Trying to adapt CoC to the Vietnam Conflict

Moderators: Laffe, Vis Bellica

User avatar
Seret
Posts: 4074
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2014 7:45 pm
Location: Kent UK
Contact:

Re: Trying to adapt CoC to the Vietnam Conflict

Post by Seret »

I think what you've done with it is fine, treat as a Garand with truncated max range.

However you could also take the view that engagements over 48" are rare enough and the weapon issued on small enough scale that a special rule isn't required. That is after all the case in the official CoC rules.

User avatar
Seret
Posts: 4074
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2014 7:45 pm
Location: Kent UK
Contact:

Re: Trying to adapt CoC to the Vietnam Conflict

Post by Seret »

dwtaylor0 wrote: Helicopters are the biggest issue for me right now. I'd love to have them but I don't know if they make sense for the engagement size and timescale of CoC.
These guys seem to have worked some helicopters into their 1980s CoC games.

dwtaylor0
Posts: 101
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2014 7:21 am

Re: Trying to adapt CoC to the Vietnam Conflict

Post by dwtaylor0 »

@Seret
Thanks for the link!

Another example I've seen of helicopters being used is in the 'Big CoC on Africa' article from the TFL Summer 2014 Special. The way they have it working is that the helicopters can only be activated by spending a Chain of Command die. This seems like an interesting way to deal with the potential power of a helicopter strike and could represent the coordination needed to make sure that the strike doesn't hit friendlies.

thatguy96
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2014 5:39 pm

Re: Trying to adapt CoC to the Vietnam Conflict

Post by thatguy96 »

dwtaylor0 wrote:
Piers wrote: Joe would take that as a compliment! :D
I would hope so! :)
Piers wrote: When we wrote Ambush Valley 2 ed. he put a lot of work into the TOEs and he remains one of the most knowledgable sources of organisations for the period.
I must admit, when I first got my copy I was not totally sold on the ratio of history to gaming material. Now that I've been contributing to this project, I've found the history bits incredibly useful and AV has been one of my go to references.
I'm glad to hear that the TOE information has been useful, and I'm sorry I didn't stumble upon this thread earlier. I just wanted to let people here know that I've expanded my offerings in this regard and made storefront for them called TOEHub at Wargame Vault (Here are the Vietnam related charts: http://www.wargamevault.com/browse.php?cPath=9217_9307)

Now these charts are raw TOE information and do not generally account for the uncertainty of actual conflict, unless otherwise noted. I've also removed the sources line, but I can assure you that the charts are still compiled from primary and secondary sources, plus some educated guesswork on my part based on my knowledge of other contemporary organizations from time to time. I update the files whenever new information comes my way and I make the changed versions available to people who have purchased them free of charge (Wargame Vault's system is nice enough to streamline this for me).

I can also try and answer any questions and I'm always open to suggestions of where to focus my energies (I make no promises though heh).

dwtaylor0
Posts: 101
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2014 7:21 am

Re: Trying to adapt CoC to the Vietnam Conflict

Post by dwtaylor0 »

thatguy96 wrote: I've also removed the sources line, but I can assure you that the charts are still compiled from primary and secondary sources, plus some educated guesswork on my part based on my knowledge of other contemporary organizations from time to time.


I'm sure you've got your reasons, but I really liked being able to see the sources. If nothing else it made for a good way to find books. For example, I probably wouldn't have discovered Jac Weller's 'Fire and Movement' without it being referenced in one of the ARVN TOEs.
thatguy96 wrote: I can also try and answer any questions and I'm always open to suggestions of where to focus my energies (I make no promises though heh).
ARVN! ARVN! ARVN! Specifically the basic rifle platoon later on. Jac Weller's book is the only primary source I can find about ARVN rifle platoon organization and that seems to only cover early on. I've seen other sources that have the platoon organization seem roughly consistent, don't offer any sources (the ARVN Osprey book, the Tour of Duty rulebook, etc. all mention ARVN platoon as having 3 squads of 8-10 soldiers, each squad having one M79).

thatguy96
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2014 5:39 pm

Re: Trying to adapt CoC to the Vietnam Conflict

Post by thatguy96 »

Part of the reason why I pulled the source line was because I decided not to rely too heavily on non-governmental sources for the items I have put up for sale. I figured if I was going to be selling the items, I didn't just want to be repackaging other people's existing work and selling it as my own. Sometimes it becomes clear we've located the same sources in archives or in secondary government sources (monographs, etc), but I have my own ideas as to what's important enough to include.

As for ARVN stuff, I add as much as I can find that seems interesting, but for whatever reason there isn't a whole lot of it. Unlike US Vietnam-era TOEs and MTOEs, there doesn't appear to be an easy way to quickly locate ARVN organizational documents in places like the National Archives. I've had more luck locating FANK info than ARVN information. So what I have available on Wargame Vault now (most RF/PF and other paramilitary stuff) is what I've been able to readily locate.

Oddly enough, the ARVN platoon organization you're describing is basically what I've found for the Regional Force companies circa 1972, so its quite possible that this was a standard, across the board infantry TOE. I imagine attrition had major impact in some units too. This might mean that some units had more or less men, and M79s were reportedly always in short supply. In fact, according to annual MACV reporting, the RF hadn't even transitioned from the M1 to M2 carbine or received 100% of approved BARs by 1968 when they were supposed to start getting M16s and M79s. The RF only managed to get "100%" fielding of the M2 carbine in late 1968 after low priority units began receiving weapons turned in from high priority ones who got M16s.

Its also worth noting that American advisory elements appeared to have various standardized designs that they used throughout the region. ARVN and FANK M113-equipped companies/troops/squadrons/whatever you want to call them were very similar in basic design for instance. I know the FANK infantry company org put into place in 1971 was apparently based off of the design used for late war MIKE Force companies too. This kind of educated guess work doesn't "source" very well either heh, which is why I focused on writing design notes where applicable.

dwtaylor0
Posts: 101
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2014 7:21 am

Re: Trying to adapt CoC to the Vietnam Conflict

Post by dwtaylor0 »

For the major forces I've generally been able to find my own sources. However, if this project gets to the point of adding smaller, more obscure formations I might end up mostly or entirely using the material from Wargames Vault. Since this would mean basically publishing platoon organizations, it would be effectively republishing your work. Is there I way I can approach lists that are primarily based off your work that stays on the straight and level?

thatguy96
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2014 5:39 pm

Re: Trying to adapt CoC to the Vietnam Conflict

Post by thatguy96 »

Are you planning on selling the final product? If not, I wouldn't be too worried about it. And repurposing the information would be different from just inserting my work as is into whatever you final product looks like too.

dwtaylor0
Posts: 101
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2014 7:21 am

Re: Trying to adapt CoC to the Vietnam Conflict

Post by dwtaylor0 »

Okay, cool. The final product will not be sold unless something drastically changes.

It's too bad that you've been unable to find much in the way of ARVN infantry organization. I guess it's nice to know that my inability to find much is more than just me being bad at researching these things. :? :)

Unrelated thought: I'm considering giving the VC and or NVA the option for elite. This would give the bump to Force Morale and difficulty to hit without having to throw together my own rules. Does elite affect anything other than the initial Force Morale, how hard it is to hit them, and how far the deploy from Jump Off Points?

Edit: Gave it more thought, not totally sure that VC/NVA were overall better at hiding from gunfire. Spider holes and riflemen in trees might be harder to locate and hit, but not necessarily regular ground troops. Maybe scenario specific stuff, I read 'We Were Soldiers Once...And Young' and in the battles described there the NVA uniforms happened to match really well to some of the grass in the area.
Last edited by dwtaylor0 on Wed Oct 15, 2014 5:48 am, edited 1 time in total.

thatguy96
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2014 5:39 pm

Re: Trying to adapt CoC to the Vietnam Conflict

Post by thatguy96 »

Then that sounds fine. You can always tell your gaming groups about where the info came from and they can check out TOEHub too :)

Post Reply