official campaign proposal

Don't take this as gospel. I am however, working to generate the campaign based on KS rules and spirit. I'd like this to be a KS product/offering, if that makes sense, even if we manage the details on another forum.

I am doing this following discussion and encouragement with the hopes of building this specific community. However, I am prepared to drop this is this is deemed to be the incorrect forum for this discussion and pursuit. I firmly recognize that I'm in the KS house, not my own.

Use these points as a start for discussion. These ideas are pretty granular, but they can be altered as needed. Please help me polish them so we have a working ruleset. When practicable, refer to numbered rules or specific roles. Suggestions outlining major alterations to this proposal are okay and will be considered.

If you want to volunteer service, please do so -- let me know what you're interested in doing. Although I call for commander elections, I'm not above appointing the first set of commanders for the first campaign. The campaign will run until it's over.

-Neal


1. The campaign will be set in a fictional valley setting and will involve the clash of two corps of troops, one Union and one Confederate.

2. Each participant will command a brigade, battery, or cavalry troop, or more based on rank.

3. Each player will “form” their own brigade. Each infantry brigade will be initially formed of 2,000 men divided into 4 regiments of 500 men apiece. All brigades will begin as mixed units with troops varying in ability from raw recruits, militia, conscript, to trained (levels 1-4). Players choose Union or Confederate and may not switch sides in the course of the campaign.

4. Players may name their units using historical conventions and names.

5. Players may name their commanders, but they must use an actual Christian first name and last name (it can be historic or fictitious). We will not have a general “Yankekiller1863,” for example.

6. Once a brigade is formed, it will be placed into a division. For now there will be only one division per side. If numbers permit, we may form additional divisions.

7. The division commander will be nominated and elected from amongst the brigade commanders.

8. A corps commander will also be selected from among the brigade commanders.

9. Duties of the Corps commander are to set the overall strategic objective of the corps and to assign movement orders to the division commander. The corps commander may play the game as a regular cavalry or battery commander, or they may “pick up” a vacant brigade on gameday.

10. The Division commander will post himself to a command (one or more brigades) and will command in battle. This will include directing any available AI units.

11. Games will be scheduled two weeks in advance and may be played within a two-week window. If the battle is missed for two weeks, the battle will be drawn and the campaign progressed.

12. A commander who misses three consecutive engagements without notice will have his unit withdrawn from the campaign or assigned to a new participant.

13. After each battle, units will regain some losses and possibly some reinforcements. Equipment upgrades are possible. Captured guns are kept. Troops will improve their skills automatically over time, and will degrade skills when reinforced with new recruits.

14. A corps commander may order a unit into battle as an AI unit if the player is unable to participate.

15. Both sides will enjoy secret objectives. The possibility of separate, closed forums will be explored.

16. All battles will be fought in the HITS and Couriers mode, consistent with KS group play style.

17. This campaign will be aligned as much as possible with KS philosophy and rules of conduct.

18. The umpire may only participate with the permission of both sides and may only command a vacant unit as per rule 10.

19. The umpire may observe the battle from behind the lines of one force or another as a “war correspondent.” This individual may not communicate with anyone during the game.

20. In all cases, it is greatly preferred that umpires merely observe, or refrain entirely from joining games.

21. After each battle, the ranking officer that actually participated (Brigade or Division) will submit to the Corps Commander an AAR with copies to the umpire.

22. The umpire will declare the winner of each battle as well as any overall result such as an advance or a retreat. If the umpire is neutral, and does not participate in battles, they may weave this into narrative form commentary, if desired.

23. AARs will be due within 48 hours and umpire decisions within an additional 48 hours.

Posts to be filled
*Umpire/game master:
-Directs the course of the campaign in a general sense, outlying initial secret objectives for both sides.
-Renders a final verdict on the outcome of battles (preferably consistent with scoring, but not always).
-Maintains the official “war archives” of orders, muster sheets and so on.
-Arranges the official battles.
-Provides a basic tactical briefing to both sides, and takes information from the Division commander regarding the disposition of troops in a particular area (how the units should be placed or formed).
-Provides the OOB and general disposition to the scenario builder.
-Issues final, binding rulings on all matters in dispute.

*Corps commander:
-Moves elements as desired on the game map to achieve secret objectives.
-Provides strategic briefing to the Division commander.
-Passes AARs to umpire.
-Helps to organizes official battles.

*Divisional commander:
-Provides tactical briefings to brigade commanders.
-Outlines the general disposition of troops to the umpire for scenario preparation.
-helps to organize official battles.
Writes an AAR within 48 hours of battle and submits to the corps commander.

*Brigade commander:
-Chooses a side, a name for himself, names the units all using historical conventions.
-Participates in battles.
-Follows orders.

*Scenario designer:
-Takes general information from the umpire and deployments from the Corps commander and plans the battle, arranging the troops as best understood.

Also needed:
-A map with point-to-point movement areas. This may be entirely fictional. Each point on the map should correspond to existing SOW maps.

My first question is how will battles be generated?

Is this going to be a freeform campaign where the commanders on each side have a map and make the decisions of where their commands move and when and who they fight, and why, (within strategic requirements and limitations) or will the campaign be some kind of scripted, sequence of battles managed by an umpire or umpire team?

If the corps commander detaches a division or brigade on some separate duty, perhaps give that player the option to move his command on the strategic map (this would add some map movement duties to those two command levels in the list above).

As a suggestion for a setting, we could place this in the early war period in the trans-Mississippi region (or some fictional area east of the Mississippi) to get us away from the well-known eatern theatre. Such a location could also allow for colourful units (names and uniforms), partizan cavalry troops and early artillery like the 1841 6pdr.

Spring Hill anyone?

Cleburne wrote:Bloody Hill anyone?

Gen Georgia Under Lyon and FG under Mcullough?

That part of Ky is not very prosperous. Not much silverware to be had. How about Nashville instead.

I just need a period map upon which to superimpose the points. LOL Have ya got a map?

Where's my backpack... Dora?

Mr. Digby wrote:As a suggestion for a setting, we could place this in the early war period in the trans-Mississippi region (or some fictional area east of the Mississippi) to get us away from the well-known eatern theatre. Such a location could also allow for colourful units (names and uniforms), partizan cavalry troops and early artillery like the 1841 6pdr.

I like that idea. I'm basically attracted to anything that gets us somewhere different, with regiments from different states etc. Trans Mississippi is actually my favourite theatre, but you might also consider Eastern Kentucky/Eastern Tennessee.

I see that's twice I've agreed with Diggers in 2 posts, so I'm now going to have a lie down

Martin

Mr. Digby wrote:1. My first question is how will battles be generated?

2. Is this going to be a freeform campaign where the commanders on each side have a map and make the decisions of where their commands move and when and who they fight, and why, (within strategic requirements and limitations) or will the campaign be some kind of scripted, sequence of battles managed by an umpire or umpire team?

3. If the corps commander detaches a division or brigade on some separate duty, perhaps give that player the option to move his command on the strategic map (this would add some map movement duties to those two command levels in the list above).

4. As a suggestion for a setting, we could place this in the early war period in the trans-Mississippi region (or some fictional area east of the Mississippi) to get us away from the well-known eatern theatre. Such a location could also allow for colourful units (names and uniforms), partizan cavalry troops and early artillery like the 1841 6pdr.

[Note: numbers added to the above for answer clarity]

1. Manually and carefully.

2. Yes, I intend it to be a freeform campaign where corps commanders make the strategic decisions and division commanders the tactical ones. Basically, the corps commander moves units as desired on the campaign map. When the two sides meet, the umpire announces a battle and any relevant intel. The umpire hands the OOB to the scenario designer. The ranking commander in the battle (it could just be a single brigade or the entire division) is told upon what map the battle will occur and in what area he may place his troops. In a meeting engagement, there's not much choice, they go on an edge. A defender will have a lot of territory to choose from, but the attacker will be given enough room to maneuver. They will NOT start in sight of the enemy. In a set battle, both sides pre-occupy the same space for a turn, they MAY (read: probably) start in sight.

3. Excellent idea, although orders should make clear what should be done. I suppose a detached commander would have the option to act without orders or in defiance thereof. In fairness to your thought, detached DOES mean detached, so yes, I think this is a good suggestion.

4. I'm open to either a historic setting or an entirely fictional one. I just need a decent map. I agree with getting away form the East, although the farther west one goes, the different the lay of the land is. Once you get to the Mississippi, the land is pretty much flat for at least 1,000 miles until you reach the Rockies. However, this should really have no bearing on the campaign whatsoever. Note that I want to give players the chance to "create" their own brigades. That will be attractive to some. I think that might result in quite a mix with someone jumping on the "Stonewall Brigade" and so on. However, it will only be thus in name only, all units start the same and develop based on activity.

I am open to further development on this.

-Neal-

Sample umpire briefing to division/unit commander (proposed)

Time: It is 8:00 am.
Location: Just south of Digsbytown, game map Cavalry Field.
Environment: Visibility is 2,000 yards, 90F/33 C (very hot) and very humid. (Heat and humidity will be simulated by increased fatigue for the marching force.)
Relevant Intel: A picket has spotted haze on the northern horizon which he claims is consistent with multiple campfires.
A sympathetic villager says no newspapers or mail has come from the north for the past 24 hours despite it being a weekday.
This town has a telegraph with lines working to the south and east. The line to the north has not worked for three days.
END

At this time the commander has a bunch of options. He can try to telegraph his corps commander, which causes a delay of an hour or more.
He can continue marching, so his force will remain in road column on the map.
He can stop and deploy in accord with orders, whim, or to defend against a pending attack.

Each decision dictates his disposition should a battle occur. If a commander arrived at a space with the intention of continuing his march, he gets stuck in column and his deployment area is a road.

If he stopped to defend, he may get around half the map to deploy as desired.

If he has been stopped for a day or more, he will have the option of deploying on the best ground on the map. This will simulate fortification, digging in. The only problem I see in designing thus might be a need to ignore true compass direction at initial setup. (Union might end up attacking from the south so the Confederates can defend on the best ground--we just say it's north.)

I would suggest not giving players too many options to make further choices because this adds greatly to delay and slows the campaign down.

In my campaign (which in case anyone is wondering is now on hold due to lack of time on my part) each turn is 1 day and each player is a division commander and gives only 1 set of orders for that day for his units to move. At the end of the day a report of what he knows, either from personal observation or via couriers who had been sent by other players is all the information he has to act on for the next day.

Also division commanders may detach brigades (and even individual regiments and batteries) but these move only in response to orders sent by him which take a day to arrive, thus splitting up a division is possible but the detached elements tend to respond slowly.

N/A

Mr. Digby wrote:I would suggest not giving players too many options to make further choices because this adds greatly to delay and slows the campaign down.

In my campaign (which in case anyone is wondering is now on hold due to lack of time on my part) each turn is 1 day and each player is a division commander and gives only 1 set of orders for that day for his units to move. At the end of the day a report of what he knows, either from personal observation or via couriers who had been sent by other players is all the information he has to act on for the next day.

Also division commanders may detach brigades (and even individual regiments and batteries) but these move only in response to orders sent by him which take a day to arrive, thus splitting up a division is possible but the detached elements tend to respond slowly.

I'm down with all this, I just think in some cases orders can travel a bit more swiftly, if a telegraph is available. If I even have them. If so, they'll be plotted on the map and can be severed.

-N-

I'm going to brand this "The Western Campaign" and set it in the west. That much seems agreed upon!

I'd like to turn some subset of this map into a campaign map.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7d/ACW_Western_Theater_September_1861_-_April_1862.png

Is there anyone with some degree of skills? This map only gives a sense of the area to be involved. The actual map can be done in MS paint with an entirely different background. Anything works. :-)

Neal

Father General wrote:I just think in some cases orders can travel a bit more swiftly, if a telegraph is available.

You bring up an interesting issue. I thought about telegraph lines in my campaign but eventually decided against them. Firstly, they are really only useful, I'd have thought, to a static force since if the force is moving, couriers will be needed anyway to get from telegraph office to units and a general sending a message to a moving friendly component of his army won't necessarily know which telegraph office to send his orders to, so there's a risk the opponent could intercept it.

Secondly (and I plead ignorance here) I have really only read of telegraph communications being used in the ACW when whoever was commanding the Army of the Potomac at th etime, had to wire in his actions and report daily to Washington, so the politicians could interfere! I haven't heard of any instances of telegraphs being used betwen officers on campaign. I suspect this might be for 2 reasons - 1) the one mentioned above - things were too fluid, and 2) telegraph lines probably get cut, either by an enemy in your territory to deny them to you, or your forces in your own territory (that's being invaded) to do likewise to the enemy.

IIRC Ewell, in the Gettysburg campaign, had his divisions strung out all over the place from Chambersburg up to Harrisburg and a few points south, yet he seems to have issued orders to his divisions via riders and not via telegraph.

Also, just having everyone use horsemen keeps it simple and equal, another good wargaming reason to do that.

Father General wrote:I'd like to turn some subset of this map into a campaign map.

I could have a go but my maps tend to be very abstract and I would create a new nodal map on an Excel spreadsheet, like I did for my campaign, with only limited and semi-abstract geographic features on it to indicate terrain.

The map you link to covers a vast area. What kind of scale of distance between nodes would you be looking at?

Telegraphs that followed railroad lines were pretty standard. But that did not mean they were usually used by the armies. I will reconsider their use. For now, they are a detail, and one I might decide to omit for the sake of simplicity, if nothing else.

As far as the map goes, and to be perfectly frank, the one we have for you campaign was perfect. A map like that would be ideal for this campaign. Although I would like a railroad line passing through it. I want something that spurs both sides to act, not just a hunt-them-down on a strategic map. Both sides would have hidden strategic objectives and would have need to split their forces to cover them. Otherwise, we might just end up with a single, giant battle.

I would also like to limit supply and ammunition, making the commanders choose if they want to stay in a space to glean supplies, or take more territory to gain support (reinforcements) and ammunition from their war departments.

Since the territory will be mostly Confederate, the Union will need to do a bit more holding, posting brigades to various spot to maintain lines of communication. However, they will have more resources as the game progresses. The Confederates may start with better troops, but the quality and number of reinforcements will be much less. I want to start balanced, but impose historical circumstances to the greatest degree possible without terribly unbalancing the game.

Neal

-N-

[/quote] I could have a go but my maps tend to be very abstract and I would create a new nodal map on an Excel spreadsheet, like I did for my campaign, with only limited and semi-abstract geographic features on it to indicate terrain.

The map you link to covers a vast area. What kind of scale of distance between nodes would you be looking at?[/quote]

Yes, have a go if you like, I'd greatly appreciate it. Use the same distance as used on your map. No need to reinvent the wheel.

If you are considering a hex map approach then I'm happy to volunteer y services ;-)

http://www.mediafire.com/view/?a1wwpdkhls3i1w8

Also can draw features, eg rivers, railroads etc

Very nice work, Grog. Not sure if we want a hex map though. I think Neal was thinking more on the lines of a nodal map, like this:

http://www.atomic-album.com/showPic.php/22426/RoamawkValleySmall.jpg

FG - how about taking the Shenandoah valley and adding a network of nodes to it. We could make it a fictional place as well, somewhere in Kentucky or Tennessee.

Thank you Grog for the map. However, while a hex-based map would provide fine movements and such, it would also make the campaign unplayable from a practical standpoint, or threaten to at least. A nodal map is much simpler, provides fewer choices, and therefore fewer and faster decisions. We can also more easily specify which game map (battlefield) will correspond to each node, so players will know what to expect as far as terrain.

Rebranding the Shenandoah might work, I'm willing to give it a try.

Frankly, with the campaign being a new endeavor, I think simplicity is best. What you propose, Mr. Digby is reasonable, sound, and acceptable.

Thank you for your help!

Would you be able to draw the map? I'm not too swift when it comes to graphics, but I've got MS paint. LOL

-Neal

http://stonewall.hut.ru/images/shenandoah_map.gif

http://stonewall.hut.ru/images/140.gif

http://www.historyofwar.org/Maps/century_2_284_Shenandoah.gif

http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/h?ammem/gmd:@field%28NUMBER+@band%28g3882s+cw0654400%29%29

That last map is fantastic but can only be viewed offline with certain viewers (its .jp2 format). I use the XnView app

http://www.xnview.com

Once we have a nice map of the Valley we could superimpose nodes onto it in any scale you wanted, depending on how long each turn would be.

We could set the game in a fictional 1861 time period, before even Jackson made the Valley famous, and have some fun, fictional, very early war forces and commanders.

Mr. Digby wrote:http://stonewall.hut.ru/images/shenandoah_map.gif

http://stonewall.hut.ru/images/140.gif

http://www.historyofwar.org/Maps/century_2_284_Shenandoah.gif

http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/h?ammem/gmd:@field%28NUMBER+@band%28g3882s+cw0654400%29%29

That last map is fantastic but can only be viewed offline with certain viewers (its .jp2 format). I use the XnView app

http://www.xnview.com

Once we have a nice map of the Valley we could superimpose nodes onto it in any scale you wanted, depending on how long each turn would be.

We could set the game in a fictional 1861 time period, before even Jackson made the Valley famous, and have some fun, fictional, very early war forces and commanders.

Digby, I like the last map and was able to view it, but I'm worried about it being a bit busy.

I like: http://stonewall.hut.ru/images/140.gif

That one is clean and simple and relatively blank, which allows for imposition of nodes.

If we figure each turn is about 1 day, we can go from there.

-Neal

Father General wrote:I like: http://stonewall.hut.ru/images/140.gif

That one is clean and simple and relatively blank, which allows for imposition of nodes.

So do I. It's very much in period style.

As long as the umpire has the nodes marked, do the players even need to see them?

Martin

Thanks for the feedback fellas

Nodal map definitely the best option, especially with limited map options and if wanting to keep housekeeping down.

I would be very interested in joining the campaign, although my MP involvement would remain low and sporadic, for the foreseeable future. Will there be opportunity for 'occasional players' to join in?- even if they just play with a formation that has no history within the campaign.

BTW-If at any time in the future you or anyone else would like hexes put on a map then I will be willing to do this, it really doesnt take much time.

Grog wrote:Will there be opportunity for 'occasional players' to join in?- even if they just play with a formation that has no history within the campaign.

I think this is a very good idea. I can't see people specifically volunteering to command artillery so that will be a possibility and it'll always be the case that some players won't make some battles. I don't know how Neal plans to cover that but you could step in and take an absent players command or there could be a couple of anonymous brigades per division or corps that occasional players could take.