Command Range?

Command Range? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Age of Muskets] >> Horse and Musket: Volume I, Frederick the Great

Message

larizona55 -> Command Range? (8/18/2005 9:16:26 AM)
I recently saw the commander editor beta screen and noticed that you can modify the command range of a commander. I have been playing wargames since "God was a Corporal", and have seen this same thing modeled in tons of games. But why? It just seems to be a way to give a better commander a better capability, and thus advantage, over his piers. But if that's the case, why don't we just give them the ability to fly, or leap over tall buildings? What I am getting at is, what is the physical process that gives a commander a better command range? A booming voice? Big hands, so they can be seen at greater distances? Maybe it's just that his couriers have faster horses. Trying to think this through logically, I can't see why we would model one commander on the battlefield as being able to affect units at a range greater, than another leader. I could see that one commander might be more bold/decisive than another. But this is modeled by initiative. I can see that one commander might be more active than another, but the way to model this, is to give them more acitivity points. So short of a courier with a faster horse, I don't see why command radius should be different. Of course, it could also be the use of flags / signaling devices. But this is probably more properly a national or unit characteristic. Thoughts anyone?

Jagger2002 -> RE: Command Range? (8/18/2005 3:12:30 PM)
I see command range as a reflection of the staff and unit commanders. A good commander can train solid staff and sub-commanders to make good decisions without the direct intervention of the overall commander. So I see an extended command range as a reflection of an organization shaped by the commander.

roth -> RE: Command Range? (8/18/2005 10:48:40 PM)
As a miniatures player, I have always found command range to be an inaccurate and distorting way of handling command control. I appreciate your statement about it representing the capabilities of the commander's staff, but I believe there are better ways of doing that, too. In most games I've played, command ranges lead to doing some very gamey things with commander figures or counters. The Napoleonic and ACW rules sets that I play assign some (ideally historically-based) level(s) of capability to a commander, which translates to a percentage chance of activating a certain order or unit. This frees his actual physical location to be used for other things, like being attached to a unit. There are enough clever ways to reflect command control that command range seems to be a lazy-man's solution. I would hope that Battles of Napoleon will develop a better one.

Le Tondu -> RE: Command Range? (8/19/2005 2:22:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jagger2002 I see command range as a reflection of the staff and unit commanders. A good commander can train solid staff and sub-commanders to make good decisions without the direct intervention of the overall commander. So I see an extended command range as a reflection of an organization shaped by the commander. Jagger2002 has an excellent bead on this one. It makes sense. The higher the level of command, the greater one could influence events around them. One has to model it somehow. The better commander always had an advantage over his peers and I sure hope this game models that. How do you model the disciplinary policies of Davout? They had an effect that saved lives and won battles. It is the same for the great staff that worked under him. Could Kutusov have gotten away with partying his pants off at a distance from the fighting during Borodino without the Army level staff that he had? No way. Then there are the commanders that repeatedly exposed themselves to enemy fire and greatly influenced events -like Napoleon. I sure hope that will be modelled. You know larizona55, could what you saw just be something that affects the commander's level as opposed to the individual commander? It seems that we're gonna have to wait til the game is released before we can learn everything about it. When I consider what we've had for the last ten or more years, I am very happy to see what will be coming with BPW: Battles of Napoleon. It will evolve and grow, then after a while something better will probably come along if it doesn't. Who knows larizona55, maybe you will be the one who brings us the next step. :)

Tim Coakley -> RE: Command Range? (9/14/2005 5:20:23 PM)
Quick note on this... My thinking runs along two lines... 1) The command range is an abstract limitation to reflect personal capability (how much ground can I manage as a general) and the limits of staff/couriers. My military servic e(no combat) has reinforced this. As a LT, I could manage my 4 tanks for a KM2 or so...as a CPT, by Cav Troop for much bigger area. It comes with experience and training. 2) It is also a technique to encourage historical tactics. Having a BDE CDR keep his soldiers in his command range keeps the deployment historical. No dispatching a battalion on a commando mission.

Capitaine -> RE: Command Range? (10/4/2005 11:55:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Double Shot Design My thinking runs along two lines... 1) The command range is an abstract limitation to reflect personal capability (how much ground can I manage as a general) and the limits of staff/couriers. My military service (no combat) has reinforced this. As a LT, I could manage my 4 tanks for a KM2 or so...as a CPT, by Cav Troop for much bigger area. It comes with experience and training. I agree with the abstraction, but perhaps the "management" aspect is best portrayed by assigning a limit on the number of, say, battalions within command range that can be "in command" on a given turn via that general. Might be a bit much, but I have played a tactical board game with this method and it worked well. quote: 2) It is also a technique to encourage historical tactics. Having a BDE CDR keep his soldiers in his command range keeps the deployment historical. No dispatching a battalion on a commando mission. I agree wholeheartedly here. It's essential for this purpose. I would, probably, wish that all command ranges were equal among the same command level since it's likely to reflect a physical command limitation, rather than personal capability. Regardless, having a command span is better and easier to keep track of than other methods of command modelling I've seen. I'm just glad there is a command feature in the game besides mere combat and rally features. [:)]

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.125