What makes combat "feel" like combat?

I read the rules for TCSgames but never got to play. It touches on planning. We do far more extensive pre thought. Allot of work and Training go into avoiding the issues that can cause Catastrophe. Though they are no guarantee as the real world shows. World War Two was no different. American soldiers were issued maps of Europe made by Michelin Corp. I bought some on E-bay. They were tourists maps but were sufficient for navigating the roads. I have seen many hand sketched maps made by British to plan advances in the Caen Area. Tank Battles I miniature was a series of short books on history and gaming. It gives a good account of British Navigation and C3 issues in the African Campaign. Also it talks of the British Tankers. They navigated using Naval Sextants. Cool Night, no Terrain references open hatch being tossed about, and stargazing. That's awesome!! uhh except for the war part.

Part of Daily life in a combat zone out of combat is constant patrol and scouting. Any height you can get in Buildings hills even climbing a tree just to get more vantage is always sought after. And Tanker always try to scout routes on foot whenever possible. Otto Carious always talked about going forward with Infantry to get the lay of the land for the tanks. In fact he was wounded in this practice.

You can see great detail about the planning in Military manuals of then and now. Globalsercuity.org has many US Manuals that are great resources for this. METT-T Is the acronym we used = mission, enemy, terrain, troops available, time available. These manuals show in good detail the steps taken. If you look at their World War Two counterparts many of the fundamentals are not that dissimilar. Most of the major changes are from organization and technological advances. https://www.atu.edu/rotc/docs/10_fm7_8.pdf Infantry Platoon and Squad from 2001

With us, Battalion would always have at least one meeting a day. All plans and available info were relayed to the Company commanders and maintenance and logistical personal as well. They would bring notepads and prepare notes so that in turn they could brief their underlings and so on down the chain of command. All maps were copied several times so that we could all have one down to junior NCO Corporal's or Buck Sgt.s that were Squad leaders. This way nobody was out the details of the plan, the route to the phase line and no hand holding was required.Now granted, what squad leaders had was only pertinent to their level. So when you hear about captured map cases from the war etc. They were different. But we all had some form of map. We made our sketches of not only what areas we were responsible for but what our neighbor squads or platoons were, this kept us from bumping into one other and reduced fratricide to some degree. So with Fog of War its not that you either have all info or none at all. It is that incomplete picture and uncertainty in your own Intel that needs to be represented In games I.M.O.

I think the extensive planning beyond what TCS admirably shows in its system would greatly improve many wargames as far as what kind of results you would see. I imagine many whom are looking to get entertained and get right to play might find it tedious. But it would be worth a try as exercises.

One noted example of the past was Avalon Hill's TAC AIR. I don't know what kind of ratings BGG gives it but, it was borne from Military training games and it shows. The system of plotting AD zones and preparing "lanes" through friendly AAA coverage for aircraft is a good example of the more detailed planning that is used avoid catastrophe.

I also think communication nets would be a world of good. But likely get labels with the same complaints of tedium . I have a Book on that subject as well, from Osprey. I applied it to my take on platoon level grand tactical gaming, which is in reality a compilation of the many Panerbltiz/Leader variant's from the Avalon Hill General with a bit of my own spice. It really changes things.

IN Both Tac AIR and my Variant I use a plastic overlay and dry erase markers and the maps I mentioned earlier instead of the Original Components. It is needed for the indicator's of unit boundaries and Fields of fire etc. They look something like this. http://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/vo8/no2/images/Lied2-big.jpg

It's probably all a bit much to be a marketable commercial idea as it would add allot of setup before actual play. I do this stuff solo and am sidelined permanently from meaningful employment. The up side is lots of time for this level of commitment.

Another interesting military tool for wargamers I think, is the CaA analysis ideas. Also can be found online. CoA is Course of Action.