scenario four : a delaying action

Moderators: Vis Bellica, Laffe

dakkadakka
Posts: 96
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2019 4:44 pm

Re: scenario four : a delaying action

Post by dakkadakka »

Unfortunately setting a number of phases or turn in CoC is a little difficult, with the variable turns and rate of movement. I suppose I could set a number of gaming hours - basically, take the objective before the session is over.

TT - I do see your point about the issue of the defender’s morale collapsing. But, there are also some famous last stands throughout history where the defenders lost; but, held off the attackers long enough to accomplish an objective that was beyond that particular battlefield. While it can be argued that the defenders’ morale did not collapse in reality (they didn’t surrender), I think if you translate the outcome of them being wiped out to a man into CoC game terms, that would be a force morale reaching zero. In CoC, you usually hit zero FM long before the last team is wiped out.

I’ll talk to the guys today before we start the game about the victory conditions and see what they think is an appropriate win condition. I want this scenario to have the feel of a delaying action with a defender doggedly hanging on and an attacker pressured to push forward - not a meeting engagement where the forces fight until one side runs off.

Regards,

Jim

User avatar
Seret
Posts: 4145
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2014 7:45 pm
Location: Kent UK
Contact:

Re: scenario four : a delaying action

Post by Seret »

dakkadakka wrote:
Wed Dec 16, 2020 4:48 am
But, I also don’t see how the attacker can win a delaying action by sitting back and pounding the defender from a distance and not advancing. That completely goes against the intent of the scenario. I’ve always wrestled a little with this particular aspect of the rules.
I have no problem with the rules as they are. If the defender allowed the attacker to do that, then they deserve to lose.

The defender in a delaying action shouldn't be deploying unless the attacker is advancing. If the attacker deploys and just sits there: let them. They can't win by doing that. Hold your troops off table and wait. Deploy only once they've committed themselves to advancing.

Tuilerian
Posts: 36
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2017 6:25 pm

Re: scenario four : a delaying action

Post by Tuilerian »

of course in a campaign game I want sacrifice my troops if I'm the defender.

But my question is still pertinent as long as the writers of the rules (and they are my favorites since I abandon Adavanced Squad Leader a long time ago) :

I understand the only way to win this scenario for the defender is to break the morale of the attacker.
There is two way for the attacker to win : to break the morale of the defender or take the JOP and end the turn.

So what are the others results ?

If there is no others, why is it written : "all other resuls is a victory for the defender" ? As long as this is writen (and no errata available) : to break his own morale when you're the defender of this scenario before the attacker takes the jump off can be an other result... So all I want is to clarify the victory conditions.

In advanced squad leader scenarios, that tactics is evident to lead before the reinforcement came from the rear.

User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 8000
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: scenario four : a delaying action

Post by Truscott Trotter »

different mission same asnwer from Rich.
https://toofatlardies.co.uk/forum/viewt ... ose#p36459

Neil Todd
Posts: 191
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 11:59 pm

Re: scenario four : a delaying action

Post by Neil Todd »

A real life time limit works for the defender winning as well if the attacker has not made the objective and not broken the defender then yes it would also be a defender victory.

As for the Attacker breaking the defender and the gentleman's agreement between some of us at the our club that we discuss the battle afterwards and decide if the defender has done enough to 'win' that is our choice. Yes the defender has lost the game on the table but they may have achieved enough for a higher level victory that was occurring off the table. Which is the very essence of why this scenerio is named as such and to me while the victory conditions are worded as so.

If the defender just deployed all his stuff in the open and got mown down there is no way he would deserve the win and wouldn't get it. If we have had a game that has gone 6 or more turns and the attacker has been very slow and methodical with no sense of urgency but eventually kills the defender we would more than likely agree that the defender did enough to win a more strategic level victory. If it was a closely run thing with a few turns elapsing and both sides close to breaking before the defender finally falls we have even worked out some odds and had the defender roll a di to see if he has done enough. It can really make for a great climax after a really close battle to see both sides hopes pinning on the roll of a single di.

I know this approach isn't for everyone and you my not have the same level of banter etc with your opponents. We have hundreds of games under our belts over the 6-7 years we have all been playing. The sheep stations went out the window a long time ago we all enjoy the narrative more and usually have some great write ups of the battles flick around by email the next few days afterwards. Who doesn't love the tail of a heroic defense were everyone dies but it was useful for the bigger picture.

User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 8000
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: scenario four : a delaying action

Post by Truscott Trotter »

Tuleiran look at it this way.

Breaking force moral is an auto lose in any scenario - so leave that aside.

The results are the Attacker takes the objective he wins.

The 'any other results' is common language not technical definition and refers to the attacker losing if he fails to get the JOPP or runs out of time.
Richs opinion is if the defender breaks or withdraws (like in a campaign ) then the attacker can simply walk onto the objective and win.

If as per Neil ( not having a go Neil am all for house rules to make it suit taste and not playing for sheep stations either, but I thought the OP was asking how the RAW works?) you want to put a special rule for heroic defence or a strict number of phases rule (someone recently had a good way of making this work ) to put pressure on the attacker then great.

The missions in the book are meant to be fairly basic and introductory - once you get into the campaigns you will see much more detailed and different types of missions.

Tuilerian
Posts: 36
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2017 6:25 pm

Re: scenario four : a delaying action

Post by Tuilerian »

thanks for your answers.

I am sure now that breaking morale is always a loss.

We decide that we will play scenario 6 instead the 4th.

User avatar
Comecon
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2020 7:20 pm

Re: scenario four : a delaying action

Post by Comecon »

Many scenarios have this problem. There is no real "time limit" and that makes the game slow. My suggestion is to try the method described in "handling turns differently" a few posts down. It makes mission way more fun!

User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 8000
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: scenario four : a delaying action

Post by Truscott Trotter »

That's the one handling turns differently. Looking forward to trying that out on a game in the new year.

User avatar
MLB
Posts: 1012
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2015 3:57 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: scenario four : a delaying action

Post by MLB »

If you set a time limit, then make it a number of turns (not phases). This makes it unpredictable for the attacker and an incentive to be more aggressive. The longer the attack takes the more chance of rolling a turn end or the defender acquiring CoC die to end turns. There are other similar mechanics, such as counting every six rolled in each command roll and when the total reaches a certain number the game ends.

Another penalty for a slow or delayed attack is that it can give the defender more time to call for assistance. As an alternative, keep a similar tally to above and when this is reached the defender receives a further 10 support points (or whatever number you feel appropriate) available to deploy immediately from the next phase.
The Tactical Painter
Painting little soldiers for tactical battles on the table top

Post Reply