Hex War Games - Strategy Part XVI - Taking a City

Some lessons one must continually learn.  For me, it is 'how to take a city'.  For some reason, I continually apply defensive tactics when I'm on the offensive, and my poor beaten units reflect that mindset.  In an attempt to ingrain this lesson into my mind, I'm going to shed some light on taking a city.  (Screenshots and images are from weewar.com)

Bad Approach - Blue Unsecured City Capture

Step 1: Approach
Do not conquer if the city is on the "Front lines".  Conquering units do not occupy a city, they spend their time quelling the populace.  In this sense, units conquering a city suffer disadvantages during the conquering process.  In game terms, this manifests itself as a reduction in defense values and an inability to attack.

If the conquering units is one of the initial units on the front lines, it can be expected the conquering unit will be easily defeated.  If enemy artillery lies within range of the city, the conquering unit's destruction is almost certain.

In our example, the blue infantry has moved in without supporting units and attempted a capture.  Red will easily overwhelm and destroy the blue infantry.

Step 2: Red Occupies the City

Step 2: Occupy

Instead of conquering, front line units should occupy the city instead.  The advantage of occupying a city is the unit maintains it's full strength and defensive capabilities.  While occupied, the city remains under the original owner's control, but the city cannot produce units if it is a production game.  This should continue until Step 3 occurs.

In our example, Red has moved into the city, but not set the unit to capture the city.  If attacked by Blue, red will have full defense available to it.

Step 3 & 4: Secured City and Capturing Infantry Unit

Step 3: Secure
Secure the area beyond the city limits with other friendly units.  Use the ZOC of the units to prevent enemy units from attacking the conquering unit.

By moving the Red infantry in the hexes facing the enemy units, the city is now secured.  This red line must first be breached before the blue units may assault the city.

Step 4: Conquer

Move the conquering unit into the city.  This will increase the likelihood of successfully conquering a city and minimize the overall casualty rate.

Failed Blue counter attack.

Red's gambit pays off.  Concentrating their firepower, the blue units eliminated a Red infantry and was able to penetrate the Red line.  However, this single attack was unable to destroy the Red infantry unit in the city.  Next turn the city will revert to Red's control, another victory in Red's plan to dominate the map.

Hex War Games - Strategy Part X - Oblique ZOC Defenses

The previous article discussed ZOC defenses from a Head-On assault.  This article reviews the same defenses, but from oblique assault and rear assault angles.

Assault Positioning
A Head-On assault occurs if the shortest distance between the attacking unit and the objective hex is parallel to the defending unit's retreat path.  An Oblique assault occurs when the attacking unit's shortest distance to the objective is not parallel to the defender's retreat path.  There are generally two oblique paths: Forward Oblique and Rear Oblique.  In this case the attacking unit attacks 'at an angle' to the defender's line of retreat.  Lastly, the attacking unit may come directly along the defending units line of retreat, this is called a Rear Assault.

Assault Positions

Superior and Inferior ZOC Defenses
In oblique assaults, the location of the defending unit has an additional element to consider: Positioning.  A position may be in either Superior or Inferior position.  A diagram of the Inferior and Superior position is provided in the diagram below:

ZOC Defenses on Forward Oblique Assaults

Superior defensive positions allow the defender to immediately counterattack if the defender must retreat.  Inferior positions means if the defending unit retreats, it must move before launching a counter attack.  Another way to view superior/inferior positioning is if the defending unit is forced to retreat, does the objective hex remain in the defender's ZOC?  If the answer is 'Yes', it is a Superior Position, and if it is 'No' it is an Inferior Position.

Rear Oblique Assault ZOC Defense Positions

Rear Assault Positions

Normally, assaults along the defender's line of retreat are considered ideal for the attacker and bad for the defender.  This is definitely a situation to be avoided if possible, but when viewed on a unit-on-unit basis, rear assaults leave the defender with all superior positions.  This is because if the attacking unit forces the defender to retreat, the defender moves to a location adjacent to the attacker and may counterattack next turn.

Rear Assault ZOC Positions

Rules Benefiting Superior ZOC Positioning

Two types of rules in games are greatly affected by Superior/Inferior positioning.  The first type of game is when the player has a limited number of units which may move each turn.  In this case, having a unit in a Superior position means the player does not have to spend vital points moving the defending unit into position, allowing the player to move other unit's, hopefully bringing them closer to the objective hex.

A second, and more common game rule, is when a unit may either Move or Fire on a turn, but not both.  Usually this impacts artillery units, but some games have infantry units which are 'green' or 'low grade' and may only perform one of the actions.  In this case, being in a superior position is critical to ensuring the unit may counter attack next turn.  If the unit retreats from an inferior position, it will not get to attack on the following turn, as it will spend it's turn moving into position.

Lastly, games with 'line of sight' combat restrictions for artillery may suffer from a type of Superior/Inferior effect.  Normally, artillery units cannot fire 'blindly' at the target hex, it must be in line of sight by a friendly unit to come under fire.  If the defender is hoping to 'call in artillery' on the enemy unit, but the unit is forced to retreat from a position and, in doing so, loses line of sight to the attacker, then the position may be considered 'inferior'.

Choosing Not to Attack
In games where the Attacking unit has the choice of whether to attack a unit or not, the player may choose not to attack if the defending unit is in a Superior Position.  In these games there is usually a possibility of the attacking unit being damaged during the assault or retreating.  If the attacker attacks a superior position, it risks damaging the attacking unit twice, once during the attacker's turn and a second time during the defending unit's turn.  If the objective is to take the hex, why take a second risk?

For inferior ZOC defensive positions, it is usually recommend the attacker make the attack unless the odds are the attacking unit will be wiped out, or if the defender occupies strong defense bonus terrain.  In this case, the attacker may drive the defender away from the hex and force the defending player to spend valuable time or resources moving the unit before the attack.

The decision to attack or not, if permitted, will depend on many factors.  But Inferior/Superior positioning is an additional consideration.

Games with Definite Superior/Inferior Effects

Nearly any game with retreat rules has some form of Superior/Inferior effects.  One of the more basic version is Memoir '44.  In Memoir '44, Artillery units cannot move and attack.  Thus, if forced to retreat, they may not be able to counter attack on the enemy unit, at least, not at full strength.

There are several other games I've played, most of which I can't remember the name of, whose retreat rules caused Superior/Inferior effects.  One whose name I can't remember was a Napoleonic battles game.  In the game I remember there were limited number of unit's permitted to move, and artillery required line of sight by a friendly unit.  I vividly recall placing a unit in good natural defensive terrain, but in an inferior position.  Odds were the unit would survive the combat untouched.  As the dice would have it, the unit was forced to withdraw and I spent many precious actions trying to get the unit back into position and attack.  I would have been better of placing the unit in a superior position and letting the attacker drive the unit into a position where it could automatically counter attack.  Eventually I lost that game, but learned a valuable lesson.

I'm curious what other games exist which have superior/inferior type effects.  If you know of any, please leave a comment with the name of the game.

Hex War Games - Strategy Part IX - ZOC Defenses

Protecting a Target Hex

Since ZOC affects both movement and combat, it may be viewed as a type of ‘Terrain’.  Unlike most terrain, ZOC terrain moves around the map as the unit’s move.  The movement of a single unit with ZOC can greatly impact the mobility of the opposing army.  This article will discuss effects of various arrangements dealing with ZOCs.

For these examples, we will deal with the most common ZOC available:

• Entering an enemy ZOC ends movement.

Additionally, a few other ground rules are necessary to establish:

• Attacking and defending units are limited in number (no reinforcements),
• The attacking units are attempting to reach the position(s) marked with an X,
• All attacking and defending units may move a maximum of 4 hexes per turn,
• For retreating purposes, the defending unit must retreat closer to the bottom of the map.

Defending Positions of a Hex

A unit may protect a given target hex three basic ways:

A – Preemptive Defense,
B – Last Ditch Defense,
C – Counter Attack Defense

Defense Positions

Some hexes may hold more than one type of defensive position depending on the Natural Terrain.  The diagram below shows a single attacking unit, the target hex, and the defensive positions in the surrounding hexes.

Preemptive Defense

The position marked ‘A’ is a purely preemptive defense.  Preemptive defenses have several advantages over the other types of defense.  Preemptive defenses require the enemy engage the defending unit before moving on to the objective hex, or taking extra time to bypass the unit.  For games which are timed, this is an excellent method of stretching the game out.  Even if the rules allow for “advance after combat”, the enemy unit may not take the objective location on this turn.

Bypassing the Preemptive Defense

If the game has retreat rules the defending unit may retreat to the objective hex due to combat results.  On the next turn, the unit is already in position for a Last Ditch Defense.  This may result in the enemy not moving on a subsequent round, again, controlling the flow of the enemy unit.

Preemptive Defense Retreat

A common drawback to the Preemptive Defense is the location of the hex “A”.  Usually the hexes where one would plant a preemptive Defense has the weakest Natural Terrain.  This is not so much a quirk of fate, as the reason the enemy is approaching from that direction in the first place.  If the objective were more readily reached from another direction, then the enemy would attack from that direction.  This means the defending unit in a Preemptive Defense receives no Defensive Bonus.  If this is the case, the defending unit may become a sacrificial unit, expected to simply delay the enemy.

Although the terrain bonus may not be the best, the Preemptive defense can be crucial when friendly units need two turns to move and engage the enemy.  This results in a Delaying Tactic may provide the time necessary for those forces to arrive and save the objective.

Last Ditch Defense

The ‘B’ marked on the objective identifies the Last Ditch Defense.  In this case, the enemy may march right up to the objective, but must fight the defending unit to take the objective.  Often times the objective hex has greater natural defensive advantages, so it seems reasonable to place a unit in Last Ditch Defense.  If sufficiently fortified, the enemy unit may spend turns besieging the hex before finally taking it.  Some games do provide the attacker bonuses to the attack based on the attacking terrain.  For these games, a Last Ditch Defense gives the attacker three options to attack from, and therefore some control over how the ensuing battle may end.

Last Ditch Defense and Retreat Positions

A danger does exist to the Last Ditch Defense if the game rules allow for Advance After Combat. In this case, if the enemy drives the defending unit out, the enemy may immediately take the objective hex.  If retreat rules are in place, the defender should end up in one of the hexes marked ‘C’.  They then find themselves in the position to counterattack on the following turns.

Counter Attack Defense

The positions marked ‘C’ are not designed to stop a unit from occupying the objective.  Instead, the unit launches a counter attack after the location is occupied.  This type of ‘defense’ usefulness occurs when the unit occupying the objective hex suffers a terrain penalty, such as tanks occupying a city.  The danger of such a defense is if the counter attack fails, the objective hex is left under the attacker's control.

Dual Defense Hexes

Positions marked ‘A/C’ may be either A or C type defenses depending on the natural terrain.  The opposing unit may avoid the zone of control of the defending unit, if the natural terrain allows quick movement for the opposing unit.  The movement is as follows:

Bypassing the Dual Space Defense Positions (A/C)

This defense is great if the natural terrain the attacker must travel to reach the objective prevents it from reaching it in one turn and the Natural Terrain in position A/C has greater defense bonuses than the hex in just position A.  Forests and rivers make great Natural Terrain limiters to movement.

Even if the defending unit is bypassed, the defender is now in a position to initiate a counter attack from its current hex.  If the defender is forced to retreat, the defender still finds itself in one of the original Counterattack Defense position.

Hex War Games - Strategy Part VIII - Zone Of Control

Upcoming discussions will deal with Zones Of Control (ZOC).  This article will discuss several types of ZOC found in games.  I'm sure there are variations on these, so it is by no means inclusive of every possibility.  I've included some games I'm aware of for typical examples.

Zone Of Control
A unit's zone of control consists of the six hexes surrounding the unit.  Every game has differ combinations or rules regarding zone of control.  The degree of impact on the ZOC will differ for each game.  There are four areas of ZOC may affect:

• Combat,
• Movement,
• Supply,
• Command

Combat

Zones of Control can have multiple impacts on combat depending on the game.  I've categorized the most common as the following:

• Passive - Units do not need to engage in combat
• Active - Units must attack enemy units which end in their ZOC.  Alternately, some games declare that every opposing unit in the zoc of a friendly unit must be attacked, but not necessarily by the unit exerting the ZOC. (example: Artillery could count as an attack).

Movement

There are several forms of movement Zones of Control:

• Interrupting: Units must end their movement upon entering the ZOC of an enemy unit.
• Locking: Units may not leave a ZOC except through combat effects.
• Fluid: Units may move through enemy ZOC, but at an increased movement cost.
• Open: Unit has no ZOC effect on movement.

Supply & Command

ZOC may also affect supply and command of units.  The type of ZOC a unit may have is as follows:

• Disrupting: Supply and/or Command lines may not pass through the ZOC of enemy units.
• None: ZOC's have no impact on Supply and/or Command

Sample Games

Memoir'44 (or at BoardGameGeek)- Is a simple form of hex based war games.  I would classify it more in the Tactical category.  The units in this game effectively have a Passive, Open ZOC with no supply or Command limitations.  Effectively, every unit may move freely from one hex to another without penalty.  The only limitation is two units may not occupy the same location, so if blocking the lines of retreat more damage can be done on the unit.  It is a game with the simplest  form of ZOC available.

Weewar - A computer based Hex war game.  It has a Passive, Interrupting ZOC, there are no command or supply limitations in the game.  Units must end movement as soon as they end adjacent to an enemy unit, but they do not need make an attack.  One aspect of  the game which differs from others is that units exert ZOC against all other enemy units, even Sea and Air units.  In most games, Air units usually ignore ZOC effects.

A screenshot of a sample game is below.  The Blue Wheeled Unit (Raider) can normally move 4 hexes on plains terrain.  However, Red's units permit the Raider to move adjacent to them, but force the raider cease movement.  The shaded regions indicate areas where the Raider cannot move.

Interrupting ZOC from WeeWar
(Shaded areas cannot be reached)

Tac Air - Tac Air has one of the most restrictive ZOC I've seen in a game.  First, there are units representing supply and command units.  In the picture below, the NATO (Green) 2/35 unit is "In Command", but "Out of Supply" Since the ZOC from the 1/22 and 3/22 Pact (Brown) block the unit from getting to the supply unit.  The move was not without consequence, as the Pact's 1/22 unit is Out of Command, but In Supply.  Furthermore, since Tac Air has an Active Combat ZOC, both the 1/22 and 2/35 units must attack each other during the combat phase.

ZOC effects on Supply/Command from Tac Air

Russian Front - Russian Front is a great game covering the battles on, as the name implies, the Russian Front.  It also has one of the most unique ZOC rules I've encountered.  Unit's have a Fluid ZOC, it costs extra to movement points to enter hexes in enemy ZOC.  However, in order to engage in battle units must enter the same location as an enemy unit.  The tricky part is, once a unit is engaged in battle, it loses it ZOC.

This simple change means the Most Efficient defense does not protect as effectively.  Once an enemy unit moves into two friendly unit's location, the remainder of the enemy forces can flow in around them without hindrance.

Hex War Games - Strategy Part VII - Bends In The Line

Bends in the line become inevitable as the battles develop.  Understanding how the bends affect combat can impact the defensive configuration chosen.  There are three basic configurations that permit bends in the line

• V-Bend
• A-Bend
• Wave-Bend

V-Bend

A V-Bend consists of a single bend with the attacking force entering the inside "V" of the formation.  A benefit of this formation is it reduces the attacking force to a 1:1 ratio.  The weak point of this formation is the flanks.  It is usually necessary to place two strong defensive units as the anchor units.

V-Bend Formation

A-Bend
The A-Bend is the reverse of the A-Bend.  At first glance it appears to provide the same type of benefit as the V-Bend.

A-Bend Formation

In reality, the A-Bend formation suffers from a distinct disadvantage.  The lead unit can come under attack from three different directions.  This can eventually lead to a break in the unit which destroys the formation.

A-Bend Formation-Concentrated Fire

Since the first unit becomes the weak point in the formation, the lead unit usually requires the strongest unit lead the attack.  Another option for the attack is to have the middle units be the strongest available and the front unit being a sacrificial unit.  If the front unit is not sufficiently threatening, however, the defender can revert to the unit-to-unit attack.  It is critical to realize, if in a head-to-head fight, assaulting a V-Bend formation requires an A-Bend formation.

Wave-Bend
The Wave-Bend consists of an alternating V and A bends so the units form a "wave".  The major disadvantage to this arrangement is it provides no great benefit in either attack or defense.  Similarly, the formation needs to be attacked in a wave formation.  Usually this formation requires units alternate in strength, with the weaker units behind the stronger units.

Wave Formation

Hex War Games - Strategy Part VI - Map Edge

Rarely in the world is the coastline hundreds of miles long and in a straight line.  There are even fewer places where forest, mountains or swamps transition right up to the sea.  In Hex Based war games, however, this seems to be the norm since every games has an edge, beyond which pieces cannot be attacked.  So, how can the map edge be used as an advantage, or disadvantage, to the pieces in the game.  We will discuss map edge effects in this article.

Map Edge Combat Effects
The edge of the board acts like a completely reinforced wall no unit may pass.  At most a unit may be attacked from four sides.  If forming a line along the grain, the board makes an excellent anchoring point.  Two configurations for anchoring on the edge exist:  On the Bulge or Off the Bulge.

Configurations for Anchoring on a Map Edge

When anchored Off The Bulge, some unit along the line may be attacked from two adjacent locations.  If anchoring the line On The Bulge, each unit may only be attacked a single time.  Thus, anchoring On The Bulge provides a better defense than Off The Bulge.

A final possible configuration is to have the line formed Off The bulge, but one unit jutting forward towards the enemy.  This creates a Bend in the line, but the addition of the unit allows the line to form On The Bulge and still reduce the attack to a 1-to-1 ratio.

Off The Bulge with an Advanced Unit

Hex War Games - Strategy Part V - Off the Grain Defenses

So far I've discussed defenses going with the grain.  On the grain defenses are generally better than "off the grain" defenses, and this article will discuss why Off the grain is worse, and compare the only truly effective "off the grain" defense.

Optimum Off Grain
Other than placing a unit on every hex, similar to the "ideal" defense, the next best defense is to place a unit with one hex gap between each unit.  This arrangement looks like the following:

Optimum Off Grain Defense

Although it looks similar to the Most Efficient On-Grain defense, there is an important difference in the hexes surrounding the unit.  In this configuration each defending unit may be adjacent to three enemy units.  In a best case scenario, the enemy attacks each unit 2:1, but one unit may be attacked 3:1, as shown in the diagram below:

3/2/2 Attack on Optimum Off Grain Defense

 I consider the above to be best case only in relation to the worst case scenario in which every other unit comes under fire at 3:1 odds and the remaining units come under 1:1 attack.  This configuration is shown below:

3/1/3 Attack on Optimum Off Grain Defense

When attacked with a 3/2/2 it will usually lead to a "roll up" of the flanking units.  In the 3/1/3, it will create multiple breaches at a time.
Breaching Optimum Off-Grain Defense
A breach anywhere along the Off-Grain Defensive line leads to a difficult to contain situation:

Off-Grain Breach

If two or more of these breaches occur along the line simultaneously, not uncommon given a 3/1/1 attack, it can lead to isolated units which can be quickly surrounded and destroyed.

Hex War Games - Strategy Part IV - Most Efficient Defense

This article will describe the most efficient arrangement of units for defense.  I have heard this referred to as the "optimum defense", but I consider it the most efficient as that is what it is: It provides the best maximum coverage with minimum exposure to fire.

Most Efficient Defense
The most efficient defense consists of units with one hex distance between them.  It is rare a player has enough units to perform the "ideal defense".  Usually the player has a limited number of units to cover a given area.  The objective then becomes, how best to make use of these units.  The Most Efficient Defense (MED) does just that.  A sample of the MED is shown below:

Most Efficient Defense

Normally, games have a zone of control (ZOC) which prevents units from moving from directly between two units on the first turn.  Thus, on the first turn, each unit may only be attacked by the units directly in front of it.  If a unit does manage to penetrate in the space between two units, it now finds its self being attacked from the front and the rear, an unenviable situation.   In most cases, a good player will have a "reserve" unit hopping between the gaps and bringing withering fire down on any unit attempting to move between two units.

In a purely mathematical exercise, a line of X units can "take up space" equal to 2X+1 hexes wide, but can only come under attack from 2X opponents on the first turn. Thus, 3 units would form a line capable of defending line 7 hexes wide, but they would hold off 6 units on the first turn.

Breaching MED
The MED is a great static defense for holding space with limited units.  However, being outnumbered 2:1 every turn will eventually lead to a breach, as depicted below:

MED-Breached

 If left without maneuvering, the defense falls apart.  Each of the remaining units can come under attack from 5 sides, and a 'corridor" exists which leads to the hard of the units.  Units are rarely immovable.

The best counter to the situation where a breach occurs is for each unit to move one hex to "close the gap". If performed, this effectively restores the line to its initial condition, albeit it the 'ends' of the lines are shortened by one space.  In the example diagram, the two units would move one hex closer and the situation is restored.

Proactive Movements
Many defenses are not static, but allow the units to "move".  The MED forces the opponent to choose an area of attack, and the defender may quickly react to "close the line" into an ideal or hybrid ideal at the point of greatest threat.  The following diagrams shows how the lines can quickly collapse to protect from a threat from any direction.

Collapsing lines to the Left (Collapsing to the Right is a mirror image)

Collapse to the Center

 This brings the maximum amount of firepower and depth to quickly come to aid of units under attack.  If necessary, units may also "collapse backwards" to achieve the same results with a loss of one hex of territory.

Hex War Games - Strategy Part III - Nuclear Defense

Back in college (and before) I played lots of hex grid war gaming against various opponents.  Against one opponent in particular the armies would "advance" in a very wide formation with lots of space between units. I finally couldn't understand why he advanced his units in that way (and only in certain game), so I finally asked him what the heck was going on.

The answer was one I never suspected, "Because we have nukes."  I stared at him dumbfounded until he explained, in great detail, how the nuclear/chemical rules greatly affected his thinking.  We debated (argued more likely) passionately about the benefits/cost of the units until we agreed on few neutral points:

1. It provided a minimal benefit in a static situation
2. If maneuvering is not performed, it is easily overcome.
3. It usefulness in any game which does not include Nuclear/chemical weapons is questionable
4. It does count as a 'defense' in the strictest sense of the word.
5. It became known as the 'Nuclear Defense', although I tend to call it the 'Nuclear Advance'.

For completeness of the discussion on Hex defense, this article will discuss the benefits and drawbacks of the 'Nuclear Defense'.

Nuclear Defense
The idea of the Nuclear Defense is to prevent large numbers of units from being wiped out by nuclear or chemical weapons.  Other than a single unit by itself, this is probably the worst for of defense along the grain possible.  A Nuclear Defense consists of units separated by two hexes of distance, as shown below:

Nuclear Defense/Worst Line Defense

This defense permits each unit to be surrounded and attacked on five sides at a time.  If the distance were any greater, the attacking units could move to completely surround each unit and attack on all six sides.  It is from this slight reduction in number of attacking units that we determined it was a form of 'defense'.  This configuration does provide some defense, albeit not much better than none at all.

Nuclear Defense Uses
In war games occurring in the modern era, there is one advantage to the Nuclear Defense.  Usually the game permits the release of 'tactical nukes' or 'chemical weapons'.  These nuclear/chemical weapons have an incredible impact on groupings of enemy units, usually wiping out or severely damaging all areas in the central hex and adjacent hexes.  In situations where nuclear/chemical weapons are potentials, it is advisable to not group units.  In this case, the 'Nuclear Defense' usually prevents the destruction of more than a single unit with nuclear/chemical weapons.

The question becomes, are nuclear/chemical weapons that much of a threat.  Testing this invovled my friend and I setting up several conditions for releasing nuclear weapons and seeing what effect it had on the battlefield.  Normally, we employed the following rules:

1. We ignored terrain effects for movement prior to nuclear launch.
2. We permitted firing of nuclear/chemical weapons without penalty.
3. Friendly units could not be within 2 hexes of an affected hex.  

Under these conditions, the Nuclear Defense worked reasonably well at preventing a tactical nuclear warhead from devastating an army.  I would typically lose 2 or 3 units in Nuclear exchanges, while my opponent would lose only a single unit.

The problem became one of maneuver, when a breach occurred.

Breaching the Nuclear Defense
While space protects from unconventional weapons, it doesn't protect well from conventional attacks.  When breached, a huge gap in the line five hexes wide is formed.  This is usually large enough to drive whole divisions.  After this, the breaching units can quickly wrap around and destroy the remaining units, rolling them up from the inside out.

In test with my buddy, we found this to be a major danger to the Nuclear Defense.  If he managed to time my advance correctly, he could close the gaps and get units into a tight formation which (per our rules of engagement), prevented a nuclear launch.  However, on more than one occasion the Nuclear Defense could not close the gaps fast enough.  One memorable occasion involved the very center unit falling.  Next turn his remaining 5 units in the division were wiped out as my swarmed them.  Now, rather than having six division to protect a front, there were only 5, and the others were too busy trying to get into fighting formation to be of much use.

But not all Nuclear Defenses were unsuccessful.  I have one solid memory when I really would have preferred to use a tactical nuclear weapon, but never found the cost worth the return.  By game end he had launched all his nukes, and I still hadn't fired mine.  The loss of my units were painful, but they managed to slow the assault, not stop it altogether.

Best Use of Nuclear Defense
Overall I'd have to rate the Nuclear Defense as effective for what it is trying to achieve.  It does present greatly diminished returns in using a nuclear/chemical weapon. However, as a static form of defense, without Natural Terrain, it is not successful.

Perhaps the best use for the 'Nuclear Defense' is prior to combat engagements on the way to battles.  This is similar to "column marching" in non-modern war games, where units marched in line formation at higher speed.  If ambushed, those units in "marching order" usually suffered higher casualties than those in "fighting stance".

While moving forward, the Nuclear Defense allows units to advance forward with minimal impact from nuclear weapons.  As the units approach the combat zone, the units need to compress the space between them, reducing the gap as the front is reached.  Natural Terrain may complement or render inviable the a Nuclear Defense.

If Nuclear/Chemical Weapons are not present in the game system, this form of defense should be avoided if at all possible.  If on the Front Lines, this defense should also be avoided.

Hex War Games - Strategy Part II - Hex Combat - Ideal Defense

In the previous entry, we defined Terrain, discussed how the Hexes which partition the boards into spaces may be viewed as terrain, and discussed the three primary ways hexes are used to affect movement.   'Terrain' we defined as "something which affects movement or combat".  "Natural Terrain" has a real life counterpart, whereas Hexes do not.  We then discussed the ways in which various game systems have implemented Hex Style Movement.

In this article we will discuss the impacts of hexes on combat in.  A few grounds rules will be made for this discussion:

1. No Natural Terrain is considered,
2. Ranged units (such as artillery) are not considered, combat is only from one hex to an adjacent hex,
3. Units must end movement if they are adjacent to an enemy unit and, lastly,
4. Units starting adjacent to an enemy unit may only move 1 hex at a time

This allows us to review the impacts of Hexes on combat.  It also provides a baseline to review the impacts of various Natural Terrains in later articles.

Hexes and Grain

For many of the discussions, it is necessary to discuss "Grains".  A hex normally has six (6) grains.  A Grain consists of a straight, continuous line of hexes crossing only hex sides.  When arranged "along the grain", a series of units are aligned in such a way the units could move from one to the other without having to execute any "turns".

Grain Lines

Combat Limitations

Hexes reduce the impact of combat by limiting the number of units that may impact it at once.  In the case of single unit by itself, a unit may only be attacked on a maximum of six sides.  Normally, such a situation will result in the destruction of the unit.

The objective in combat is normally to breach the enemy's lines to reach some objective.  As such, it is first useful to describe the different forms of defensive arrangements and what happens when the loss of a unit creates a breach.

Ideal Defense

The ideal defense consists of a situation where all units are lined up along a grain line.  The ideal defense means only two units can attack any given unit at a time.  A major drawback to this type of defense is it does not provide any greater means of the defender to counter attack.

Ideal Defense

The best a player can hope for is to wear down the enemy units through attrition or by extending the line faster than the opponent.  In the first case, the battle will usually go to the player with the greatest production capability or the fastest healing rate.  In the second situation, the players will rush to add units to the end of the line until it can "wrap around" the other player's units.

Essentially, this is what occurred in The Great War (or World War I as it is known today).  The weapons of the time (machine guns, artillery and barbed wire) outpaced tactics (large infantry groups).  These led to strongly defensible positions.  These positions were practically impregnable if infantry were entrenched.  The best the generals could hope for was to extend the lines beyond that of their enemies.

When a breach occurs, it usually is a single unit, often with severe damage.  The breaching unit, if lucky, can now bring greater firepower on the enemy line and widen the breach. More than likely the breaching unit will be destroyed, probably by any units held in reserve and the line will be restored.

Ideal Defense Breached

Breaking the Stalemate
The ideal defense ends in a stalemate.  Normally, the only way to break the stalemate is to introduce an element which changes the conditions.  In games, the change in elements could be a technological change, a change in tactics, or a sudden surge in strong units.  Otherwise, it will end with a production battle.

The Great War experienced many of these changes, to greater or lesser extents.

Technological Advance
First, the introduction of Armored Tanks allowed allied units to breach the enemy lines.  However, the armored vehicles of the time were not reliable and the tanks available were never deployed in great enough numbers to make a difference.  When the breaches did occur, they were never adequately followed up, and so the results was essentially the situation described in this article: a minor gap was created, quickly driven back, and the gap filled.  Theoretically, the introduction of the tank in sufficient numbers could have swayed the balance of power, but in The Great War they were ineffective.

New Units
When the Americans entered the war in April 1917 , three years after the war had been going on.  These fresh units allowed the Allies to gain some ground.  Potentially the greatest benefit these units presented to the war effort was a reduction in Germany's soldier's will to fight.

New Tactics
All country's in The Great War fought using antiquated tactics for the advanced weapons of the time.  Germany developed the Ludendorf Offensive, a change in tactics and strategy which made fantastic gains after several years of no advances.  It is arguable at least a portion of these gains were caused by low morale on the allies soldiers, but the gains would not have been possible without the development of infiltration and stormtrooper tactics.  These changes in tactics came too late to save Germany, as the American's arrived on the scene.  However, the change in tactics did manage to disrupt the "Ideal Defense".

Production War
Germany lost The Great War when it gave up its will to fight.  The collapse occurred mainly due to an inability to produce more soldiers, food, and material for the war.  In short, it had lost a production battle.  With starving civilians, ammunition shortages, and the introduction of new weapons of war (Tanks), the end for Germany became obvious.