"Strategic Campaign"

[Garnier]

I've been making a very simple campaign system, hence my absence from teamspeak the past few days. I think it's playable at this point, hopefully tomorrow evening someone will want to do a test run. (It's not released yet).

I also wrote some code to convert the SOW master OOBs into divisions for GCM, so we can use historical OOBs for this kind of mini-campaign, for a change.

To see what it's like you can run the GCM Launcher and click Game -> Load Campaign, and select the test game. You won't be able to play it though.



The main idea for rules would be that there are two players who are actually playing the campaign, handling the strategic part through the launcher and leading in battle. Anyone else who wants to be in the battle would offer to help one of the players, and that player would decide what to let him command in the battle, no one would be obligated to take part. Obviously it will depend on these two players to make it work.

[SamSmith]

Is each region a different battle map?

Would the two primary players be moving pieces on the strategic map resulting in "zoomed-in" engagements when two opposing pieces ended up in the same region?

How much control can you exercise over the armies' starting position when those engagements happen?

Very cool idea.

[Garnier]

Those are a few of the enormous number of questions that will come up.

1. No, we can't make maps yet so we're limited to the current maps.
2. Yes, though of course there are a lot of rules built in for this.
3. None. If you are attacking, the enemy starts somewhere close to the middle of the map with 6 objectives, and you start closer to one side. If it's a meeting engagement or both sides started in the same region, then both will have equal number of objectives. This uses fixed scenarios so there's less luck involved. Means there's less variety of setups, but you can predict where you'll be when you attack so you don't make an attack, notice you were unlucky, and just not fight.

Both commanders move their divisions simultaneously, and submit their moves. Once both sides have submitted their moves, the battle phase is entered, and you get to see where the divisions ended up. Battles are fought in a certain order (given to you automatically). Retreats are also handled automatically.

[giob60]

How many people will be able to be involved in?I mean,more than two as multiplayers?
Will it take in consideration lost men in followed battles?

[Garnier]

How many people will be able to be involved in?I mean,more than two as multiplayers?

Anyone who the two "players" offer troops to could be in a battle. Only two will actually do the strategic moves in the launcher.

Will it take in consideration lost men in followed battles?

Yes, you record the battles as normal so the divisions involved lose men.

[SamSmith]

So how will you build the strategic map? Will you move south from PPT to the Culp's Hill map, for example? I saw someone mention a possibility of cordoning off a section of the battle map, so would you divide up the larger Gettysburg Map?

[Garnier]

I'll probably just somewhat randomly assign map [areas] to the different regions on the campaign map. The objectives and start positions and map used in a region will not change or be randomized during the campaign, so you'll be able to plan strategy around them.

[InferiorBaton]

WOW! This seems very interesting! I should be on close to all weekend, so if this gets tried out I want to see it.

[Garnier]

I've spent every free moment this week working on it, every time I think "now it's ready to try" I think of some more critical things that should be changed. We'll see!

[Garnier]

It's nearing readiness. Stuff may still come up, but I don't have anything on my list right now, I'm just piecing together an OOB for it.