Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
4 Posts

Holdfast: Korea 1950-51» Forums » General

Subject: What exactly is represented by SP's? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Jan van der Laan
Netherlands
Leeuwarden
Friesland
flag msg tools
badge
Als u begrijpt wat ik bedoel.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I own and have played many a block game. In most cases the "strength" of a unit determines the number of dice to be rolled. The lower the strength, the less dice to be rolled. In HK the number of SP's does not alter the number of dice to be rolled. An 8 SP strong Chinese army rolls as many dice as a 1 SP strong unit. I tried to figure out the meaning of the SP's or what they represent but I don't get it. Nice game btw.

Edit: typo
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Pereira
Portugal
Porto
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I would say it's the resilience of a unit to stay fighting although in the holdfast system units always fight with the same strength until they are defeated.

There are many people who criticized this but this is one of the aspects that keeps the system simple so I like it the way it is.

I play other games that take that into account and I like them also but this thread will probably be filled with some defending the Holfast system and others point out what they don't like
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Peter Perla
United States
Arlington
Virginia
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmb
I do not presume to speak for the designer, but I can say that the typical linear reduction of combat power with staying power that the standard step reuction represents is not realistic for most periods, but especially for modern 20th century units. This is so primarily because so much of a large unit's combat power resides in its artillery, which tends to survive until the other arms collapse enough to allow the guns to be overrun. Hence the repeated historical examples of German divisions fielding no more than a battalion's worth of infantry or a company of panzers being able to hold off Soviet or allied attacks. Similarly on the allied side.

So much of what wargamers think they know about real war just ain't necessarily so!

Take care

Peter
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Hoyt

Butte
Montana
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
peterperla wrote:
So much of what wargamers think they know about real war just ain't necessarily so!


Maybe. But let's try parsing your rationale a bit before we accept it

peterperla wrote:
I do not presume to speak for the designer, but I can say that the typical linear reduction of combat power with staying power that the standard step reuction represents is not realistic for most periods, but especially for modern 20th century units. This is so primarily because so much of a large unit's combat power resides in its artillery, which tends to survive until the other arms collapse enough to allow the guns to be overrun. Hence the repeated historical examples of German divisions fielding no more than a battalion's worth of infantry or a company of panzers being able to hold off Soviet or allied attacks. Similarly on the allied side.


Ok, seems like there are three attributes in that first sentence:

Combat Power (which we may take to be offensive capability)
Staying Power (which we may take to be resiliency, or defensive capability)
Steps (which are a measure of whatever power it is that we have left and which are lost when we are attacked)

OK, in this system a unit retains it's ability to hold ground and project a zone of control regardless of how many step loses it has lost. So, accepting, for the moment at least, that the defensive ability of a unit resides in it's artillery and they are the last overrun.... then the HF system of step loses not effecting staying power meets your model. Fair enough.

But what of offensive power? Is that also uneffected by step losses? It is in the game, a 1SP unit rolls just as many dice as an full strength unit...but does that model reality as well as the defensive situation? Or at all?

I think not. Infantry can take and hold ground (and spot for artillery and keep the enemy spotters away from good vantage points). Armor can exploit and easily outrun their own artillery support, but somehow retain a certain amount of effectiveness. Heck, somebody has to do the overrunning of the enemy artillery that costs them their last SP right?

If the only important arm was the artillery, in both defensive and offensive operations, there wouldn't be much point in having the other arms would there? We'd see units of pure artillery just chasing (slowly) each other around with pauses to shoot once in a while....

So, if we ignore (or accept, your call) the idea that a 1 SP unit can defend and hold ground just as capably as a full strength unit, and we doubt that is true on offense (although it is in the game), we're still left with an interesting question...What the heck does a Strength Point represent?

Casualties? Morale? Remaining Supplies? Surely those aren't purely binary attributes, lose 7/8th and suffer no reduced capability, but lose that last 1/8th and you are completely ineffective.

I'm OK with reduced units holding their ground. I'm not OK with reduced units retaining full offensive capability



 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.