CoC Big Battles and a solo question

Moderators: Laffe, Vis Bellica

Post Reply
acctingman
Posts: 130
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 7:49 pm

CoC Big Battles and a solo question

Post by acctingman »

I've only played a couple games and I was wondering if, with some tweaking, could you play CoC solo using more than platoons? Maybe something company sized? I don't know the rules well enough to know if it can be done or not. So, I'll ask you who have played it more?

Can one person play both sized, but with a company each side?

Thank you

PatG
Posts: 317
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 10:06 pm
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Contact:

Re: CoC Big Battles and a solo question

Post by PatG »

I would go with I Ain't Been Shot Mum. It's a set of rules for company+ actions and uses a card draw for activation with a special tea break card to end the turn. The cards give a different feel to the player sequence than dice that in my opinion is better suited to solo play.

Munin
Posts: 1168
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 7:49 pm

Re: CoC Big Battles and a solo question

Post by Munin »

Take a look at the free "Big CoC" supplement available for download on the TFL website. It has stuff about doing bigger battles up to company-sized engagements.

While CoC is a fantastic game for solo play, I'm not sure I'd want to do both solo play and a company-sized battle under CoC as written. I agree that if you want both of those things, IABSM is probably a better fit.

Archdukek
Posts: 5146
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 11:49 pm
Location: Linlithgow, West Lothian, UK

Re: CoC Big Battles and a solo question

Post by Archdukek »

I'd definitely agree with the suggestions that IABSM would be a better option for solo company level games.
Big CoC is designed as a multi-player game with each player controlling a platoon and rolling command dice for it and executing turns in parallel with the other players on that side. It could be played solo but would take a long time and lose some of the tension and friction in the normal game as you played each platoon sequentially.

John

Post Reply