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 |
 |
| 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.
One point I should have made clearer in the post is that reaction B 'Superior writes new orders' isn't restricted to writing orders for the triggering unit. They may write orders for any unit under their command as long as it falls within the overall objective assigned to them. The example in the original rules shows a divisional commander ordering a cavalry brigade to attack a newly sighted enemy cavalry brigade threatening one of his division's Infantry brigades. They also order all other infantry brigades to form squares. The original brigade presumably forms squares under their own initiative under option A. This is the kind of detail I need to iron out (while keeping it simple).
ReplyDeleteThe rules don't cover down to battalion level as the basic unit is the brigade. I treat artillery as separate brigades, as I don't like guns as integral to a brigade as they rarely were in 1813 onwards - the period my armies are for.
ReplyDeleteAmong the changes I made was record-keeping to track disorder and strength points, rather than individual casualties on brigades. The incrments for casualties has to be fairly small as the casualty rates are delightfully low. Still not quite hit the sweet-spot for balancing book-keeping against this requirement.
A very few of my rules still require orders but not many and those that do offer a simplified system for doing so. Decades ago, I examined Jeffrey's VLB. What I found was the VLB was not reproducible by me. In my trials, the system fell apart when there was interaction between different parts of the battlefield, moving at different VLBs. Bookkeeping and need for frequent adjudication grew rapidly. The question frequently became, how to qualify which events are significant and who gets to decide. Jumping ahead to an interesting event soon saw every little event being significant and time essentially standing still.
ReplyDeleteInteresting idea but for me, (at that time), not workable.
The VLB concept is one of those that looks good on paper but doesn’t really work in practice. I’m not a fan and won’t be using it. Fortunately the rules for C2 in the host rules actually use 10 minute increments when calculating transmission timings.
DeleteI also found when tryin the VLB element that there was something occurring almost every 10 minutes - as I said when first commenting about the rules. I have been limiting orders to simply a direction (very simple on a hex grid) and whether to attack or defend - keeps it simple. I stop it from being too restrictive by allowing the brigades to use the diagonals as they move (they face a hex vertex, not a side). On attack they are not allowed to move such that no enemy remain to their front (there must be some for an attack order to be given / adopted). This gives the attacker some flexibility and the defender some uncertainty about who they will actually attack.
Delete