Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
15 Posts

Commands & Colors» Forums » General

Subject: Command and color best for modern warfare? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Geir Erik Ø
Norway
Sandnes
flag msg tools
Geeks!
badge
Hello!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I played C&C ancient some days ago, and I have some experience with Memoir.

In Memoir I justify the “not every unit moves” syndrome with; the units don’t know where the enemy is. Some units fortify to secure an objective, wait for supplies and other.

When it comes to hand to hand combat like in C&C:A I don’t know if this can be justified the same way. As I have imagined these battles, you have two battle battlelines that clash together.

Maybe we don’t play it right, but in C&C:A you focus on only a part of the army while the rest just stand and do nothing. As the resources are so small, you have to focus on damaging the enemy with units in position rather than getting all the units into a “battle line”

So what I try to say is:

In modern warfare you can justify that not every unit moves during the game. But in ancient warfare this seems wrong.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Roland W. est. 1984
Germany
Deutschland
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
you do not have the communication abilities you have in modern battles. When a Messanger walks from one side of the field to the other it can take some time^^... Warmovies may suggest a false image of the way battles were thought in the past even in WW2 i do not think the movies capture the real thing...
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Harald Torvatn
Norway
Trondheim
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Modern command systems are vastly superior to ancient command system, so commanding the army to do something was more difficult then, not easier.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Geir Erik Ø
Norway
Sandnes
flag msg tools
Geeks!
badge
Hello!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
But when you have two battle lines on a field, you don't need much communication on where the enemy is. I have not much knowledge on warfare, but if the general strategy is, "close in on the enemy" you don't need messengers to tell you when to go. When everyone around you goes you go.

I agree that messengers got lost and were important when you had situations that made you change your strategy on the fly.

One of the scenarios I had three leaders controlling their part of the army. One on each flank and one in the middle. In this battle the right flank moved first and started fighting. and then the left flank started moving. The center didn't move at all.

In reality these leaders would come together and make a plan. Then all would move in a tight line against the enemy to protect their flanks.

Of course they would have to change this as they went, such as were to use the cavlary. But in general the whole front line moved forward. And then you put reserves where the line start to thin out. Reserves in C&C:A is a joke. If you have units at the back, they will likely never see battle, even if they are the best unit you have.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kent Reuber
United States
San Mateo
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
If you dislike the fact that some units won't act, you might look into the BattleLore-influenced game Battles of Westeros. Because of the way commands are parceled out, most units get to act every turn.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Geir Erik Ø
Norway
Sandnes
flag msg tools
Geeks!
badge
Hello!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I own Memoir and I have many scenarios left.

I am also in the prosess of painting my Warmaster armies. And of course there is Warhammer. So I'm not short on moving whole armies.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Harald Torvatn
Norway
Trondheim
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Geirerik wrote:
But when you have two battle lines on a field, you don't need much communication on where the enemy is.
But you need communication about what to do.
Geirerik wrote:
I have not much knowledge on warfare, but if the general strategy is, "close in on the enemy" you don't need messengers to tell you when to go. When everyone around you goes you go.
Yes, but that is not a good strategy. Where you are strong, you want to clos in on the enemy. Where you only want to protect someone elses flank, you move much more cautiosly. And some units are faster than other units. Should they close in fast, or should they wait for their flank protection?

Geirerik wrote:
I agree that messengers got lost and were important when you had situations that made you change your strategy on the fly.

Strategy must change all the time, since the enemy also acts.

Geirerik wrote:
One of the scenarios I had three leaders controlling their part of the army. One on each flank and one in the middle. In this battle the right flank moved first and started fighting. and then the left flank started moving. The center didn't move at all. In reality these leaders would come together and make a plan. Then all would move in a tight line against the enemy to protect their flanks.
This would not be a good staregy in those areas of the battle in which the enmy forces are much stronger than yours. In those areas, you would try to keep some distance, which would probaly be a better way to protect your other units flank than getting so close to the strong enemy units that they can destroy your units easily.

Geirerik wrote:
Of course they would have to change this as they went, such as were to use the cavlary. But in general the whole front line moved forward.

No. There was at lest two basic strategies in which everyone did not move forward: The macedonian and Chartagian strategy would be to hold with the infantery and win the battle with cavalry on the flanks. The roman and greek strategy would be to protect flanks with cavalry and win the battle in the centre with infantery. In each of these strategies, the "holding" part of the army would try to not engage, or engange as late as possbile to give the attacking part of the army time to win the battle before the "holding" part of the army lost it.

Geirerik wrote:
And then you put reserves where the line start to thin out. Reserves in C&C:A is a joke. If you have units at the back, they will likely never see battle, even if they are the best unit you have.
Who decides where and when the reserves goes? Committing ones best troops to battle is something one does not do lightly, and someting which even very trusted subordinates may not be allowed to do.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin Duke
United States
Wynne
Arkansas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
And maybe consider that what you are moving and rolling dice with are the only part of the game/battle that happens to be 'active' right now at this moment of the game...where you are focusing your attention.

Feel free to try the game one time moving all your units, fighting all your units, and letting the opponent do the same. Better yet, let your opponent do it all first. But it won't be a very good game.

When you take Commands and Colors: Ancients for what it is, you can have a lot of fun with a very good game. If you want to talk about what a game isn't, then not many games are fun for long.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Geir Erik Ø
Norway
Sandnes
flag msg tools
Geeks!
badge
Hello!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Harald wrote:
But you need communication about what to do.
No. You need unit leaders who already knows what to do.

Harald wrote:
Yes, but that is not a good strategy. Where you are strong, you want to clos in on the enemy. Where you only want to protect someone elses flank, you move much more cautiosly. And some units are faster than other units. Should they close in fast, or should they wait for their flank protection?


I just read about an ancient battle. Caesar won against Pompeius at the Battle of Pharsalus. The lines meet and the manuvering were done by the cavlary. I don't say that flankers don't work well in C&C. These would act on situation and they would obvious be confused and not acting according to the plan. This would be simulated good in C&C. I say that Battle lines don't work well in C&C. According to Caesar he won as his troops were disiplined. They didn't charge when they wasn't supposed to. I belive this meant that the whole line moved as one body. Exept for reserves and cavlary flankers.

henrik wrote:

Strategy must change all the time, since the enemy also acts.


When you are in a battle line, lined up with thousands of men, there is not much change you can do.


Henrik wrote:

No. There was at lest two basic strategies in which everyone did not move forward: The macedonian and Chartagian strategy would be to hold with the infantery and win the battle with cavalry on the flanks. The roman and greek strategy would be to protect flanks with cavalry and win the battle in the centre with infantery. In each of these strategies, the "holding" part of the army would try to not engage, or engange as late as possbile to give the attacking part of the army time to win the battle before the "holding" part of the army lost it.


But after the center holds and the enemy had closed in. (With their battle line) The whole front center charged, not only parts of it?

henrik wrote:
Who decides where and when the reserves goes? Committing ones best troops to battle is something one does not do lightly, and someting which even very trusted subordinates may not be allowed to do.
So they rather lost the battle than get their best troops into fight? Strange, there is obvious much I don't know about warfare. Maybe I don't know the game well enough, but manovering troops from behind while the enemy is attacking, seem to be a sure tactic to loose.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Geir Erik Ø
Norway
Sandnes
flag msg tools
Geeks!
badge
Hello!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
kduke wrote:
And maybe consider that what you are moving and rolling dice with are the only part of the game/battle that happens to be 'active' right now at this moment of the game...where you are focusing your attention.

Feel free to try the game one time moving all your units, fighting all your units, and letting the opponent do the same. Better yet, let your opponent do it all first. But it won't be a very good game.

When you take Commands and Colors: Ancients for what it is, you can have a lot of fun with a very good game. If you want to talk about what a game isn't, then not many games are fun for long.


I don't say C&C:A isn't a good game. I say that currenly I find the system more fitting for Modern warfare like Memoir. Memoir feels like commanding units that don't know everything you know. That fits the theme just right. C&C:A just didn't feel like commanding an army, and that was what I expected the game would do.

And as I said I own Memoir, so I can play the system with a theme that suits me better.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Roland W. est. 1984
Germany
Deutschland
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
nonsense you never know WHAT to do. Because no battleplan lasts more than some minutes and the enemy reacts or does something which you do not have forseen... so leaders alone do not make a good army. How they work together over a communication system is the key
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Geir Erik Ø
Norway
Sandnes
flag msg tools
Geeks!
badge
Hello!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
evil_puck wrote:
nonsense you never know WHAT to do. Because no battleplan lasts more than some minutes and the enemy reacts or does something which you do not have forseen... so leaders alone do not make a good army. How they work together over a communication system is the key
And they never managed to move their whole army as a coordinated one. I got it.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Trystan
Sweden
Hässleholm
Skåne
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I know I'm a bit late to the party on this one but I thought the same thing as the OP at first, I think this was because the only wargames I played as a youngster were Games Workshop ones, so the idea of not moving my whole army each turn seemed odd, it felt more like playing (keeping with GW) Blood Bowl 3rd ed+ and choosing the best of a bad hand to move as many guys as possible before a turnover.

It was only when I thought about it and importantly thought about how your opponent is in the same boat that it started to mesh better for melee combat, all over the battlefield people are waiting for the signal to charge, or battling each other with no gain and it's when the commander/fate/weather or whatever else changes and focus shifts to one part of the battlefield that real gains are made or lost.

Anyway, my point I suppose is that I came to like the C&C system when I stopped thinking about turns in the "move all your guys, roll all your dice and call your opponent back from the telly" sense and more that each command card is a part turn, a moment of focus before your oponent gets to turn his eye to counterattack and personally I prefer that you only move a few guys before your opponent gets a chance to.

Finally as anyone reading can tell by my examples I'm neither a serious nor heavy wargamer, I generally like quite fast neat games which give a feel for whatever it is their theme is portraying, the C&C games for me scratch that itch for battle for me.

On a side note, for a game where troops do carry on regardless it might be worth checking out if you haven't already Battleground: Fantasy Warfare, there you give guys standing orders like close / fire / move to point A which they'll carry out automatically unless you spend precious command points to alter their actions.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steven Dolges
msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Geirerik wrote:
And they never managed to move their whole army as a coordinated one. I got it.


A six years later reply:

In a CCA game I just played with my wife, Battle of Akragas, I managed to move nearly my entire army (sans one cavalry on far right flank and one light unit on far left) using a line command card. It lets you move foot units in a long contiguous line.

So if your 6 year old critique is about CCA not allowing you to move your whole army at once, I disagree. You certainly can, you just need to make sure you organize your army correctly.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michal K
Poland
Otwock
Mazowieckie
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Indeed, it was even more easy in Ancient times then now - t move whole / almost whole army. Nobody sane would put today your troops in one, contiguous line and move them now. The Great War tought generals what machine gun can do...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
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.