Hello there,
as I stated before in another post I want to play a NUTS! Early-War-Eastern-Front Campaign. I posted the same intention at the THW Yahoo group (using an older nickname) and got some interesting answers.
One guy suggested using Skirmish-Campaign Books. After looking through their products and samples I decided to order the book covering the ´39 Polish-campaign (together with the WWI Rommels Road To Verdun). 
Does anybody have experience with those books or even with combining them with NUTS! ?

Thank you,
Hermod-1871

---

"LT! Rules of Engagement!"
"We're already engaged."

The skirmish books are great resources - made for play with arc of fire they are fairly generic with conversions for other rule sets at the front - in fact you could retro fit these with the charts I did for our Normandy campaign and figure out what rep they are supposed to be.

I have regularly used the skirmish campaign games straight to run NUTS games - the maps in the books are on 1' squares and aimed at 15-20mm. Many are quite big as well so you'll have to decide how big to make them if you are doing it in 28mm etc.

So it is real easy to use them for NUTS is the basic answer and then combine the two 'campaign systems' as the one in the skirmish books gives you what to play next and what base troops to use as where the NUTS one will give you what replacements you get etc for your squads.

Hope this helps

Rich J

---

The good old days/ Old school - not good just old!

I thought I'd dust off and revive this thread, since this is one of my areas of interest.

I've played a couple of games of Nuts using simple coversions of SkirmishCampaigns (SC) scenarios using the Red Guards at Kursk book. These have been solo affairs so far, mostly as I get familiar with the rules.

The only (minor) concern is convering SC training and morale to Nuts' single REP rating. Reading through the scenarios, it seems that having some separation between the two traits might be key (e.g. fanatical but poorly trained troops). I'm thinking this might best be handled using the "attributes" mechanism in the THW/Nuts rules. Has anybody tinkered with such an approach?

Even using a simple conversion, the SC scenarios are nicely sized for Nuts play, though perhaps on the large-ish size during some of the bigger battles. For now, I'm picking and choosing rather than playing the full campaign described in the books.

- Bob

bobstro:

The only (minor) concern is convering SC training and morale to Nuts' single REP rating.

you can easily convert it for NUTS by using an option of splitting the single Rep stat into two stats (training and morale) and using them depending on the particular situation. but there is a problem that tests in NUTS aren't directly related to morale or training but to general quality of troops.

eg. Received Fire test takes morale into account (will one's nerves brak?) but training as well (will one be able to return fire?). The same goes to In Sight, and most other tests.

So you might split it into "fighting" and "nerves" and use the first for shooting and melee, and the latter - for other tests.

But it seems that attributes would be the easier way to go.

By the way you pointed to one interesting issue - even though Nuts manages to produce quite realistic representation of firefights, it doesn't really do much about morale. So japanese fanatics, or determined Waffen SS might take some work to represent well....

 

And large-sized tables are a problem for me, which makes using SC a bit more difficult for me, as I rarely have access to big tables.

mahon:

[...] you can easily convert it for NUTS by using an option of splitting the single Rep stat into two stats (training and morale) and using them depending on the particular situation. but there is a problem that tests in NUTS aren't directly related to morale or training but to general quality of troops.

Having played a lot of Flames of War, that was my first thought. But as you noted, it requires a lot of extra re-work to Nuts, and I'm not sure I'm qualified to produce anything that really improves on the original.

For now, I'm just doing a rough conversion from SC->Nuts using different REP generator tables based on the SC training rating, which I more-or-less lifted from the default unit generation tables based on matching known units to training levels. This way, more elite units are more likely to get more higher-REP figures, but no guarantees.

It's a real testament to Nuts and THW that the single REP rating effectively reproduces effects that require multiple stats in other games. Instead of, for example, needing a low training rating (conscript) plus a special (and much-derided) "Hens and Chicks" rule to attempt to replicate poor Soviet armor coordination mid-war, I find that Nuts' REP results in the same sorts of behaviors those are meant to reproduce: Soviet armor fares best when lower-REP commanders stick near the high-rep leaders. Similarly, the higher-REP German tankers get to move more frequently, without having to resort to a "Stormtrooper" special rule.

mahon:

[...] But it seems that attributes would be the easier way to go.
By the way you pointed to one interesting issue - even though Nuts manages to produce quite realistic representation of firefights, it doesn't really do much about morale. So japanese fanatics, or determined Waffen SS might take some work to represent well....

In looking back over SC, I'm thinking it would be simple enough to just have an attribute for each morale level. Something like...

Fanatics (SC A+): Always pass 2d6 for personal rolls. Or "select reaction".
Top Quality (SC A): Use 3d6 for personal rolls, select best 2.
Veteran, Average: Use default REP, no attributes.
Reluctant (SC D): Use only 1d6 for personal rolls. Or use 3d6 for personal rolls, select worst two.
Unwilling (SC E): Always pass 0d6 for personal rolls.

I'm going to give this a try in my next few games. It will be interesting to see what a Fantic with poor REP does. I may have to tweak things a bit for outgunned, or obviously hopeless situations.

mahon:

And large-sized tables are a problem for me, which makes using SC a bit more difficult for me, as I rarely have access to big tables.

The biggest SC tables seem to be 8 x 4 feet. I'm using the 1 cm=1 inch conversion for most of my games and playing at 15mm scale, so that's more like 4 x 2 feet scaled down.

- Bob