Re: AAR - ACW Valley Campaign Held 21st Feb 2009 UK - Woodford

[nichtstadt]

Well, I've pressed Post Reply which means you have to copy and paste the subject in the message template but does not include your text - in effect twice.

The question as to how you present information to a player - whether intelligence or anything else - depends,in my view, entirely on who the player is representing. If he is on his own then the information should be a synthesis presented by his staff whereas if you had separate players for the staff officers then, in the case of intelligence, you provide them with raw data.

Nichtstadt

[Martin]

The technical ways of this forum are sometimes a bit peculiar, aren't they. I'm starting to get the hang of it, but still find some things a bit counter-intuitive.

Re intel, I see your rationale Andy, and cannot fault it historically. I think I would be less rigid in my interpretation though in 2 cases:

1) Where a player is on his own in the game, but in an force where there is no trained staff. Say as commander of an 1861 ACW volunteer force, where I might give the raw intel to simulate the lack of staff capability to interpret & synthesise.

2) As a game device to keep players fully occupied. My feeling is that in a k/spiel we do not represent many of the tasks which fill a commander's day. Some of these are matters of routine, and many involve discussion with subordinates. From my own experience in business, much of this is necessary (though not all), but in any event it's very time-consuming, and difficult to avoid.

In a typical k/spiel a player is on his own, and without players representing staff, regimental and battalion commanders, to constantly refer to him for authority to do this or that, clarification of his intentions, moral support etc etc. It seems to me that giving him the raw intel to piece together may quite neatly fill that gap. Of course it does then mean he is operating at more that one level of seniority. But I am prepared to live with that abstraction, if it means that time does not weigh heavily on him, which I always feel is the greatest sin.

Martin

[nichtstadt]

Well, I can't fault your reasoning there, Martin. The other reason that you might want to give a player raw intelligence is that if there are not 'staff players' to collate it then umpires have to do it and you may be short of them!

As ever it comes down to a question of game design. To go back to the beginning, however, I think that it is worth thinking about how to reflect different levels of skill in staffs and other services. We are used to doing so for the combat ability or morale of the troops they command but is just as important to do so for staff, logistics, recce and so on.

Nichtstadt

[Martin]

"Well, I can't fault your reasoning there, Martin. The other reason that you might want to give a player raw intelligence is that if there are not 'staff players' to collate it then umpires have to do it and you may be short of them!"

Very true

"As ever it comes down to a question of game design. To go back to the beginning, however, I think that it is worth thinking about how to reflect different levels of skill in staffs and other services. We are used to doing so for the combat ability or morale of the troops they command but is just as important to do so for staff, logistics, recce and so on."

Good point. If circumstances warrant, you could give one side the raw data and the other the staff view for instance.

Martin

[MuseOfLife]

You can convert these jp2 files to jpg and thence convert to an A4 paged pdf file as follows:

7) Download & install pdf creator

A lot of pdf creators do not support 64-bit OS. Today I have discovered new PDF Creator. It works ok on my 64-bit XP.

[Ike]

Absolutely wonderful AAR! The contents were utterly fascinating and encourage me more than ever to continue with my K-S endeavors!! The presentation itself was highly professional and easily understood. It may be an artifact of age and poor vision, but the order of battle page was difficult to make out. The balance - maps, progress reports, commander/staff actions and thinking, were both readable and highly entertaining!

On the question of grading intelligence reports, giving the human player the raw intel take is a good idea, even if there are more than one player per side. I've played in campaign games using various computer game programs and "map movement, miniature battles" campaigns and one common factor is that the sides will (ought?) to organize themselves into both command and staff functions. That is, "Bob, you will command 1st Division while Ted and Herb will be your Brigade O/C's; John will take 2nd Division with George and Fred as Brigadiers; Arthur, you've got the Cavalry Division with Ralph and George-2 as your Brigadiers. Alfred, you're Corps Commander." Then, tell Alfred privately that he needs to organize a staff of at least a G-2 (intel) and G-4 (logistics) for the campaign, as maintaining supply flow will be critical and the intel will be presented in the form of raw field reports from subordinates' units, spies and other sources. Then, use an average die for reliability with 2 = highly accurate, 3 = high, 4 = low, 5 = utterly wrong. If you'd like another roll after the 3 or 4 results: 3 = 10% off, 4 = 20% off, 5 = 50% off; after a "5", either some completely fictitious report or make up a chart with various likely fictions already prepared and roll against the chart.

In my solo, non-K-S campaigns, I use the personalization rules following the examples of Henry Hyde and Tony Bath, and give my field officers numerical values for various traits and abilities and use those numbers to determine how reliable their intel is, whether they implement their orders promptly, how and if they respond to field situations which are quite different from the initial briefing and orders, and similar situations. In solo campaigns and battles, of course one must use such expedients, but I have found them to be quite useful in taking control of the battle and/or campaign out of my hands and giving it a life of its own. An adaptation of something of this sort might help with qualifying intel and other staff work - e.g., how long does it take General Santa Ana's staff to organize a movement from San Antonio de Bexar toward the Trinity River, in pursuit of General Sam Houston's retreating Texican forces? I suspect that I shall continue to use such reaction charts/tables in my solo K-S.

[Martin]

Some excellent ideas there Ike. Running a game for several players over a few hours limits the amount of this sort of stuff you can include, because the umpires normally have their hands full keeping the game moving. Although I think we should do more than we currently do on this sort of thing.

Have you thought about running an email k/spiel? If you went for say 2 turns per week, or whatever, you would have more time to work through all this stuff and do it justice.

Regards

Martin

[Ike]

I have given some thought to a multi-player K-S, via emails or a forum, and limiting the turns is a straight-foward way to reduce referee burn-out and stress, as well as giving time to introduce various complexities; logistics comes to mind. Right now, however, the goal is to become proficient with the K-S rules themselves both as a referee and a player. Once comfortable with K-S, considering various ways to use it as the tactical rules set in a larger campaign context - easiest of course is just a lot of K-S scaled maps as with the Metz maps - and I'll be doing a fair amount of solo-gaming to reach that point. Once there, I can begin to work out details and see what rules etc would usefully transfer from solo to multi gaming. There's the possibility of using Cyberboard, or Skype in conjunction with some other online "whiteboard" program, there are a couple of FRPG programs out there which might be useful ... forums, emails, oh! my! But I must walk before I can run.

[Martin]

Best of luck whichever way you go.

Martin

[Ike]

Thank you, sir, and I'll try to post here from time to time with AAR's and "lessons-learned" and perhaps a link to a photo or two.

[Martin]

I shall look forward to it most excellent Ike

m