Battle with four corps per side
Purpose of Command and Control Rules
My problem with the role of
the Army Commander has caused me to reconsider what I want to achieve with
Command and Control rules. I have used
them since I wrote my “house rules” about ten years ago. They were derived from LFS, and have changed
little.
This week I have tried to
“tinker” with those rules, but found that I created more problems than I
solved. So I have decided to reconsider
the whole concept of Command and Control.
In my games I have two levels
of commander. There is one army
commander and up to four corps commanders.
The main purpose of my Command and Control rules is to prevent the corps
commander reacting too quickly to something which is happening outside his zone
of control.
At the start of a move a poker
chip is placed in a box for each army and corps commander. They are drawn one at a time and this
determines the sequence of activation of all commanders.
At present we use Command
Points (CP) to restrict the number of orders any commander can issue each
turn. I like this system because it is
easy to understand and keep track of.
Role of Army Commander
He commands between one and
four corps commanders
I want him to restrict the
range of options open to the corps commanders.
His orders confirm the
objective and area of operations of each corps commander
They also confirm whether the
corps should hold, move, engage, attack or retreat
Only he can change this
stance.
Role of Corps Commander
He commands four infantry
brigades, one cavalry brigade and corps artillery brigade
Infantry brigades use column,
line and square formations. They also skirmish,
volley fire and have hand to hand combat.
I want to restrict the zone of
command to ensure that all brigades remain within 8” of the corps commander.
I want to make command more
difficult as brigades suffer casualties and loss of morale.
Current Problem
The role of the Army Commander
is in keeping with the historical role.
However it does not transfer well to the wargames table.
The Army Commander performs
well when there are only one or two corps on the table. By keeping the two corps relatively close he
can move to either within one move and change their orders.
But as the numbers of corps
increase to three or four this becomes much more difficult. It can take two or even three moves for him
to reach a corps commander. In a game
which lasts a maximum of twelve moves this is too long, particularly for an
attacking army.
I need to redefine the role of
both types of commander to ensure that there is the required delay in reacting
to change of circumstances, but not so much that it slows down the game too
much.
I want to keep the general
outline of the command and control as at present. But I have to find a way to allow the corps
commander to react within one, or at most two, moves.
I also want to find a more
useful role for the Army Commander. At
present he spends the whole game riding around the battlefield playing “catch
up”
C&C is always an issue.
ReplyDeletePerhaps instead of always moving the commander, rate each general as, let' say 2 for average, 3 for more for superior, 1 for poor. 1 pt allows a general to move OR to issue an order to a corps commander who is close, 2 points would allow an order to go to a corps commander who is far away.
Thus a superior commander could issue an order to a nearby corps commander and another to one far away etc while a poor one will be very constrained.
Hi Ross
ReplyDeleteThanks for your suggestion.
I already have a points system for commanders which makes it easier for a Gifted commander to issue orders and more difficult for a Poor commander to act on them.
But the real problem is one of distance on the table. It is 6 foot wide and the general can only move 16" each move. I could allow longer move distance for the general, but that is very difficult to justify.
Or I could change the orders a corps commander can issue, so that he does not have to wait for his orders to arrive. But that defeats the purpose of command and control rules, which is to stop the corps commaner doing whatever he wants whenever he wants.
I think the answer will be to adjust the balance between the Army and the Corps commander. But there has to be some sort of penalty for the corps commander.
regards
Paul
Paul,
ReplyDeleteSorry for contacting you this way, but I don't have your email address on my PC.
With luck I should be publishing THE PORTABLE NAPOLEONIC WARGAME in the very near future, and I’d love to send you a copy. Please could you send me your postal address so that I can post one to you as soon as it comes out.
All the best,
Bob Cordery
Hi Bob
ReplyDeleteThat is very kind of you, I would love to have a copy
But I don't have your email address
Could you send it to me at
paulleniston@hotmail.com
Look forward to hearing from you
Paul