Whiskey/Hotel game 2019 - Day 1.

[Paul]

I don’t know what the fuss is about tanks.

The reason we haven't had issues is because armoured vehicles are very discriminated against under the rules. However whilst the end result is probably good this is for the wrong reasons. All weapons, above small arms, have equal chances of destroying any armoured vehicle with no difference between weapon and armour allowed for. So an RPG has as much chance of knocking out an M1 as a 105mm rifled gun does a Ferret.
In an urban setting this works (albeit playing all the right notes but not neccessarily in the right order) but take it ouside into the 'Bush' and it would feel wrong.
Obviously the rules were originally intended to be an uber simple set for small scale infantry combat and most of what i've suggested here and on the posts above isn't meant as a criticism of those but rather as ways of expanding things to make a satisfying game with more scope.

[tim.w]

In short, the rules were designed to mess your armour up early on. This worked well last year, too well as it frightened off your tanks this year haha!

I also didn't expect as many RPGs etc. The rules are/were toy soldier rules that complimented the event cards. Very happy to see them developed into our own house set for Kumbahyah and the challenge is to make them feel right, stay very simple and produce a result alongside the cards.

I'd be inclined to introduce a basic points list in the future just to encourage a bit of economy in force selection and a fairer game. That would go hand in hand with upping Special Forces abilities and downing the effectiveness of natives etc. The cards can also be used to add more problems for the white devils to even things up.

I'm sorry we didnt get to see Kumbah-Kong on a spree, he was designed to be a real pain and something you would all need to work together to get rid of. Next time!

I'm kicking the tires on a Kumbahyah tank battle game, using 6mm vehicles. Alex has a good game with Rommels Battles, which I might have a look over soon.

If we ever do a Kumbahyah weekend and its a growing possibility then a side game of tanks could start the next phase of the conflict.

[Norman D. Landings]

Heheheheheheh.... 105 vs. Ferret..... I want to see this!

“Your vehicle is miraculously intact. It is, however, on the roof of a roadside cafe in the next village...”

How about we classify anti-armour weapons as Light, Medium or Heavy, and armour as Light, Medium or Heavy?

Lt. anti-armour weapons: 6 to damage Heavily-armoured targets, 5 or 6 to damage Mediums, 4,5,6 to damage lights.

Med. anti-armour weapons: 5 or 6 to damage Heavies, 4,5,6 for Mediums, 3,4,5,6 to damage lights.

Heavy anti-armour weapons: 4,5,6 vs Heavies, 3,4,5,6 vs Mediums, 2,3,4,5,6 vs Lights.

Armour counts one level less from above (RPGs from rooftops, tankbusting helos, etc) or from rear.
No matter the modifiers, armour can’t go below ‘light’.

Yes... this would involve an ‘extra’ roll (as we would then roll on the vehicle damage table). I am suitably ashamed to suggest this unconscionable imposition.


Not 100% convinced on the issue of native bushcraft - looking at Bush Wars, every example of bush ninjas seems to be offset by some bunch of chumps who’re convinced bullets can’t hurt them and just saunter into the line of fire.
I reckon both those extremes are better represented by event cards rather than making them the permanent default settings for some factions.

[Paul]

I had thought bout something similar using opposed dice rolls. After a successful to hit roll Light weapons get 1 dice medium 2 and heavy 3. Light armour gets 1 dice medium get 2 and heavy 3. Make opposed rolls with 1 hit knocking the vehicle out but allowing the crew to escape, 2 hits destroy the vehicle and force the crew to make saving throws whilst 3 hits destroys the vehicle totally crew and all.

As for Kumbayah Tank wars, 6mm, 10mm or 15mm would all work I think.

[Norman D. Landings]

Not liking the opposed rolls because
(A) it adds an extra roll and a hatful of dice and (B) it means that even if you roll max to hit and max damage, you can never get a total destruct with light or medium guns.

That seems counter Intuitive to me.
Shoot a medium ATG at even the lightest armoured car all day - you can’t blow it up.
(It’s a 2-dice gun: you can only get a vehicle kill & force the crew to make saves at best)

[Paul]

At the moment there is a vehicle damage table, so the opposed rolls replace that and make the target player more active in that phase. Compard to this suggestion:

Lt. anti-armour weapons: 6 to damage Heavily-armoured targets, 5 or 6 to damage Mediums, 4,5,6 to damage lights.
Med. anti-armour weapons: 5 or 6 to damage Heavies, 4,5,6 for Mediums, 3,4,5,6 to damage lights.
Heavy anti-armour weapons: 4,5,6 vs Heavies, 3,4,5,6 vs Mediums, 2,3,4,5,6 vs Lights.

it removes a dice roll!
Any hit kills the vehicle, but the larger the gun the bigger the potential BOOM and chance of crew casualties. It's the difference between just killing the vehicle and a catastrophic kill.
Crew are intentionally protected so have a good survival rate even when the vehicle is knocked out. Even the Sherman in WW2 with a poor reputation would expect to lose 'just' one crew member KIA and one WIA of a total of five when it was knocked out. (According to a 12th Army report).
By native 'bushcraft' I only meant the real bushmen and hunters. Most indigenous would still be rubbish, hence my 'militia' classification.
The proper 'hunters' I would class the same as 'Elites' for simplicity sake.

[Tim Hall]

Heheheheheheh.... 105 vs. Ferret..... I want to see this!

“Your vehicle is miraculously intact. It is, however, on the roof of a roadside cafe in the next village...”

How about we classify anti-armour weapons as Light, Medium or Heavy, and armour as Light, Medium or Heavy?

Lt. anti-armour weapons: 6 to damage Heavily-armoured targets, 5 or 6 to damage Mediums, 4,5,6 to damage lights.

Med. anti-armour weapons: 5 or 6 to damage Heavies, 4,5,6 for Mediums, 3,4,5,6 to damage lights.

Heavy anti-armour weapons: 4,5,6 vs Heavies, 3,4,5,6 vs Mediums, 2,3,4,5,6 vs Lights.

Armour counts one level less from above (RPGs from rooftops, tankbusting helos, etc) or from rear.
No matter the modifiers, armour can’t go below ‘light’.

Yes... this would involve an ‘extra’ roll (as we would then roll on the vehicle damage table). I am suitably ashamed to suggest this unconscionable imposition.


Not 100% convinced on the issue of native bushcraft - looking at Bush Wars, every example of bush ninjas seems to be offset by some bunch of chumps who’re convinced bullets can’t hurt them and just saunter into the line of fire.
I reckon both those extremes are better represented by event cards rather than making them the permanent default settings for some factions.

I'm liking the simplicity of Norm's suggestion here, it adds some difficulty without getting bogged down and clunky. There should be a chance to miss in the heat of battle.

[Paul]

I'm liking the simplicity of Norm's suggestion here, it adds some difficulty without getting bogged down and clunky. There should be a chance to miss in the heat of battle.

Try both systems. It's very much a horses for courses decision. Norms adds a dice roll and adds to the downtime (helplessness?) for the non 'phasing player. But it is probably closer to the rest of the rules in its ethos.

[Norman D. Landings]

But any opposed roll.... actually requires TWO rolls, n’est pas?
At best, it takes a roll from one player, and gives it to the other.

[Paul]

But any opposed roll.... actually requires TWO rolls, n’est pas?
At best, it takes a roll from one player, and gives it to the other.

Nah...both players roll at the same time and compare scores, so the firing player rolls less. It helps to maintain some involvement for the player under fire.