A Command Game I'd Really Like to Try

[[GG]AndrewKent]

A 4v4 with one player on each team designated as the commander.

The commander would only take a general, or maybe a general and a light cav.

The commander could concentrate on the big picture and give orders accordingly.

One small thing to work out would be the need to make sure the commander didn't start out in the central deployment zone. At least I don't think that would be desirable.

I would enjoy both playing as the commander and also playing as a subordinate in this version of a command game. I think it would be very enjoyable to have someone who could do nothing but concentrate on the battle and direct troop movements.

The commanding general could get reports from his subordinates and could also move around the map to view different areas of the battlefield.

Can we try this sometime?

AndrewKent

[[GG]Salis De Silver]

ohhh...I like that

[[GG]Lord von Döbeln]

Sounds very interesting. And I think a cav unit (something like hussars) as extra body guard and scouts for the general would be good - something to hold off approaching enemy units while the general runs awa... sorry makes a hasty tactical retreat, and something to use for scouting without putting the general in too much danger.

LvD

[[GG]Salis De Silver]

gets even better... yeah 2 hussar units for scouting and maybe a dragoon unit for the body guard.

[[GG] Barrett]

and that leaves one player for cav, other for line and light, and other for guard and art?
sounds real nice, yeah!

[[GG]AndrewKent]

Glad to hear that others think this might be fun.

I had thought of having more than one general, so that the player could have eyes on several parts of the battlefield, but the more I considered it, the better I liked the idea of just having one general so that the player would have to position him to get the best vantage point, or move to trouble spots, and also to have to rely on reports from subordinates.

If a light cav was attached to the general, I'd like to see it grouped with the general and move with the general.

Fog of war and all that...

AK

[[GG]Lord von Döbeln]

Sure a "nothing-other-than-bodyguard-unit" would be cool, restricting the view of the CnC as you say AK. I'd very much like to try it.

LvD

[[GG]SirDabrowski]

Actually, I think with the new line options that will become available, that we could have a Line Commander, Light Commander, and then a Guard Commander.

But I REALLY like this idea! It'd be interesting to play as the Commander. Let's try this in a game this weekend, gents.

[[GG]Lord von Döbeln]

And Cav sir D??

LvD

[[GG]SirDabrowski]

Cav doesn't exist, you know that.

Okay, Guard/Light, then Cav. If you insist on needing your worthless Cavalry....

[[GG] Lord Ashram]

Hm computer ate up this afternoons response.

I like the idea.

A few thoughts...

First, maybe overall commanders would be allowed to use the minimap but others would be?

Also, should this sort of game be command style by commander (a cav general, a line general, and a guard/light general?) or should each subordinate commander have a force equally divided among types of troops? Think about how this would affect the game; if we played command style, the subordinate officers would have men all over the field and could see everything without the commander. Personally, I think non command is better for this sort of thing, as it reduces the individual commanders ability to see the entire battlefield.

Also, maybe no voice should be allowed? Again, if everyone has voice, it might make coordination too easy. Or maybe just the commander in chief would be allowed to talk (honor system obviously?) That way we could introduce some miscommunication and also make the supreme commander far easier to listen to and to trust, while bringing in some difficulties for the subordinates to both type and listen and react and still be able to communicate effectively. I think this would be the best way.

Finally, which game would be best for this? I think maybe AWI would be INCREDIBLE for this, as the British commander tries to effectively keep three commands together and communicating through all those woods, while the American commander tries to keep everyone moving and fighting. Maybe try it on NTW first tho:)

Anyway, would love to try it this upcoming weekend.



Ash

[[GG]AndrewKent]

Mini-map... I almost never use it and really wish they had given hosts a way to turn it off. Game is more fun/realistic without it. I wouldn't require that anyone turn it off because there is really no way to enforce this.

Would like to see it be command style, but could work either way.

I like the idea of no voice. Fog of war is better represented without voice comms. Heck, even the instant messages we can type give us better comms than the era commanders would have had.

AK

ashram said:

First, maybe overall commanders would be allowed to use the minimap but others would be?

Also, should this sort of game be command style by commander (a cav general, a line general, and a guard/light general?) or should each subordinate commander have a force equally divided among types of troops? Think about how this would affect the game; if we played command style, the subordinate officers would have men all over the field and could see everything without the commander. Personally, I think non command is better for this sort of thing, as it reduces the individual commanders ability to see the entire battlefield.

Also, maybe no voice should be allowed? Again, if everyone has voice, it might make coordination too easy. Or maybe just the commander in chief would be allowed to talk (honor system obviously?) That way we could introduce some miscommunication and also make the supreme commander far easier to listen to and to trust, while bringing in some difficulties for the subordinates to both type and listen and react and still be able to communicate effectively. I think this would be the best way.

Finally, which game would be best for this? I think maybe AWI would be INCREDIBLE for this, as the British commander tries to effectively keep three commands together and communicating through all those woods, while the American commander tries to keep everyone moving and fighting. Maybe try it on NTW first tho:)

Anyway, would love to try it this upcoming weekend.



Ash

[[GG]Salis De Silver]

Be great...each commander has his orders and objectives at the beginning of the game and can only change those orders if ordered to...or are under direct attack


Should be good

[[GG]Lord von Döbeln]

I agree that here should be no voice at all. I mean orders where written and dispatched with riders, so there SHOULD be a delay, at least as long as it takes to type orders. And then there is the chance of someone missing the order on the screen = courier has been killed or captured! Don't get me wrong I love voice, but it's not the most realistic way to do Napoleonic warfare is it... ;D

I'd like to try both versions - i.e. subordinate generals have complete force and "command game" style with one line, one lights etc. Even though the subordinate commanders might be able to see all over the battlefield the CnC won't and still has to base his decisions on written reports, so I think both versions could work nicely.

LvD

[[GG]AndrewKent]

Yes, as I thought it over, it might be best to have subordinates have complete force, but command style might be worth a try.

Is there any way to know who will start in what positions?

Ideally, in a command game, you'd have control over which deployment areas different commanders were placed in.

AK