Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
28 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

Napoleon's Triumph» Forums » Rules

Subject: Unit Move (independent command) from Corps... rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Stefan Daniels
Canada
Surrey
British Columbia
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Since a single unit is 'moving' from a Corps and thus being 'detached' from the Corps during this independent command, do the Detach Move rules apply here?: road movement is not allowed by a Detach Move. I understand that there is a qualitative difference between the two commands, but since Bowen is so literal and logical with his ruleset, and since the word 'detach' is used in the Unit Move (independent command) it seems like a logical conclusion that an independent unit 'detached' from a Corps and then moved cannot use a road movement. However, as has been pointed out to me, if this interpretation of the rule is correct, it may negatively affect the pace and 'speed' of the game considerably.

Thoughts?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Neil
Canada
Toronto
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
A wild guess:

If it requires a lot of coordination for multi-unit formations to travel by road, it makes sense to me that many units (up to 7!) traveling without the oversight of a commander would have a very hard time pulling that off. Independent units, on the other hand, may have a simpler structure that doesn't make this as much an issue. But this is just an imaginative guess (I do not know anything about actual Napoleonic military history).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rachel Simmons
United States
Los Altos
California
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
A Detach Move is not a Unit Move. They are mutually exclusive types of moves and the rules for one do not apply to the other.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Cote
United States
Maine
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I was just going to ask this question, and I see that it's been answered. What is the logistical reason behind the fact that a single unit detaching from a corps cannot move by road, but a single unit moving on its own can?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rachel Simmons
United States
Los Altos
California
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ekted wrote:
What is the logistical reason behind the fact that a single unit detaching from a corps cannot move by road, but a single unit moving on its own can?


Corps commands essentially represent what a corps commander could manage personally. Independent commands represent the army's limited ability to manage a diffuse number of smaller units in a coherent way. Corps command is a form of personal leadership: the corps commander is literally present with his men and moves where they do. A unit marching by road away from its corps commander is going "over the horizon" so to speak and out of its corps commander's control. As such allowing a player to use a corps command to control such a move is not consistent with the general command model.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Cote
United States
Maine
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
But a single unit that, say, has been previously detached from a corp suddenly has the ability to move by road? Is this the establishment of command by a lesser officer within the unit?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rachel Simmons
United States
Los Altos
California
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ekted wrote:
But a single unit that, say, has been previously detached from a corp suddenly has the ability to move by road? Is this the establishment of command by a lesser officer within the unit?


Bear in mind you can always detach and move in the same turn, so you don't have to have "previously detached" the unit. The issue is not whether a unit can move by road but what kind of command you have to use to do it. Corps commands reflect the efficiency an army gains through the presence of that level of the organization and by keeping corps together as relatively compact formations, but as the elements of the corps become scattered, those efficiency advantages are lost and the army becomes more difficult to control.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Cote
United States
Maine
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Maybe I wasn't clear. I have a corps and a unit in reserve in the same locale. I am not allowed to detach/move a unit from the corps by road, but I am allowed to move the already detached (may have started as a single unit, whatever) unit by road. Why is a unit without a commander able to move by road when the other is not? This seems counter to your statement...

Quote:
...but as the elements of the corps become scattered, those efficiency advantages are lost and the army becomes more difficult to control.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rachel Simmons
United States
Los Altos
California
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ekted wrote:
Maybe I wasn't clear. I have a corps and a unit in reserve in the same locale. I am not allowed to detach/move a unit from the corps by road


Yes you are allowed to do it. You just need to use an independent command to move the unit from the corps. See the following definition of Unit Move:

"Unit Move (independent command).
A single detached unit is moved. If the
unit is not already detached, it can be
detached as part of this command.
"

What you're not allowed to do is use a "Detach Move (corps command)" to do it, but the unit can still move by road even though it starts the turn as part of the corps.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Was George Orwell an Optimist?
United States
Corvallis
Oregon
flag msg tools
The Herbie Nichols Project - Dr. Cyclops' Dream
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The fact that you can detach a unit with a corps command, or the unit can detach itself with an individual command, is very important concept. It often comes up when a corps that contains artillery begins its turn in an approach.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Cote
United States
Maine
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I understand the rules in this respect. My question is, and has always been, "why".
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Was George Orwell an Optimist?
United States
Corvallis
Oregon
flag msg tools
The Herbie Nichols Project - Dr. Cyclops' Dream
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ekted wrote:
I understand the rules in this respect. My question is, and has always been, "why".


You've got it now, right? With a corps command, the unit is under the direct command of the corps commander, who stays with the main body, and the unit operates in his line of sight. With an independent move, a lower level officer, who travels with the unit is in command.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rachel Simmons
United States
Los Altos
California
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ekted wrote:
I understand the rules in this respect. My question is, and has always been, "why".


Well, I have tried to answer as best I could. If my answer has not been satisfactory, you have my apologies, but I'm not sure how to improve on it, and so I will have to let it stand.

[Edit]

On second though, if you look at:

http://www.simmonsgames.com/products/Gettysburg/diary/Entry1...

there is a discussion of how command was exercised in this period, following the chart comparing "Infantry Corps" at Austerlitz and Gettysburg. (Almost half-way through the essay, beginning with the paragraph that starts "At the lowest levels (battalion and below at Austerlitz...") I discuss some general historical background that might be helpful.

[/Edit]
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Cote
United States
Maine
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Sphere wrote:
With a corps command, the unit is under the direct command of the corps commander, who stays with the main body, and the unit operates in his line of sight. With an independent move, a lower level officer, who travels with the unit is in command.

Why doesn't the corps commander tell the low-level commander of the unit to move, and have him carry it out (even if by road)? Were the low-level commanders not part of the corps units?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rachel Simmons
United States
Los Altos
California
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ekted wrote:
Why doesn't the corps commander tell the low-level commander of the unit to move, and have him carry it out (even if by road)? Were the low-level commanders not part of the corps units?


I just said I couldn't do any better than I've done, but I'll try again, although with each attempt I grow less and less optimistic about success.

The corps commander is about to send the unit into a part of the battlefield that, in all likelihood, that he cannot see and about which he has no direct knowledge. What other friendly units are there? What enemy units are there? What is the situation? The whole point of corps commands is to reflect the command and control advantages for units that remain in the corps commander's personal presence, where he can easily see their situation and rapidly give appropriate orders. A unit moving away by road loses those advantages and so the advantage of being able to make the move with a corps command is not allowed.

Command and control in the game is a radically simplified abstraction of what in the real world was an enormously complicated situation. The main point of the game's command and control rules is to reflect the breakdown of command and control in the chaos of battle and one of the main ways this is done is by the differentiation between corps commands (reflecting what a corps commander could do with respect to units in his personal presence and under his direct control) and independent commands (reflecting units that were not under the immediate personal control of any senior commander and which senior commanders could only control by courier).
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Was George Orwell an Optimist?
United States
Corvallis
Oregon
flag msg tools
The Herbie Nichols Project - Dr. Cyclops' Dream
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ekted wrote:
Sphere wrote:
With a corps command, the unit is under the direct command of the corps commander, who stays with the main body, and the unit operates in his line of sight. With an independent move, a lower level officer, who travels with the unit is in command.

Why doesn't the corps commander tell the low-level commander of the unit to move, and have him carry it out (even if by road)?


Certainly the corps commander sends him with orders, but he does so without knowing what lies around the first bend or over the first hill. He can't provide orders that cover every eventuality.

When the unit moves beyond his personal command and control radius, he must trust the judgement of the independent officer, who will have to act on his own initiative should he encounter something unexpected.

The game gives the French a slightly larger number of independent commands, reflecting a better trained officer corps, but not nearly enough to control all the units you'd like once you become dispersed. The game model rewards you by allowing you to control more units if you keep them tightly under the control of the corps commanders, and models the entropy that occurs as they disperse. Either you buy into that, or you don't.


 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Cote
United States
Maine
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Sorry to be a pain in the ass here, but all I'm hearing are vague generalities about command and control. I am asking a very specific question about a very specific example. I'll draw it:

| |
CCCCCCCCCCCA --> | --> A |
B --> | | --> B
| |


Unit A (by corps command) can only move to the next locale. Unit B (by independent command) can move by road. They both have low-level commanders. The only difference is that A was ordered to move by the commander of corps C, and B was ordered to move by "courier". Yet B can move farther. This seems backwards from a realistic point of view. Why is A's low-level commander less effective than B's?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
jbrier
United States
Aventura
Florida
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Unit A CAN move by road, but must expend an independent command to do so. Look at it this way- independent commands are an abstraction of the ability of forces to mobilize whilst not under the direct supervision of a corps commander.

If Unit A were not able to move by road, I would understand your gripe, but that's not the case. You are arguing "Why can't he do it with a corps command, wah wah", but the command scheme is an abstraction to begin with, as mentioned above.

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rachel Simmons
United States
Los Altos
California
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ekted wrote:
Unit A (by corps command) can only move to the next locale. Unit B (by independent command) can move by road. They both have low-level commanders. The only difference is that A was ordered to move by the commander of corps C, and B was ordered to move by "courier". Yet B can move farther. This seems backwards from a realistic point of view. Why is A's low-level commander less effective than B's?


Corps commands reflect what the corps commanders can personally control. You can't use a corps command to control a move that is out-of-sight of the corps commander.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Cote
United States
Maine
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
So when the corps commander C gives a command to unit A, the unit commander is not executing that order?

John: It sounds like you are simply saying, "...because that's what the rules say," which I am not arguing.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rachel Simmons
United States
Los Altos
California
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ekted wrote:
So when the corps commander C gives a command to unit A, the unit commander is not executing that order?


The unit commander is executing the order; for game purposes it doesn't matter where the order came from; the point is that a low-level commander is being left to execute it, which makes it an independent command. You're only allowed to execute a limited number of independent commands a turn.

You know, sometimes there is a fine line between questioning and arguing. I have a strong sense that we have either already crossed that line or are about to. That's the answer. You don't have to agree with it, but that's what it is.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Cote
United States
Maine
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
verandi wrote:
Unit A CAN move by road, but must expend an independent command to do so.

Why is it always me asking simple questions on BGG, and having no one understand what I am asking? laugh You are thinking that I am asking the question: How can I make unit A move by road. That is absolutely not what I am asking.

I am comparing a corps detach/move command to a unit move command. I am asking why the former is less "powerful" in the road move case than the latter. I have read every reply, but no one is addressing this issue in a specific way. Here's the way I see it, in my uninformed perspective:

Corps Commander: Unit A, move east!
Unit A Commander: Yes, sir! Move east!
Unit A: We move 1 locale.

Unit B Commander: Move east!
Unit B: We move 3 locales.

So just because Unit A Commander was ordered to move (instead of deciding to move on his own), his unit is ineffective. The Corps Commander can move the entire corps by road, but he can't send the unit by road (even though they COULD do it on their own).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Cote
United States
Maine
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
bowen wrote:
You know, sometimes there is a fine line between questioning and arguing. I have a strong sense that we have either already crossed that line or are about to. That's the answer. You don't have to agree with it, but that's what it is.

Seriously, I am not arguing the reality of the situation or your design choices. It just helps me understand/remember game mechanics when they make sense to me. And this, albeit, small part of the rules simply does not.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rachel Simmons
United States
Los Altos
California
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ekted wrote:

Seriously, I am not arguing the reality of the situation or your design choices. It just helps me understand/remember game mechanics when they make sense to me. And this, albeit, small part of the rules simply does not.


I've done my best. Sorry it wasn't good enough. In retrospect I should have stopped a lot earlier given that my subsequent efforts were of no more use than my initial one. My first instinct to let it go at that point was the right one. Once again, sorry it wasn't helpful.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Cote
United States
Maine
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I apologize if I seem insufferable. I get obsessive about learning new games perfectly. I learn best from others using the Socratic Method.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.