JasonC Posted April 14, 2005 Share Posted April 14, 2005 I mentioned in passing on another thread that I've been working on setting up a CMx10 campaign on a corner of the battle of Kursk. For the purists, semi-historical rather than historical, incidentally. Adam-L has said he is interested, but one player does not make a campaign. So I am looking for others. If there is enough interest we will do it. I first need two players willing to act as side commanders. That means deciding which parts of the overall force go together into tactical forces, go where on the operational map, etc. No spreadsheets to fill out. You just move CM units around in the scenario editor and send me the resulting map of your proposed moves, along with an email stating the intention (in case of collisions etc). When I have both, I make the moves and report collisions, which become battles. Quick maps, nothing elaborately perfected. The terrain type for the map generation is determined by the terrain in the operational grid square etc. Both sides then need to assign a side commander for each tactical battle and resolve them, reporting the results in an AAR sent to me and their own side. (TCP-IP is preferred for speed). When the fights are resolved (or if there weren't any), I make a new operational map and send to both side commanders, the clock advances 2 hours (or more at night), and on we go. Given RL time commitments, I can't promise the speediest campaign in human history. If for any reason I can't continue at some point, I will make files available etc so the campaign can. But we will get battles out of it, they will hang together, losing men and equipment will have lasting consequences, etc. The (semi) historical setting is the left wing of the southern German attack. Common intel is somewhat restricted, but the fight commences with portions of the German 3rd Panzer division attacking the forward Russian infantry regiment in the area. Side commanders will get much more detailed briefings and an operational map, in the form of a scenario file. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted April 14, 2005 Author Share Posted April 14, 2005 No problem, then you have one. Against who? (I can't command, I have to referee - I know both sides etc). Any takers? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandy Posted April 14, 2005 Share Posted April 14, 2005 Hi Jason, Very interested in participating, please. Happy to play either side. Sandy 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chiavarm Posted April 14, 2005 Share Posted April 14, 2005 I would be interested in participating if I could play PBEM. I prefer TCP/IP, but I can only commit to a PBEM game. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brent Pollock Posted April 14, 2005 Share Posted April 14, 2005 Me, unless "sandy" was wanting a strategic role instead of a tactical one. It sounds like grand fun, but I only do PBEM, not TCP, so I might as well do the strategic stuff. Russians, please. Originally posted by JasonC: No problem, then you have one. Against who? (I can't command, I have to referee - I know both sides etc). Any takers? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DasNoogie Posted April 14, 2005 Share Posted April 14, 2005 Hi, I can do TCP/IP's on friday nights and saturdays. gary 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xipe66 Posted April 14, 2005 Share Posted April 14, 2005 Very interested in participating too, won't mind helping out with "paperwork" either if that should be needed. Not a top notch player though (only played a few times online, but a veteran against the computer - I fear this experience will prove nothing online again though) so maybe I can be given - if a seat at all - lower echelon troops with subpar commander. I can play most of the week but am in europe (GMT+1) so 09:00-02:00 (GMT) works best. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted April 14, 2005 Author Share Posted April 14, 2005 We will certainly need a number of tactical commanders. On past experience, even when 4-6 sign up per side it can be non-trivial to get a player for each tactical fight at a scheduled time. Adam is going to be one of the side commanders because he explicitly asked for it, and because I know him (lol) and know he will do a good job. He hasn't picked a side. I'm reluctant to nominate the other side commander yet, but I'm willing to be overruled if everyone just wants to get started. Michael Dorosh, if you read this thread, we once had a set of Kursk fights planned that didn't pan out (because you got more interested in AK etc). If you want in on this one, you'd be welcome. I will post a strategic map, since that is common intel. And give people another day to express interest. Then I send out briefings. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted April 14, 2005 Author Share Posted April 14, 2005 Here are some views of the operational map. The view from Gertsovka The view from Hill 247 The view from Cherkasskoe 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booz Posted April 15, 2005 Share Posted April 15, 2005 Jason, if still room, I would like to be included 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brent Pollock Posted April 15, 2005 Share Posted April 15, 2005 Very funky - what are you trying to represent with a single tile of track? Originally posted by JasonC: Here are some views of the operational map. The view from Gertsovka 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigduke6 Posted April 15, 2005 Share Posted April 15, 2005 Does the side commander get to think about air and artillery? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platehead Posted April 15, 2005 Share Posted April 15, 2005 Count me in, preferably as a junior tactical commander on the Allied side but willing to take on any role needed. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted April 15, 2005 Author Share Posted April 15, 2005 There is room for all as tactical commanders. BigDuke - about arty definitely. Air won't be easily coordinated, it will mostly just happen, with minimal information about it and occasional spotty coordination. The operational commander tasks his arty fires, assigning FOs to subunits. He forms battlegroups by mixing his operational units in the portions he sees fit, ordering them to the sector he sees fit etc. Arty is represented on the operational map by a unit for the battery itself and an FO for its fire assignment. All batteries are rated in rounds per day, 1-3 modules worth. They can fire operationally at targets not engaged in tactical fights, for counterbattery e.g. - I resolve those myself. Operational ranges are simplified but the right scale - 10 km for div arty, 5 km for intermediate stuff like infantry guns, heavy mortars, and rockets, 2 km for light mortars. Attackers have to use dedicated support, by specifying the company HQ that gets the FO (just locate the FO next to that HQ, "in command" aka red line). You can also assign a battery to general support of a battalion, and it will support some portion of it that is engaged if any unit of it is attacked. All very straightforward, no spreadsheets to keep. The rounds per day stuff is written right in the unit name, as are vehicle, gun, or squad strengths for maneuver units etc. Bigduke, are you interested in operational command? That would be fine by me - it would be Adam vs. you with the others as tactical commanders for each of you. Somebody has to start expressing a preference as to side (lol). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted April 15, 2005 Author Share Posted April 15, 2005 Brent - mostly a close up effect. The rail line runs through the village right to left. There is just a building in the middle of the village, too. Terrain matters at the grid square level - 5x5 CM tiles, each representing 1 km (thus the name, "CM times 10", applied to distance scales). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdogg Posted April 15, 2005 Share Posted April 15, 2005 I am very interested in participating as a tactical commander for the Germans. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brent Pollock Posted April 15, 2005 Share Posted April 15, 2005 Ah, the fog begins to lift; it is not the standard scale. Originally posted by JasonC: Brent - mostly a close up effect. The rail line runs through the village right to left. There is just a building in the middle of the village, too. Terrain matters at the grid square level - 5x5 CM tiles, each representing 1 km (thus the name, "CM times 10", applied to distance scales). However, I was confused by your note above to Bigduke: "Bigduke, are you interested in operational command? That would be fine by me - it would be Adam vs. you with the others as tactical commanders for each of you. Somebody has to start expressing a preference as to side (lol)." Because I thought I clearly stated a preference to be the Russian bigwig... Originally posted by Brent Pollock: Me, unless "sandy" was wanting a strategic role instead of a tactical one. It sounds like grand fun, but I only do PBEM, not TCP, so I might as well do the strategic stuff. Russians, please. </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by JasonC: No problem, then you have one. Against who? (I can't command, I have to referee - I know both sides etc). Any takers? </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted April 15, 2005 Share Posted April 15, 2005 I would love to command a portion of my beloved GD, especially if it means driving buggy Panthers over Brent Pollock's quivering soon-to-be-cadaver...any room for German tactical commanders? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted April 15, 2005 Author Share Posted April 15, 2005 Brent - the strategic commander is the leader for his side. He is expected to fill in and command a tactical battle whenever no one else on his team is available - so he does need to be able to play the actual CM games in addition. (Last one I did, Wreck was side commander for the Germans, and I think he wound up commanding a quarter of their fights tactically. Of course when you have someone that good there is something of an incentive to use him). I have no objection to PBEM resolutions beyond the brutally practical one, that they simply take too much time in my experience. For a campaign to move forward, the tactical battles need to be resolved on a weekly time scale. Two weeks if something goes wrong, but not regularly. And that needs to fit in several exchanges of map files, operational orders, battle design time etc. You can't take a month to resolve a battle and then do the other stuff, and expect the whole thing to move along. So, being able to play TCP-IP is pretty much required. Though they are resolved TCP-IP, there is no time limit per move in the actual resolution. Just move at a reasonable rate, watch if your opponent has submitted and hurry up if he has, etc. The game is meant to be over in a few hours tops, so it can fit into people's RL schedules. If it goes over the time slot, either player can ask for a ceasefire and his opponent must comply. If both want to continue of course they can, until the turn limit is reached. Michael - Alas this is 3rd PD, protecting GDs left flank historically. But you would still be most welcome as a German side tactical commander. In my experience there is plenty of demand for tactical commanders ready willing and able to step up and play a TCP when it is required. [ April 15, 2005, 04:11 PM: Message edited by: JasonC ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Kulin Posted April 16, 2005 Share Posted April 16, 2005 I'd be interested. Have never tried TCP but willing to learn. Tactical - either side. Andrew 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted April 16, 2005 Author Share Posted April 16, 2005 Adam - we have enough people, so this will happen. I just need a firm commitment for a second side commander (BigDuke would be fine by me - he expressed interest in that role but in the form of a question) and choice of sides. Everything is ready to send out operational maps and briefings on my end. To hone appetites, here are some sample screenshots of what the tactical terrain will look like - A spoiling barrage Panzer grenadiers move out An MG in the distance Germans approaching FWIW... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted April 16, 2005 Share Posted April 16, 2005 Okay, my email is madorosh@shaw.ca - looking forward to it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted April 16, 2005 Author Share Posted April 16, 2005 OK, Adam has the Germans. His briefing is on its way... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted April 16, 2005 Author Share Posted April 16, 2005 Some points about terrain, that are common info. On the operational map grid squares have various CM terrain types in them, which show the type of settings the autogenerated maps will use. Here is a "terrain key", if you want to generate examples to see what the typical terrain will be like in various locations on the operational map. open and settled terrain types - steppe - rural, open, gentle slopes rocky - rural, open, small hills rough - rural, open, modest hills open - farmland, open, gentle slopes wheat - farmland, light, gentle slopes light buildings - village, light, gentle slopes rubble - rural, open, gentle slopes, heavy damage (old front line - crater field). wooded & river area terrain types - woods - rural, medium, gentle slopes woods w/rocky - rural, medium, modest hills woods w/marsh - rural, medium, flat. Water, marsh, and soft ground added scattered trees - rural, light, gentle slopes scattered trees w/ marsh - rural, light, gentle slopes. Water, marsh, soft ground added. scattered trees w/ river - as previous plus fordable water barrier added. scattered trees w/ river, bridge - as previous with one wooden bridge added. I recommend the side commanders generate km square samples of each of the above to have a sense of the terrain the operational map represents. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted April 16, 2005 Author Share Posted April 16, 2005 OK, here are my preliminary sides. If you don't like where you are, please sound off. I'm going to send briefings etc so the side you are on won't be able to change unless you speak up now. Germans - commander - Adam-L team - Michael Dorosh, tdogg, Das Noogie, Xipe66 Russians - commander - Bigduke6 team - Platehead, Sandy, Booz, Andrew Kulin. On the Russian commander, either Bigduke6 or sandy could have the role. Bigduke expressed some interest in the operational command position, in particular, thus my placement above. But if he isn't interested or sandy (who posted earlier) strongly wants it, I will reconsider. Andrew, I have email addresses from everyone but you - it isn't on your profile. Please mail me at - jasoncawley@rcn.com with subject line "Kursk campaign" - so I have your address. I will send email to the side commanders with everyone's email address. If the roles above are satisfactory, I will send briefings to all concerned. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.