The Loose Association of Wargamers

Essex Boy wrote: ↑Wed Jan 18, 2023 11:39 am

Spanner wrote: ↑Wed Jan 18, 2023 11:32 am

by Essex Boy » 18 Jan 2023 19:19
No idea what TOES is

It's a US acronym- Tables of Organisation and Equipment. In the UK, Oz and NZ forces we use Orders of Battle (ORBAT).

Thank you, Spanner. I'm surprised that Donald tended towards the North American language........or am I........

Iain

Listen, buddy. My bad but I could care less? Do the math - Americanisms are so now. Period.
(We should touch base when I'm in Limey-land this year).

Later, Donnie.

Thank you, Spanner. I'm surprised that Donald tended towards the North American language........or am I........

Using the US terminology is becoming more common everywhere, Iain. I was always having to explain why we had to use the ADF terminology in documents, even if the US one made more sense or was "sexier". But "TOE" is more precise, as that is exactly what it is- a table listing the way a sub-unit, unit or formation is organised and equipped. "ORBAT" covers everything from a modern infantry four-man brick to 21st Army Group in 1945 or Marlborough's forces at Ramillies.

PS, "Donnie"? Ochoin, surely there are some limits?

Spanner wrote: ↑Wed Jan 18, 2023 8:56 pm

PS, "Donnie"? Ochoin, surely there are some limits?

To make a point? No limits. See Oxford Debating Union.

domnhall

ochoin wrote: ↑Wed Jan 18, 2023 7:48 pm

Essex Boy wrote: ↑Wed Jan 18, 2023 11:39 am

Spanner wrote: ↑Wed Jan 18, 2023 11:32 am

It's a US acronym- Tables of Organisation and Equipment. In the UK, Oz and NZ forces we use Orders of Battle (ORBAT).

Thank you, Spanner. I'm surprised that Donald tended towards the North American language........or am I........

Iain

Listen, buddy. My bad but I could care less? Do the math - Americanisms are so now. Period.
(We should touch base when I'm in Limey-land this year).

Later, Donnie.

How the mighty have fallen.

See Oxford Debating Union.

Never went (nor been) to Oxford (if we had one at Uni of NSW I never heard of it, but my uni student days were happily brief). A debating union would be an excellent site for a wind turbine, methinks.

by Essex Boy » 19 Jan 2023 09:21
How the mighty have fallen.

Yes. Perhaps Donald's just a little off colour?

Essex Boy wrote: ↑Wed Jan 18, 2023 10:21 pm
How the mighty have fallen.

Ah dinnae ken whit ye mean. I jist talk like normal fowk. Nuhin special tae it. Some gadjies dinnae unnerston oor accents though and we kin talk kinny fast for some. It’s no’ aw that hard once ye get the hang o’ it tho. Av goat mair problems unnerstonin some English accents than maist other accents gawn.

slainte, domnhall

Ah dinnae ken whit ye mean. I jist talk like normal fowk. Nuhin special tae it. Some gadjies dinnae unnerston oor accents though and we kin talk kinny fast for some. It’s no’ aw that hard once ye get the hang o’ it tho. Av goat mair problems unnerstonin some English accents than maist other accents gawn.

slainte, domnhall

Ah, youse was just a bit off colour and is now back to normal.

Excellent.

PS Can't help with RF or RFR, as I've never played the rules.

ochoin wrote: ↑Wed Jan 18, 2023 6:18 am We are currently having the annual enjoyable, albeit lengthy, conversations as to what our little group will present for this year's Train & Hobby show.

Amongst other periods being mooted is WW2. It's not a period we often touch on - using Blitzkrieg Commander when we have a garage game.
There are issues with BKC – chiefly, I have the only copy of the (original) rules, Clearly, we'd need at least 2-4 copies of presumably the newer rules.....not cheap. Some of us are pretty keen on WW2 and there are some fairly big Western Desert forces being raised. I have medium sized NWE forces etc. One pal has the entire 5th Black Watch for NWE at 1:15- bet you can't guess with whom he recently served with.

So, how about ‘Rapid Fire’? @ 5 pounds a pop, it passes the expenditure requirement but I don't know much about it. And one of our number once had A game in the UK using these rules.

1. I’m assuming we’ll look at the revised RF rules – “Rapid Fire Reloaded” as they evidently simplify the original. Playable?
2. It’s labelled a big game set – which BKC really isn’t - so more Show-worthy?
3. Figures seem to be based in 2s with some singles. Most of mine, & everyone else’s, are in 3s with some 2s. Is this an issue?
4. Units seem to be actually units using TOEs – BKC operates on an amorphous mass of what you have & with any commander commanding any unit.
5. Artillery, air, airborne & a lot of aspects covered well?

Clearly,I need to know more so I'm asking here as a preliminary.

donald

Either will give you a reasonable game, although we use BKC for preference. We did however playtest the most recent BKCIV version, so perhaps we're biased! RF is cheaper, but the free QRS etc sheets that are available for BKC make it less expensive than it looks at first sight. You'd probably get away with a single copy & some familiarity with the rules. There are some changes between BKCI, II and IV (no-one talks about or uses v3! ) I don't know if there is a pdf version of BKCIV available.

RF itself has a lot of 'bathtubbing' (I'm not sure about the 'Reloaded' version ,but it seems likely).

The T,O & E in RF also is very much a sketch - the figure ratios are around 1/15 (a battalion is around 30-40 figures, an infantry company around 8) but for vehicles it's 1/5 (so c 15 tanks in a British regiment). That puts a lot more AFVs on the table than infantry, which may or may not be offputting. BKC has more consistent figure ratios & the basic 'building blocks' in their lists are reasonably accurate. There is a command hierarchy in BKC, based very much upon the concept of battlegroups, but it is confusing to start with.

We'd reckon on running a brigade equivalent per side in BKC, which would be about as many as RF would handle comfortably IMHO (multi-table big game extravaganzas notwithstanding - they usually have multiple umpires).

I thought basing was single figures in RF, with multiples being crew served weapons (mortars and the like). Air, artillery etc is reasonably abstract.

Spanner wrote: ↑Wed Jan 18, 2023 11:41 pm (if we had one at Uni of NSW I never heard of it, but my uni student days were happily brief). A debating union would be an excellent site for a wind turbine, methinks.

There was (and is) one, but unfortunately Uni Debating Societies are often a breeding ground for would be politicians and their ilk, but occasionally productive of excellent comedians (see Shaun Michallef, The Chaser crew).

Essex Boy wrote: ↑Wed Jan 18, 2023 8:19 am No idea what TOES is.....

According to Gene Kelly, it's something to do with what Moses supposes (there are roses involved as well, I believe).