I'm happy to say that soloswolf will be returning to the campaign
We've talked about things, and though I see no reason to go into details, I have nothing but understanding for his absence; just happy to see him back 
Rafiki wrote:Processing will take place tonight
Ehm, warning: falling asleep on the sofa in front of the TV can be detrimental to your turn processing schedule...
Armies are on the move, and we are starting to see some major battles. There isn't a single player who I don't want to hear from about what's going on, so make sure to update those AARs of yours!
Then I suggest the following:
- Send a mail to the list, notifying Banks that you're in the process of placing your orders and ask him to hold off till you send the updated order-file
- Place your orders
- Send the file to the list, letting Banks place his orders, upon which they are sent to me (via the list)
-
Jabberwock
- Posts: 2204
- Joined: Thu May 31, 2007 12:12 am
- Location: Weymouth, MA
- Contact: ICQ
Disappointed
Well folks...toe into the water so to speak.and really sincerest apologies for upsetting anyone ...but as an onlooker here goes.
I had such high high hopes of this campaign. Would have volunteered myself but felt I was just not experienced enough (given the quality of those who did put themselves forward)
Was very very hopeful though of learning from what I believed to be experts. To say I have been bitterly disappointed though would be to putting it mildly.
I fully accept Rafis arguement that first and foremost this game should be for the enjoyment of the participants....but what I ask myself is the purpose of having AAR's other than for the audience (and mostly these have been non existant).
Ah well, apologies to all, and I doubt I could have done better...but at least Il've said it.
There have been exceptions (once at least being diplomatic not saying who they are) but too few and far between.
In general terms trying to understand the sides....The union side seem to be a three headed hydra......totally co-ordinated from the centre and with only one aim in mind to win the game (the Hooker alteration of orders was a real real beauty - how the president would ever been in a position to have known or ordered this is beyond me)
On the confederate side nice to see a hands off approach from the centre but one theatre totally devoid of information ( now supposedly back in action)
And I know I'm depressing and a bull in a china shop and nasty and vicious and etc...etc...just that I love the PBEM game so much
Regards
leure: leure:
I had such high high hopes of this campaign. Would have volunteered myself but felt I was just not experienced enough (given the quality of those who did put themselves forward)
Was very very hopeful though of learning from what I believed to be experts. To say I have been bitterly disappointed though would be to putting it mildly.
I fully accept Rafis arguement that first and foremost this game should be for the enjoyment of the participants....but what I ask myself is the purpose of having AAR's other than for the audience (and mostly these have been non existant).
Ah well, apologies to all, and I doubt I could have done better...but at least Il've said it.
There have been exceptions (once at least being diplomatic not saying who they are) but too few and far between.
In general terms trying to understand the sides....The union side seem to be a three headed hydra......totally co-ordinated from the centre and with only one aim in mind to win the game (the Hooker alteration of orders was a real real beauty - how the president would ever been in a position to have known or ordered this is beyond me)
On the confederate side nice to see a hands off approach from the centre but one theatre totally devoid of information ( now supposedly back in action)
And I know I'm depressing and a bull in a china shop and nasty and vicious and etc...etc...just that I love the PBEM game so much
Regards
leure: leure:-
Jabberwock
- Posts: 2204
- Joined: Thu May 31, 2007 12:12 am
- Location: Weymouth, MA
- Contact: ICQ
On AAR's I totally agree with you. I am trying to get mine caught up to the action. In the meantime, all you are seeing from our side is the telegraph office. It may look like I'm winning the arguments there, but then my CinCs just continue to do things without telling me (one of them has figured out how to work with me, finally), and I have something new to rant about there, usually after it's too late, and so it goes.
As far as historical control, only McClellan and Rosecrans tried to keep the administration uninformed of what went on or was about to go on in the field. I freely admit I'm playing the whole war department. This was the first war run by telegraph. Copies of orders were made and reviewed. I think Washington was much better informed and interfering historically than you suspect. You're thinking like a civilian, so are/were my CinCs. In game, the Fredericksburg operation was conceived by Scott, and he certainly would have been in a position to know and do something about those orders before the operation launched.
That said, if I had to do it all over again, I wouldn't be president. I think there is a consensus about that. I have developed my own doctrines about how to do things, and trying to impose them on others has been frustrating for all involved. I prefer to teach by demonstration. That's not saying that I don't appreciate playing this/these role(s). I would never have felt the need to organize my doctrines in one place for everyone (except the rebs) to read, if not for this experience. I'm far from done with that process.
If you keep apologizing for your opinion, I might feel the need to start apologizing for mine.
Regards
As far as historical control, only McClellan and Rosecrans tried to keep the administration uninformed of what went on or was about to go on in the field. I freely admit I'm playing the whole war department. This was the first war run by telegraph. Copies of orders were made and reviewed. I think Washington was much better informed and interfering historically than you suspect. You're thinking like a civilian, so are/were my CinCs. In game, the Fredericksburg operation was conceived by Scott, and he certainly would have been in a position to know and do something about those orders before the operation launched.
That said, if I had to do it all over again, I wouldn't be president. I think there is a consensus about that. I have developed my own doctrines about how to do things, and trying to impose them on others has been frustrating for all involved. I prefer to teach by demonstration. That's not saying that I don't appreciate playing this/these role(s). I would never have felt the need to organize my doctrines in one place for everyone (except the rebs) to read, if not for this experience. I'm far from done with that process.
If you keep apologizing for your opinion, I might feel the need to start apologizing for mine.
Regards
[color="DimGray"] You deserve to be spanked[/color]
-
Jabberwock
- Posts: 2204
- Joined: Thu May 31, 2007 12:12 am
- Location: Weymouth, MA
- Contact: ICQ
I think the player who takes the role of president has to perhaps come into the game with the understanding that he WON'T be calling most of the shots...and WON'T be moving most of the pieces around.
In real-life....presidents don't just give orders....they receive reccommendations....and then accept or deny them....THEN give orders. It doesn't appear either team has operated in this fashion...which is fine...it was expected.
As far as the AAR's...it is dissapointing...I feel, really, that this entire project should be geared to the reader....and not the players. It should be fun for the players yes...but I think it matters more how fun it is for the readers...otherwise there is no point in requiring AAR's. I'll be the first to say that writing AAR's isn't the LEAST time consuming thing to do...but I always try to make time .
In real-life....presidents don't just give orders....they receive reccommendations....and then accept or deny them....THEN give orders. It doesn't appear either team has operated in this fashion...which is fine...it was expected.
As far as the AAR's...it is dissapointing...I feel, really, that this entire project should be geared to the reader....and not the players. It should be fun for the players yes...but I think it matters more how fun it is for the readers...otherwise there is no point in requiring AAR's. I'll be the first to say that writing AAR's isn't the LEAST time consuming thing to do...but I always try to make time
.-
Jabberwock
- Posts: 2204
- Joined: Thu May 31, 2007 12:12 am
- Location: Weymouth, MA
- Contact: ICQ
Banks6060 wrote:In real-life....presidents don't just give orders....they receive reccommendations....and then accept or deny them....THEN give orders. It doesn't appear either team has operated in this fashion...which is fine...it was expected.
This system works fine, if the recommendations are recieved. Otherwise suggestions (occasionally orders) have to go from the top down. The US team is getting there; it's been a struggle.
Banks6060 wrote:...and WON'T be moving most of the pieces around.
In further regards to the Hooker situation, I eventually refused to give the order myself, and Andrew chose to resubmit. I was willing at that point to let it go in with the original (mistaken) order.
I often threaten to move some pieces around myself, but rarely follow through. I've recently (at someone else's suggestion) developed a system of withholding reinforcements and stealing rear echelon units for other uses as an alternative way to communicate, enforce some doctrinal compliance, or express frustration at a lack of communication. This obviates the need to make those threats going forward. I'm hoping not to use it much.
[color="DimGray"] You deserve to be spanked[/color]
-
AndrewKurtz
- Posts: 1167
- Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 2:49 am
- Location: Greenville, SC
Jabberwock wrote:This system works fine, if the recommendations are recieved. Otherwise suggestions (occasionally orders) have to go from the top down. The US team is getting there; it's been a struggle.
I'd ask folks to watch going forward. We struggled with the format out of the gate, but I think we are getting it figured out.
On another note, perhaps it would a good idea to post the TRN and ORD files for non-players to be able to download and review? They may enjoy...
-
Jabberwock
- Posts: 2204
- Joined: Thu May 31, 2007 12:12 am
- Location: Weymouth, MA
- Contact: ICQ
-
Jabberwock
- Posts: 2204
- Joined: Thu May 31, 2007 12:12 am
- Location: Weymouth, MA
- Contact: ICQ
A few more points, soundoff.
1. If my suggestions in the War Room were heeded, I wouldn't have to repeat them.
2. I was applying considerable pressure to get a certain operation going before winter. Now it is too late. I have failed. My suggestions were ignored. Now, finally, there is a token force headed in that general direction, probably in the hopes of mollifying my annoyance. The rebels will likely reinforce that location long before we can get there in the spring. Next year's operations will be impacted as a result. I don't know how this can be perceived as centralized command.
3. I'm doing what I think it will take to win the war. Part of that is doctrines. Part of it is asking commanders to adhere to a plan. I was not detailed enough on doctrine or what the plan would be before the campaign started. I wasn't aware what most of the plan would be, it develops dynamically. In both theaters I have modified my plans considerably to be more in accord with CinC preferences and actions. I'm not especially vocal about that, so CinCs and the audience are less aware of it. I wasn't aware of all the gaps between my doctrines and those of other experienced players. I've been trying to make up for those mistakes ever since. Part of it is attention to detail. My doctrines require coordinated efforts. The actions of supporting forces are almost as important as the main forces. If the commanders miss details for whatever reason, I will call their attention to it. If they submit orders without communicating, then I don't know what is a missed detail; what is stubbornness; what is lack of knowledge about my doctrines; what the commander considers to be part of the overall plan, but I don't. That's why my suggestions have been pre-emptive and detailed. They have had to be.
4. The onus is on the north to be the aggressor. That takes coordination. Coordination is not going to be provided by McClellan, Fremont, Halleck, Banks, and Butler. It requires communication, either two-way, or one-way. The onus is on the CinCs to make it two-way.
1. If my suggestions in the War Room were heeded, I wouldn't have to repeat them.
2. I was applying considerable pressure to get a certain operation going before winter. Now it is too late. I have failed. My suggestions were ignored. Now, finally, there is a token force headed in that general direction, probably in the hopes of mollifying my annoyance. The rebels will likely reinforce that location long before we can get there in the spring. Next year's operations will be impacted as a result. I don't know how this can be perceived as centralized command.
3. I'm doing what I think it will take to win the war. Part of that is doctrines. Part of it is asking commanders to adhere to a plan. I was not detailed enough on doctrine or what the plan would be before the campaign started. I wasn't aware what most of the plan would be, it develops dynamically. In both theaters I have modified my plans considerably to be more in accord with CinC preferences and actions. I'm not especially vocal about that, so CinCs and the audience are less aware of it. I wasn't aware of all the gaps between my doctrines and those of other experienced players. I've been trying to make up for those mistakes ever since. Part of it is attention to detail. My doctrines require coordinated efforts. The actions of supporting forces are almost as important as the main forces. If the commanders miss details for whatever reason, I will call their attention to it. If they submit orders without communicating, then I don't know what is a missed detail; what is stubbornness; what is lack of knowledge about my doctrines; what the commander considers to be part of the overall plan, but I don't. That's why my suggestions have been pre-emptive and detailed. They have had to be.
4. The onus is on the north to be the aggressor. That takes coordination. Coordination is not going to be provided by McClellan, Fremont, Halleck, Banks, and Butler. It requires communication, either two-way, or one-way. The onus is on the CinCs to make it two-way.
[color="DimGray"] You deserve to be spanked[/color]
Return to “American Civil War, The Grand Campaign”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests