raban's unique set of leadership skills...
Rebecca Ferguson :)
Stunning shots and close ups - the look of this film resonates
It is therefore admirable that Villeneuve managed to stick to the Dune narrative, without trying to be contextual with the modern world (the politics of Dune are very much not ours - no matter how some reviewers would like to think they are); of course, indirectly there are always parallels, but too many modern directors, or their production companies try to push an ideological narrative in order to make money – not so here. If anything, much of the 1960s era spiritual details have been blurred vs the context and meaning of the original book, as to dwell on same would have strangled the narrative.
Of course that said, there was a scene where the Fremen are heard to retort ‘of course he is not going to admit to being the Messiah; only the Messiah would deny being the Messiah!’
…which reminded me of…
In fact...wait a minute...
Brian lives with his Mum...Paul Atreides lives with his Mum ...case proven !
Another classic, with strangely, a similar narrative ...no ...really!
