official campaign proposal

The anonymous brigade idea is a good one. We often have an unexpected player or two show up for a weekend game. I am also trying to entice a very good scenario writer to help create a few battles. He hasn't committed yet, but I am hopeful that a bit of silverware will seal the deal.

Uncle Billy wrote:The anonymous brigade idea is a good one. We often have an unexpected player or two show up for a weekend game. I am also trying to entice a very good scenario writer to help create a few battles. He hasn't committed yet, but I am hopeful that a bit of silverware will seal the deal.

To keep sides balanced, we can also add a unit to one side or the other as needed. This brigade can be used by visiting or guest players. It is my intention to have battles planned a week or two in advance.

-Neal

Father General wrote:

Uncle Billy wrote:The anonymous brigade idea is a good one. We often have an unexpected player or two show up for a weekend game. I am also trying to entice a very good scenario writer to help create a few battles. He hasn't committed yet, but I am hopeful that a bit of silverware will seal the deal.

To keep sides balanced, we can also add a unit to one side or the other as needed. This brigade can be used by visiting or guest players. It is my intention to have battles planned a week or two in advance.

-Neal

Erm... surely the point of fighting a camapign battle is to try your damnest to make the sides unbalanced?

Mr. Digby wrote:

Father General wrote:

Uncle Billy wrote:The anonymous brigade idea is a good one. We often have an unexpected player or two show up for a weekend game. I am also trying to entice a very good scenario writer to help create a few battles. He hasn't committed yet, but I am hopeful that a bit of silverware will seal the deal.

To keep sides balanced, we can also add a unit to one side or the other as needed. This brigade can be used by visiting or guest players. It is my intention to have battles planned a week or two in advance.

-Neal

Erm... surely the point of fighting a camapign battle is to try your damnest to make the sides unbalanced?

Yes, I can also see a potential restriction there. From my understanding the campaign is part of a on-going war, driven by the decisions of the corps commanders, movements on a map and results of the battles. There may be anonymous brigades in the OOB, but they cannot pop up or be ignored based on the number of available players.
So the campaign could very well result in some small and unbalanced battles. E.g. one side has 4 brigades and the other only 1. Then up to 5 players can play, others cannot, because their units are somewhere else or there aren't enough anonymous brigades present.

I would only consider anon brigades to balance the campaign at the start. There would be no "pop ups" during the campaign.

Generally, schedules being what they will, there should be some openings in every battle for someone to step into a unit.

If this is an issue, I won't let it break the campaign -- we can make adjustments. Now's the time to review questions and resolve rules before we officially start.

If everybody is opposed to anon units to balance the sides at the initial start, we won't do them.

If a corps commander makes a battle imbalanced for whatever reason, we will not intervene.

-Neal

Leffe7 wrote:So the campaign could very well result in some small and unbalanced battles. E.g. one side has 4 brigades and the other only 1. Then up to 5 players can play, others cannot, because their units are somewhere else or there aren't enough anonymous brigades present.

In the game I am umpiring I simply allow the extremely outnumbered side withdraw in those circumstances. I try to fight the battles that are 'uneven' but avoid fighting the ones that are massacres. 4 v 1 would be resolved on the map, 3 v 2 would be resolved in an MP game.

Digby, I think that is a good rule of thumb to follow. I will be stealing that.

And you can always roll a dice:

5 & 6 the outnumbered side gets away without casualties
3 & 4 ditto, with minor losses (1d6 %)
1 & 2 ditto, with more serious losses (2d6 %) and some POWs

Or something along those lines.

Neal, sent you another PM

Mr. Digby wrote:Neal, sent you another PM

Replying now.

:-)