Jump to content


Ground Combat

  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1 calumbrookes



  • Members
  • 5 posts

Posted 27 December 2018 - 08:27 PM

Hi all

Really interested in running an island-hopping or norwegian campaign wargame over a weekend with some similarly minded friends, and although GQ3 clearly offers very comprehensive rules for the naval combat, we're looking for a more abstract way to model the ground combat.

There'a mention of TacFire in the rules (4-12) but nowhere on the internet or in here can I find any more information... anyone able to point me in the right direction or suggest an alternative?

#2 Levi the Ox

Levi the Ox


  • Members
  • 4 posts

Posted 28 December 2018 - 01:08 AM

Tucked away in either the Campaign rules or the Merchant ship document there's a section about calculating ground campaign progress based on the proportion of necessary supplies delivered over a given length of time.  Deliver too few supplies and the forces retreat over the next time interval, deliver surplus supplies and they advance.  I think it's quite clever as it keeps the naval operations as the driving factor.


Haven't tried it yet, but I think that'd be very good for either theater.  Keep the convoys running and the harbors in your hands!

#3 W. Clark

W. Clark


  • Members
  • 295 posts
  • LocationOregon, out in the sticks

Posted 29 December 2018 - 01:53 AM

I never saw that. Time to re-read that section of the rules.

#4 calumbrookes



  • Members
  • 5 posts

Posted 30 December 2018 - 02:53 PM

Interesting idea to base ground progression against supplies delivered. I like the concept.

However, in players v players campaign, that seems a little too simplistic... Any ideas on how to perhaps add modifiers to that table for things like numbers of soldiers on each side, defensive bonuses etc?

#5 Levi the Ox

Levi the Ox


  • Members
  • 4 posts

Posted 03 January 2019 - 02:41 AM

Interesting idea to base ground progression against supplies delivered. I like the concept.

However, in players v players campaign, that seems a little too simplistic... Any ideas on how to perhaps add modifiers to that table for things like numbers of soldiers on each side, defensive bonuses etc?


Ideas off the top of my head, here:


1: Troops themselves are cargo of a sort, you can calculate carrying capacity and VP for them like other types.  If you simply count in "cargo holds" delivered, successful troopship convoys or amphibious landings will count just like freighters (one passenger hold carries ~1 battalion).


2: For PvP a simple ratio of supplies could determine who advances, either

2a: Whoever delivers more advances based on the difference in totals, or

2b: You roll a d100 and compare it to the ratio of Axis/Allied supplies, the winner of the roll advances based on the difference between the roll and the ratio.


3: In either 2a or 2b above, a side with a specific advantage could receive a 25-50% bonus, and/or have an initial stockpile to work from.  Perhaps either

3a: the stockpile is entirely removed each campaign round, or

3b: it is reduced by some proportion, say 1/2.


Using #1, #2b, and #3b above, for example:

During the initial invasion of Norway, the Wehrmacht is deployed by naval and air assault.  Let's say their initial force is two divisions, which is ~18 battalions so 18 "holds".  The Norwegians have mobilized a division, so 9 "holds".


In the first week, the German invasion achieves its immediate goals, with the Kriegsmarine defeating and capturing the Norwegian coastal defense forces in Oslofjord through a tabletop battle and seizing ports at which to unload their troops through strategic maneuvering.  Additionally, they airlift 2 holds of supplies, while only 1 hold of British troops crammed aboard warships arrive.

Germans: 20, Allies: 10

With a ratio of 2:1, the Germans will advace on a 01-67, while the Allies advance on a 68-100.

I rolled a 15, so the Germans advance the difference between the roll and their proportion, 67-15=52%.  Norway is half conquered!  Blitzkrieg at its finest!

However, both sides now halve their "holds".  Germans: 10, Allies: 5.  This isn't necessarily 50% casualties, but there has been some attrition.  More importantly, everyone is running low on supplies.


In the next week, the German airlift continues bringing in 2 holds of supplies, and the first supply convoys come across the Skagerrak.  These are fairly safe from Allied naval units, and deliver 12 holds of cargo.

On the other hand, British shipping in the North Sea is vulnerable to German raiders.  U-boats sink 2 freighters in map maneuvering, not only destroying their holds of supplies but reducing the transports available to carry future loads.  A surface attack also forces a convoy carrying 6 holds to turn back, but in a tabletop action the Royal Navy defeats the Kriegsmarine units in Narvik, allowing 9 holds to be delivered there.

Germans: 24, Allies: 14

Now that the fighting has stabilized, let's give the Allies a 50% defensive bonus in the mountains, counting their 14 holds as 21 for the purposes of determining the ratio.

An 8:7 ratio means the Germans will advance on a 01-53, while the Allies will advance on a 54-100.

Alternately, we could not let them advance if they claim the defensive bonus, or count results achieved by the defensive bonus a stalemate instead (i.e. 01-53 German, 54-68 stalemate, 69-100 Allied)

I roll a 76, however!  If we're letting them count the defensive bonus they advance 23%, reducing the German progress to 29%.  If not, they advance only 7%, reducing it to 45%.

The German holds are halved to 12, while the Allied holds are halved to 7.


After two weeks of campaigning, three surface actions have been played; the key Allied victory in Narvik has brought reinforcements that allowed the Allies to hang on and even reclaim some ground, but the German naval successes, although less spectacular, protected their initial gains and prevented the Allies from reaching parity, although the German supply situation itself is far from ideal (12 of an original 18, compared to 7 of an original 9).


So running through that as I thought it up, advancing the full amount might be too swingy.  Perhaps the victor advances half of the difference instead.  Certainly the side claiming a defensive bonus doesn't count it for counterattacks.  However, even counting in fairly abstract "holds" still delivers a decent idea of the forces involved while allowing the naval games to shape the campaign.  Without the British tabletop victory the Norwegians would have only had 5 holds remaining, up to 8 on defense, and although that same roll of 76 would have allowed them to hang on for the second week, in the third they would likely have been crushed.


Hope that helps!  It's certainly given me ideas about how to run a similar campaign...

#6 Lonnie Gill

Lonnie Gill


  • ODGW Staff
  • 295 posts

Posted 03 April 2019 - 02:32 PM

G' Day Levi and Calumbrookes,


Interesting approach!  Another way to simulate ground combat at the campaign level you might want to consider is provided in SUDDEN STORM, our 1937 US vs Japan naval war campaign.  Ground combat is resolved using the GROUND ASSAULT section of the OPERATIONS Chart 2 A with Ground Status Logs to track the availability and location of multiple Ground Combat Units (GCUs) and losses.  It can be used to handle a variety of different GCUs and resolve ground combat including extended combats (stalemates) that require multiple Campaign Turns to resolve.  It would be fairly simple to adapt the approach to your planned campaigns.





  • Kenneth D. Hall likes this

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users