General Campaign Discussion, Q&A, etc

I suppose you can detach a regiment. There may or may not be a human commander, depending on who you leave behind. I want you to be free to do as much as you can within the limits of the game. The more freedom you have the better the fog of war and surprise, which makes it interesting.

Neal

Many thanks to everyone involved in designing the whole campaign so far!
Here are some questions I came upon when reading the campaign ruleset.


Corps commander
- The corps commander is a character on the map and has to be moved like other units?

Couriers
- If the division is split up in several smaller and detached units. How is information (battle results, scouting information, free text, ...) transferred from detached units to the corps commander and other detached units. Is this simulated by couriers moving on the map?
- Are couriers auto-generated by the umpire or does the detached general need to write each one?
- If a courier passes through a node with an enemy unit, is it intercepted, delayed or forced to take a deroute?

Movement points
- Infantry 1 node, cavalry 2 nodes. What about artillery, Generals without troops (like corps/div commander), supplies and couriers?

Battles
- Can you be more precise on when a battle is fought in SOW and when not? I think I saw somewhere a rule like "if more than 3:1 then auto-win". This could make sense if a smaller unit stumbles onto a much larger enemy. But not if the smaller unit is waiting/entrenched. Then it could just fall back/retreat. Maybe cavalry is a factor to be considered and could prevent retreating.
- Is there a time limit on the battles in SOW?
- Currently the only result of a battle is the score achieved or one unit surrenders ("SOS"). I propose that a unit can also retreat from the battle after a certain amount of time has passed (1 hour?) and the unit is near one border of the map.
- For each node a SOW map is defined. I suggest we mark the connections to its adjacent nodes on each map.
- I assume all existing SOW maps are used. Players should consider this when playing this campaign.

Scouting
- LOS: Do units only see what is in their current node or the adjacent nodes too?
- If cavalry is scouting and sees an enemy army. Is it forced to fight a battle in SOW to see the enemy or is the information like enemy strength and unit IDs just generated by the umpire?

Detroy/Repair railway tracks
- I propose that repairing should take longer than destroying the tracks.

Version 4 of the map.

Changelog ( )

Added Cross Keys [32] and Centreville [36] nodes in the south central area.
Added road south from Cross Keys [32] to Port Republic [37], east from Turkeytown [24] to New Market [25] and east from Mount Olive [15] to Strasburg [16]
Added node names
Added where I consider a modest water barrier lies betwen a road that enters or leaves a node and the centre of the node. This would be something like Antietam Creek or Rock Creek on the Culps/Mac maps.
Renumbered nodes in the south.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I would suggest that if the corps commander is 1 or 2 nodes away from the battle, he be allowed to participate in it. With the potential of 8 brigades plus cav plus arty, the division commander will be hard pressed to competently fight a battle. The corps commander could act as a 2nd division commander if need be. If the corps commander is more than 2 nodes away, he can observe the battle but may not communicate with anyone on the field.

I would think that messages between the forward elements and HQ regardless of distance would arrive within 12 hr. I believe the valley is 200 X 40 mi at its maximum. A relay of couriers would easily cross that distance.

Oh gosh, this will be some work! LOL

I had a VERY hectic day, rather exceptional, so I have very little time to make, but I will do the best I can.

1. Corps Commander may certainly move, but he does not command in battle. He may also remain in the rear any number of spaces. I know this is not very kreigsspiel, but there's a reason why I prefer it to be this way the first time around. He's not getting captured or killed. It would create all kinds of headache.

2. Couriers - Communications in this game, on the campaign map, will be very direct and simple. With forums and TS chat, it's difficult to keep people unaware of their mutual movements and so on. The best we can do as per fog of war is keep the sides separated.

The goal of this campaign is to actually get people acquainted and to work out the kinks of a dynamic campaign system. Kreigsspiel offers an excellent, yet challenging ruleset for newcomers. I'd like to keep this campaign "Kreigsspiel lite" (as we'd say in the US) and introduce real KS in the second go around. This is to minimize complication and variables to the greatest degree. Don't get me wrong, I LOVE me some KS rules, but as a green KS umpire, I need to walk before I run. That goes for the newbies on here too. On the other hand, if there were a KS certified/qualified umpire willing to take the reins, I'd be all in favor of that. This campaign is a learning experience for all of us. We'll work our way up to perfection as quickly as possible, please bear with me!

In the meantime, I did the following mental gymnastics to account for couriers getting through: The distances on the map are so small, couriers or telegraphs would provide critical information to the Corps commander within several hour's time. A man on a horse could probably cross the valley lengthwise within a couple days.

If a unit is surrounded by the enemy, it will not officially be able to communicate.

Artillery movement 1 node. In reality they could often keep pace with cavalry, but not right now - staying simple.

I would like to see horse artillery in the game. Maybe a few howitzers can be attached? Maybe say the howitzer guns get 2 movement as a compromise. It'd be up to the corps commander to split the arty command.

I agree on the units may retreat. There must be one hour of game time elapsed and the units must be at the map's edge. The commander may signal via game chat to all sides, "RRR" which will signal a general retreat. Screencap this and dump the file. We will assume the retreating unit was able to get out of rifle range, if not much farther. They may be pursued. Casualties sustained during fighting at the map edge while waiting for that hour to elapse will be considered rear-guard action casualties. No casualties will return to a unit that retreats, those men are left behind/captured.

SOW maps will be assigned to nodes. This almost happened tonight, but life interfered in a hard way. It's high on my priority list.

All battles 2 hours minimum, unless both sides start in sight, then 90 minutes (but only if) the two sides are less than a division (brigade v brigade) otherwise, 2 hours. Did that make sense?
All battles 2 hours.
Exception: Brigade vs brigade beginning in sight, then 90 mins.
This may need to be tweaked further.

LOS = current node only.

Cavalry may see a unit if it shares a node, but can retreat more quickly. They can always retreat before battle in the face of infantry. This will usually be resolved on the campaign map. No battle required if Cavalry declines. A die roll will determine the level of intel gathered. A high die roll (6) will guarantee accurate information, but the cav will be observed and the other side will know it. I'll list the rule/results once I've had time to properly consider this.

2 turns to repair tracks, but that's it. They're already spending a rail capacity resource to do the repair as it is.

I hope this helps!

-Neal

Leffe7 wrote:Many thanks to everyone involved in designing the whole campaign so far!
Here are some questions I came upon when reading the campaign ruleset.


Corps commander
- The corps commander is a character on the map and has to be moved like other units?

Couriers
- If the division is split up in several smaller and detached units. How is information (battle results, scouting information, free text, ...) transferred from detached units to the corps commander and other detached units. Is this simulated by couriers moving on the map?
- Are couriers auto-generated by the umpire or does the detached general need to write each one?
- If a courier passes through a node with an enemy unit, is it intercepted, delayed or forced to take a deroute?

Movement points
- Infantry 1 node, cavalry 2 nodes. What about artillery, Generals without troops (like corps/div commander), supplies and couriers?

Battles
- Can you be more precise on when a battle is fought in SOW and when not? I think I saw somewhere a rule like "if more than 3:1 then auto-win". This could make sense if a smaller unit stumbles onto a much larger enemy. But not if the smaller unit is waiting/entrenched. Then it could just fall back/retreat. Maybe cavalry is a factor to be considered and could prevent retreating.
- Is there a time limit on the battles in SOW?
- Currently the only result of a battle is the score achieved or one unit surrenders ("SOS"). I propose that a unit can also retreat from the battle after a certain amount of time has passed (1 hour?) and the unit is near one border of the map.
- For each node a SOW map is defined. I suggest we mark the connections to its adjacent nodes on each map.
- I assume all existing SOW maps are used. Players should consider this when playing this campaign.

Scouting
- LOS: Do units only see what is in their current node or the adjacent nodes too?
- If cavalry is scouting and sees an enemy army. Is it forced to fight a battle in SOW to see the enemy or is the information like enemy strength and unit IDs just generated by the umpire?

Detroy/Repair railway tracks
- I propose that repairing should take longer than destroying the tracks.

FG, I would appreciate it if you'd read my earlier set of Roamoak Valley rules and comment. We are somewhat reinventing the wheel here. Everything is covered in those.

The KS umpire resolves battles, that's his main function, so as the battles are SoW games that part does not apply.

In my campaign, all comms between players was done by e-mail so everyone was in the dark as to what was going on apart from the reports the umpire gave him of what his personality could see/be aware of and the couriers that criss-crossed the map carrying messages from other players.

I did consider using forums but as they will kill the fog of war (which is the one element essential to a Kriegspiel) I didn't use them.

I urge you not to use the forums for strategic and tactical courier messages and reports. Every player on one side will instantly see all information and the Kriegspiel factor is lost at once.

I was working on the assumption you'd use the same system here - messages between players would be by courier and sent via the umpire by forum PM or e-mail and the actual forums would contain only the public knowledge the side as a whole would have.

Mr. Digby wrote:In my campaign, all comms between players was done by e-mail so everyone was in the dark as to what was going on apart from the reports the umpire gave him of what his personality could see/be aware of and the couriers that criss-crossed the map carrying messages from other players.

I did consider using forums but as they will kill the fog of war (which is the one element essential to a Kriegspiel) I didn't use them.

I urge you not to use the forums for strategic and tactical courier messages and reports. Every player on one side will instantly see all information and the Kriegspiel factor is lost at once.

I was working on the assumption you'd use the same system here - messages between players would be by courier and sent via the umpire by forum PM or e-mail and the actual forums would contain only the public knowledge the side as a whole would have.

I just wanted to raise the question. I am more than happy if we start with a simplified version in this campaign and add more features later in following campaigns.
I also think the splitting of units into regiments and differentiation of artillery into horse/foot artillery should be skipped.

I would keep it simple.
Infantry, cavalry and artillery and couriers have their own range of motion.
One should not fall into the artillery mounted and not mounted.


Later, one can add new rules.

Greeting Thomas

Leffe7 wrote:I also think the splitting of units into regiments and differentiation of artillery into horse/foot artillery should be skipped.

I'm all about the simple approach. However, I do like the notion of allowing it. So far there seems to be two asking that it be omitted in the inaugural campaign. Any other voices on the topic before I solidify the rule?

-Neal

Mr. Digby wrote:FG, I would appreciate it if you'd read my earlier set of Roamoak Valley rules and comment. We are somewhat reinventing the wheel here. Everything is covered in those.

The KS umpire resolves battles, that's his main function, so as the battles are SoW games that part does not apply.

In my campaign, all comms between players was done by e-mail so everyone was in the dark as to what was going on apart from the reports the umpire gave him of what his personality could see/be aware of and the couriers that criss-crossed the map carrying messages from other players.

I did consider using forums but as they will kill the fog of war (which is the one element essential to a Kriegspiel) I didn't use them.

I urge you not to use the forums for strategic and tactical courier messages and reports. Every player on one side will instantly see all information and the Kriegspiel factor is lost at once.

I was working on the assumption you'd use the same system here - messages between players would be by courier and sent via the umpire by forum PM or e-mail and the actual forums would contain only the public knowledge the side as a whole would have.

Digby, sent you PM regarding the ruleset.

At first, all commanders will be in the same place, so forum discussion will be a simple matter and entirely legal. Once commanders get into the field, they must send me orders for their units. I pass those orders onwards based on a number of factors. Generally speaking, except in extreme circumstances, those orders should make it.

There is a proposal to restrict campaign discussion, consistent with KS style play and to ensure fog of war, on the table. Does anyone have a problem with me handling all messages between commanders in different nodes? If not, then all messages to commanders in different nodes must be through me.

I'll probably set up a dedicated email for that.

Thoughts?

-Neal

Friedrich wrote:I would keep it simple.
Infantry, cavalry and artillery and couriers have their own range of motion.
One should not fall into the artillery mounted and not mounted.

What I usually do is attach artillery to divisions. If it's an infantry division, it's foot artillery and moves at infantry speed, if it's a cavalry division it automatically becomes horse artillery and moves at cavalry speed.

This is on the map.

On the battlefield all artillery moves at the same speed.

Father General wrote:

Leffe7 wrote:I also think the splitting of units into regiments and differentiation of artillery into horse/foot artillery should be skipped.

I'm all about the simple approach. However, I do like the notion of allowing it. So far there seems to be two asking that it be omitted in the inaugural campaign. Any other voices on the topic before I solidify the rule?

I have no problem with brigades detaching regiments and artillery asets detaching batteries on the map. Of course the units would have to respond to orders sent from brigade or division HQ so there would be delays in having then respond.

Currently the batteries are attached to their divisions. I like Digby's suggestion. Let's use that.

-Neal

Mr. Digby wrote:

Friedrich wrote:I would keep it simple.
Infantry, cavalry and artillery and couriers have their own range of motion.
One should not fall into the artillery mounted and not mounted.

What I usually do is attach artillery to divisions. If it's an infantry division, it's foot artillery and moves at infantry speed, if it's a cavalry division it automatically becomes horse artillery and moves at cavalry speed.

This is on the map.

On the battlefield all artillery moves at the same speed.

Father General wrote:

Leffe7 wrote:I also think the splitting of units into regiments and differentiation of artillery into horse/foot artillery should be skipped.

I'm all about the simple approach. However, I do like the notion of allowing it. So far there seems to be two asking that it be omitted in the inaugural campaign. Any other voices on the topic before I solidify the rule?

I have no problem with brigades detaching regiments and artillery asets detaching batteries on the map. Of course the units would have to respond to orders sent from brigade or division HQ so there would be delays in having then respond.