Looking at Command and Control again

In the comments in my first post about this topic  (You can find it here >Small but Perfectly Formed: Command and control in wargames.<) Rob pointed me in the direction of a long out of print set of rules which had looked at the same points I was mulling over.  These are 'Napoleonic Rules for a Large Scale Action with Small Scale Miniatures'.  The rules were published in 1980 and had come up with a set of mechanisms to cover pretty much the exact issues I identified.  No point reinventing the wheel I thought and promptly hunted down a copy on Scribd.  After a read through and some note taking I was in agreement with Rob, almost half a century ago the same issue had come up and been solved by smarter minds than mine!

(AI image) This is the chain of command...don't make me use it!

The rules use a variable bound mechanism which was in vogue back then and which has fallen out of use since but it doesn't make much difference to the C2 rules involved.  It listed change of situation triggers, possible reactions to those changes and who can act on the triggers.  It also gives guidance on ranges over which triggers can be identified.  The core concept is that command and control are exercised at separate points in the chain of command and no one  (other than the CinC) can simply issue orders to attack, unless it is for a counter attack to defend the subordinates formation.  

Each link in the chain of command consists of a superior who issues commands and a subordinate who must execute them but can determine how that is done.  Orders have to pass down the full chain of command between an officer who is entitled to give a command and the officer who executes it,  and that takes time.  Essentially this consists of time in transit and time to read and execute the order.  In the absence of new orders a formation simply gets on with the last instructions unless attacked when it is entitled to defend itself.  I rather like the simple underpinning concept of "If tell you to jump all you are allowed to do is ask 'how high'."

The basics of the rules are as follows.

1.  The game starts with the CinC writing orders for the overall objectives of the subordinate commands.  These are broken down by Corps, Division Brigade objectives as required.  I can see fun and games arising in multi player games where three or four players are acting as Corps or Divisional commanders and have to translate Army level orders to their own subordinates objectives.

2. These initial orders are followed unless a change of situation is seen by an Army, Corps or Divisional Commander.  Brigades and Battalions can only deviate from orders if forced to act in self defence when attacked.  In that latter case all they can do is defend and/or or seek new orders from above.  Only the CinC has full freedom of action.

3. Change of Situation triggers are restricted to ten cases, see the tables below.  Each one has a limited set of responses available (also shown on the table below).

4.  Most responses only allow the parent formation to change orders but that requires a message moving from them to the subordinate formation and in some cases vice versa all of which takes time.

5.  Units engaged in firefights or close combat cannot respond to changes in situation or seek new orders.  This means that generals need be able to see what is happening to their commands to be able to influence the fight as the units at the sharp end are locked in place.

Permitted Responses to a change in situation

These possible changes are not mutually exclusive.  They include options for both the affected unit and that units superior.  So (for example) the subordinate unit could go on the defensive and seek new orders while the superior commander seeing the situation could send orders to other units in response

Triggers and options

The rules don't take into account failures to follow orders correctly and other areas of friction as it seems to be assumed that orders are not open to interpretation and are followed to the letter.  While this may be the case in most situations there are always occasional  'outliers' where subordinates have ideas of their own, for good or ill!  They also don't appear to be written to cover Army through to Battalion chains of command or the freedom of action granted French Corps commanders (Q was that really a thing on a big battlefield or just while Corps were acting independently?)

That said, looking at the above I think I have enough to work with to create some simple C2 rules.  Lets see how it goes.