Stacking

[DCal12]

I am just curious what people think about the stacking rules? Does anyone play diffrent stacking rules?

One hex is 100 meters each units represents several soldiers. I would think you should be able to stack more then two units. If your worried about this massive hex of numerous soldiers moving across the board I would think any unit that has blast would take care of that.

I am not trying to get the rules changed or anything, just curious what peoples take on stacking is.

Dan

[Colonel_Coo]

we play as written currently. It is a serious part of the game mechanic.

If you want input on what happens for overstacking then please consider:
Whenever an enemy attacks an unit in hex that is overstacked, those attacks occur at +1 to hit.
All defensive values of friendly units in overstack are at -1.
If you attack an hex that is overstacked, your attacks gain blast and bombardment.

If a friendly and enemy vehicle are in the same hex, then they are conisdered to have ramed. Detroy all friendly soldiers in the hex (the side that caused overstacking is the friendly side) and then have both sides roll all their attack dice immediately. The higher modified total is considered the winner. The loser's vehicle is immediately removed from the map and is considered destroyed. If the loser successfully makes 1 hit during this attack result, place hit counters as appropriate on an enemy vehicle.

If two are move friendly vehicles are in a hex; they are considered to be meeting each other face to face. They may not make any attacks, enemy units may use AI or AT values when they make attacks and their maximum defense is 4.

Friendly soldiers in overstack make attacks at -2 to hit.

the maxium speed for a friendly unit leaving a hex that is overstacked is 1. It loses all road bonuses.

[NorthernRommel]

I use vastly different stacking rules then what AAM uses. But then I come from the realism school of game play.

Keep in mind that the map hexes that WOTC uses for AAM are bigger then 100m. I would say they are in representation closer to 150m to 250m. The new maps are a bit better, but still somewhat wacked. I think the range thing was just something they made up to put some controls on the abstraction of ranges they use. Their stacking rules are also a horrible abstraction.

That being said -- yes Blast type SAs help deal with concentrations of infantry. I use rules that make that even more of a risk, yet sometimes makes grouping a tactical necessity as well. So there are pluses and minus to overstacking a hex.

I think people that use AAM 1.0 minis with the AAM 2.0 3 inch maps are going to start changing the stacking rules on their own in the near future.

House rules for leaving trucks or halftracks in the same hex, or not having them count towards stacking limits as vehicles, etc -- will be needed. Right now the problems with dumping troops and guns in the same hex is annoying. It makes mobile infantry tactics somewhat useless as well. You dont have that problem in my rules.

For one thing when you use maps as varied as mine, specifically urban maps, then the need for new stacking rules becomes obvious. Clustering to improve tactical firepower just plain makes good sense. However if you are using solely AAM type rules - then increasing stacking limits will create some odd issues players are not used to. Protecting your tanks with lots of infantry will become a more useful and valid tactic. It will be hard to Close Assault anything with out a means to suppress or disrupt the vehicles defending infantry. But of course the other side of that is you can cluster and Close Assault in larger numbers to poorly protected enemy tanks. So it does balance out in that respect (and makes for a better game IMHO).

When facing overwhelming infantry numbers coming at you than your defenders can end up toast a lot more easily. Right now you can use a couple cheap units to tie down an attacker. If you increase stacking then you will have players that cluster so they can steam roll that kind of minimal opposition.

Coo - are those your rules are those the new Expert Rules?

[Colonel_Coo]

I use vastly different stacking rules then what AAM uses. . . .

Coo - are those your rules are those the new Expert Rules?

Just ideas for him to draw from.

Overstacking of vehicles and soldiers should be allowed. Some, none or all of my ideas could be considered for punitive actions.

Take -1 to hit, -2 to hit, no cover, to limit concetrated fire power . .
Or add Blast, Bombardment, limited movement (it would cause a cluster $%#@) .
Ramming of vehicles has been put forth previously. Having two giants use their AT values to determine the winner would be pretty cool way of resolving. Loser is detroyed. Tie: both detroyed. I am not a fan of RAMMING, but it was real and did happen. Maybe a Add attack value, front armor and rear armor values together (that way ramming a disrupted enemy tank is easier) to determine victor. If the attack is good (not including the armro values) then the Winner may still be damaged or destroyed. (shooting at the rear 4 armor of Panther with a T-34/76 might be worth the destruction of the T-34/67)

Like, I said, try and use all some or none. Have fun.

[J.L.Robert]

I was never too keen with the hex size/stacking thing myself.

Consider ASL, where stacking limits are 3 squads (gun/mortar crews count as 1/2 a squad), 1 vehicle and unlimited Single Man counters (leaders and heroes) in a 40-meter hex.

I've always found it odd that in more than twice the area, you have less than 1/2 the forces available to fight in it. But it's just another rule; I don't let it affect how I play, nor do I let it take away any pleasure I get from this game.

[Capt. Hellcat]

I played using 3 units/hex for the 1st half of the year (or from whenever WotC said they may change that rule) and found that it worked well. It was different, but it was not a major difference in how the game played. We have since went back to 2/hex, but 1 soldier that represents a single individual (commander, sniper, hero, etc.) will not count toward stacking. So, you can have 2 infantry + a commander in the same hex. This has been working good so far.

[ii_parfait]

The pillbox card states that only one soldier type may occupy a pilbox at a time.
I like the idea of NOT counting commanders toward stacking limits especially in transports or pillboxes. I too, am an avid ASL player, where concentration of force and leadership; shoulder to shoulder is often a must for fire superiority; and in a much smaller space!
This is my first post on this site and have enjoyed much of the banter that goes on here. However, I do not have any of the 'enhanced rules' in my possesion so I'll try to refrain from a lot of dumb questions. BUT If there is such a limit on Pillboxes is there also a fire arc restriction? Is there actually a game module called "Contested Skies" in print? If so, where does one find it?
Thanks..II_Parfait

[ii_parfait]

I played using 3 units/hex for the 1st half of the year (or from whenever WotC said they may change that rule) and found that it worked well. It was different, but it was not a major difference in how the game played. We have since went back to 2/hex, but 1 soldier that represents a single individual (commander, sniper, hero, etc.) will not count toward stacking. So, you can have 2 infantry + a commander in the same hex. This has been working good so far.
I certainly like this idea of 'single man' not counting toward stacking limits, especially
on transports and pillboxes. If this idea was to become standard with the increased hex size and stacking limit, would then a comanders 'zone of influence' be reduced to the hex he occupies?
I am also an avid ASL fan/player where this is so, (in a much smaller area) and in fact, essentiall to maintain discipline and fire superiority (as well as becoming a juicy target!..concentration of force dillema..)
But what about pillboxes? It only seems right that the commander of a unit receive the most benificial cover available, (unless he's Japanese?). If the stat card states that only one soldier(unit) may occupy a pillbox at a time(and I assume that includes artillery) (OK, maybe not the 88 or mortars) should there also be a retriction to field of fire? Or does the pillbox actually represent a bunker complex strewn across a much broader area? And if so, why restrict the occupancy? I would think a commander, a spotter, and an MG42 would be pretty cofortable in one pillbox, why be forced to use 3?
This is my first post on this site. I greatly enjoy the banter of this lot. Thanks..II_Parfait

[Capt. Hellcat]

I have not expanded the stacking for pillboxes yet, but that is a possibility. If a pillbox can hold a squad of soldiers it should be able to fit 1 more guy, or 1 cmdr & a sniper, for ex.

Here is a link to a pillbox Q&A:

http://boards.avalonhill.com/showthread.php?t=12317

I'm not really sold on the answer, since the mini looks like a bunker, not a bunch of logs or some sandbags. I've just started to try treating pillboxes as vehicles, as suggested in some of the house rules threads. In this version, it has a fixed facing and can only fire "in front" and has defense 5/4. Soldiers in the PB can't be attacked directly, but will be destroyed if the PB is (3 hits, using AV attacks, including close assault). Stronger bunkers w. better defense & that can hold more soldiers are other options (see HHR).

Contested Skies is Set 3 of A&A Minis - the boosters include the rules for planes.