Will Standard Crossfire Work for Vietnam?

After reviewing What to Simulate in a Vietnam War Company-Level Game, I decided to take a closer look at whether standard Crossfire could handle it. By “standard Crossfire,” I mean the version in the rulebook (plus HTD), where a rifle stand represents a squad of 9–12 men.

The short answer? It doesn’t — but I already knew that.

The point of the exercise was to identify the gaps. And those are exactly the gaps I’m aiming to fill with Wombat Gun, my draft variant for the Vietnam War.

---

1. Asymmetrical Warfare

• Different Force Capabilities: One side often had superior firepower (artillery, air, mobility), the other relied on stealth and ambush.
• Force Composition Variety: VC Local Forces, Main Force, and PAVN regulars had very different morale and equipment levels.

Simulate with:

• Asymmetric unit stats, rally values, or command range.
• Stealth or hidden deployment mechanics.
• Limited or faction-specific artillery and air support access.

Crossfire has unit stats, rally values, command & control, equipment, and artillery support. Unfortunately, there are no orders of battle for Crossfire for Vietnam. I’d have to write some.

Crossfire has hidden deployment, depends on it really for any asymmetric game. Standard Crossfire does not have hidden movement, but I do have a house rule: Hidden Movement in Crossfire (“Ghosts”).

Crossfire also lacks rules for aircraft. Again, I have a house rule: Aircraft and Air Superiority in Crossfire

---

2. Close-Quarters Combat (“Hugging the Belt”)

• Communist troops often closed in tight to neutralise American firepower.

Simulate with:

• “Danger Close” or friendly fire rules near enemy stands.
• Bonuses or incentives for close-assault tactics.
• Restrictions on fire support near friendlies.

Hugging the Belt (closing in tight to the enemy to neutralise their superior firepower) is not possible in Crossfire. The Communists did it in Vietnam and the Soviets did it in WW2. But I don’t have a house rule for it and I would need one. Something about being in the same terrain piece as the target and/or within one stand width of the target. Then bang, friendly fire.

---

3. Mines, Booby Traps & Snipers

• Extensive use of hidden threats to delay, harass, and inflict casualties.

Simulate with:

• Random or hidden trap markers revealed by movement.
• Sniper events that cause suppression or initiative loss.
• Harassment zones that pin or delay Free World movement.

Crossfire has mines, wire and snipers. Should be good enough.

I would use my Balagan House Rules for Crossfire Armour (2nd Edition) as this aligns the fortification rules with normal direct fire.

---

4. Terrain-Dominated Combat

• Dense jungle, villages, rice paddies, and rubber plantations defined LOS and movement.

Simulate with:

• Shortened line of sight.
• Multiple terrain types with varied cover effects.
• Ambush bonuses from cover or flanking positions.

I think we’re good here. Crossfire is, by its very nature, a “Terrain-Dominated” game. Hidden deployment allows ambush fire.

Crossfire has Villages. HTD added orchards, which would work for rubber plantations. Dense jungle is easy. Just plonk down a lot of small Woods features clustered together.

But rice paddies are new to Crossfire. As it happens I have already Made Rice Paddies – I needed them for the Burma Campaign of WW2 and the Portuguese Colonial War. so I have added a rice paddies house rule to Types of Terrain Features in Crossfire

---

5. Helicopter Mobility & Fire Support

• U.S. and allied forces used helicopters for rapid movement and devastating firepower.

Simulate with:

• Rules for helicopter insertions and extractions.
• Off-board artillery and air strikes called via leaders or FOs.
• Limited-use fire missions tied to initiative or scenario conditions.

U.S. and allied forces used helicopters for rapid movement and devastating firepower.

Crossfire doesn’t have helicopters. So I had to make something up for Fogo Cruzado. The house rule is here: Tactical Air Support (TacAir) and Helicopters for Fogo Cruzado / Crossfire

---

6. Command & Control Tension

• Communist forces had weak radios and political control; Free World had better C2 but complex chains.

Simulate with:

• VC/NVA units requiring proximity to cadre or leaders to act.
• Cadre stands that boost morale but can’t issue orders.
• “Local initiative” for VC/NVA to act independently within limits.

In Crossfire troop with Command & Control need proximity to commanders. No change required.

HTD introduce Commissars and these can be used for Communist Cadre. I made it a house rule: Political Commissar Rule for Crossfire.

---

7. Night Operations & Limited Visibility

• Much of the war took place in poor light or visibility, limiting long-range action.

Simulate with:

• Reduced LOS and firing range in low-light conditions.
• Flare or flashlight mechanics to expose units.
• Movement or fire penalties due to confusion or darkness.

I have done some Musing on Night Fighting in Crossfire. The main option is the night fighting rules from HTD. These are okay, not great. And they would need expanding to include flares and floodlights.

---

8. Civilian Presence / Rules of Engagement (ROE) Constraints

• Free World forces operated under tight rules of engagement and could not fire freely.

Simulate with:

• Scenario-based restrictions on opening fire.
• “Unknown contact” markers that may or may not be enemy.
• Victory Point penalties for harming civilians or property.

Crossfire doesn’t have civilians and every table is a Free Fire Zone.

In our game of Charlie Don’t Surf there were several Civilian markers on table. They didn’t do much except absorb player time and generally run away. But one of them was standing next to one of my Free World squads when the squad got hit resulting in a dead civilian. Apparently any dead civilian is bad for the Free World even if killed by the Communists and my victory points would have suffered.

So, if this really is essential in a Crossfire version of Vietnam, I’d need to tweak to give more constraining Rules of Engagement. Unless it was a Free Fire Zone, of course.

I wonder if I could save rules and bundle civilians with Ghosts. The idea is that all Ghosts have something in them, either troops or civilians. The enemy doesn’t know until the Ghost is revealed. So shooting at Ghosts could be a problem for the Free World. Could work. Would save having a separate rule.

---

9. Firepower vs. Manoeuvre

• U.S. forces relied on firepower; VC/NVA relied on speed, deception, and movement.

Simulate with:

• High suppression firepower for Free World units.
• Better movement options for VC/NVA in cover.
• Limited ammo or reduced dice to encourage deliberate fire.

Standard Crossfire has all the usual firepower bits. The Free World would have access to more kit so have more fire power.

Some low grade Communist units might have older weapons, e.g. bolt action rifles rather than assault rifles.

But Crossfire doesn’t have hidden movement. Ghosts provide this. The Communists probably have more dummy Ghosts to obscure where they are.

Something else to consider. Only troops with good field craft can Retreat Move. So Communists, Anzacs and US Special Forces can. US Regulars and USMC cannot. Ouch. That would hurt.

---

10. Morale, Fatigue, and Hit-and-Run Tactics

• VC/NVA often disengaged before taking full losses, focusing on attrition and delay.

Simulate with:

• Morale checks for voluntary withdrawal or fade-out.
• Victory rewards for disruption or delay, not destruction.
• Objectives that don’t require total elimination to win.

This is all about morale and victory conditions. Crossfire doesn’t mandate victory conditions, or morale failure, doesn’t even mention them. These come with scenarios.

A pattern introduced by HTD is a scenario having Terrain and/or Casualty (AD) objectives. A player controls a terrain objective if their stand occupies the feature or was the last to occupy it, and the feature is/was not physically contested by the enemy. The defender can win by inflicting casualties on the attacker; killing fighting stands. Fighting stands include BC, CC, HMG, Rifle and SMG Squads, Tanks, Guns, but not PC or FOs. Tanks count as two fighting stands each.

All of that is both standard stuff and can apply to scenarios Wombat Gun.

More edgy, but still with precedent, is the concept that the Communists don’t want to fully engage, but instead delay then pull out. This similar to withdrawal missions. I have some guidelines on Fighting Withdrawals and they also feature in Mac’s Missions v3.

---

11. Obsession with Body Count

• Unlike in WWII, where casualties were often left for support units to handle, both sides in Vietnam were highly sensitive to body count—for tactical, political, and morale reasons.

Simulate with:

• Communist forces attempt to evacuate or conceal casualties to deny body count victories to the enemy.
• Free World forces required to retrieve wounded or killed-in-action stands, affecting movement or initiative.
• Scenario or VP rules that penalise leaving friendly casualties behind—or reward successful recovery or concealment.

A common pattern in Vietnam games is to track casualties. This allows the Free World to do medevac and the Communists to lug their casualties off table.

Crossfire doesn’t have this concept but it is possible to bolt it on. Crossfire abstracts everything under a squad in size (9-12 men) so I would not introduce tracking individual men and whether they become casualties. Instead I think having a section killed would be a trigger to put a casualty marker on table. The player then has to try to get this marker off table. Whether they succeed or not affects the victory conditions.

---

Conclusion

On balance, to me, Crossfire looks a pretty good basis for a company-level Vietnam wargame.

Crossfire (or HTD) has rules for many of the unique features of the Vietnam War

• Unit stats, rally values, equipment, and artillery support
• Command & control
• Hidden deployment
• Mines, wire and snipers
• Terrain-Dominated game
• HTD Night Fighting (mentioned in Musing on Night Fighting in Crossfire)
• Shiny kit to provide overwhelming firepower
• Terrain and Casualty (AD) objectives.

I already have house rules to cover many of the gaps:

• Hidden Movement in Crossfire (“Ghosts”)
• Aircraft and Air Superiority in Crossfire
• The rice paddies house rule in Types of Terrain Features in Crossfire
• Tactical Air Support (TacAir) and Helicopters for Fogo Cruzado / Crossfire
• Communist Cadre using Political Commissar Rule for Crossfire
• Downgrading low grade Communist units with older weapons happens in Fogo Cruzado
• Fighting Withdrawals

But there are things that do not exist and would have to be written:

• Orders of Battle
• Rule for “Hugging the Belt” and “Danger Close”
• Civilian Presence / Rules of Engagement (ROE) Constraints / Free Fire Zone
• Casualties and medevac

Current standard rule that might get changed:

• Something else to consider. Only troops with good field craft can Retreat Move. So Communists, Anzacs and US Special Forces can. US Regulars and USMC cannot. Ouch. That would hurt.

I think we’re in a good place.