"Command Segments per Game?" Topic

Old question asked in a hopefully somewhat fresh context.

FTPOTQ a "command segment" is a group of players (could be one) that issue orders for a set of units once per turn in a game.

Last weekend, we played a skirmish ambush scenario (against an automaton ambushers) where each player issued orders to one convoy unit. Eight players issuing orders to eight units; eight command segments.

A couple of months ago, we played the OXI Day scenario. Each side had five players who collectively controlled all the units on one side. Two command segments.

The latter game with more players and more units on the board seemed to "go faster" than the former. (Though in the former, there was a lot of socializing and drinking and eating, so it didn't "drag".)

How many command segments (and what type?) do you usually play? How many do you prefer?

-----

We normally play (and prefer) 3-5 CS I like that structure for a "most enjoyable" game flow.

Two, and I resent being called a "segment." I may be a blithering idiot sometimes, but I'm not just a piece of one.

More seriously, depends on size of game and level (and type) of command represented. Allied commands and possibly distinct armies or corps should have their own commanders and arguably their own victory conditions. (That's a council of perfection: I haven't taken part in a game with more than two players for some time. But for me, those "command segments" should be individuals. I'd rapidly drop out of a gaming group which wanted me to attend a council of war each turn. I was committee meetinged out many years ago.

Like Robert said, if I've got six players, I want them to command their own stuff, so six segments. I regularly run games with many players, and it is far quicker (and more realistic) if they push their own toys, even if some of them are higher commanders.

Of course if it is one of those 'one unit at a time' type activation systems, most of the players will be sitting around a lot of the time.

As a player, I expect to give (often different) orders to more than one unit – eg playing as a division commander, ordering brigades and battalions. That might be a 1:1 game, or a multi-player game. I like both, more often than not I'm playing 1:1.
I don't like the idea of a group of players collectively commanding units, for reasons given succinctly be Robert.

Depends on what you're playing.

I agree with Old C, it depends on the game. We play G de B and brigades, divisions and sometimes a corps formations need to be commanded and all players command at least one formation.

yes depend on size which should give scales; plus a realistic(?;) time to allow for commanders communication, dissemination of intent, fumbling, hesitations etc. a pb in skirmishes where you want very short "segments" to fit the table and the fast push of event. meanwhile de facto you can change the directions, stance etc. of several hundred men (grand skirmish) or dozens spread out in less than a minute.
all in reaching a good compromise.

rapidly drop out of a gaming group which wanted me to attend a council of war each turn.

You might just need different players. The two segments, five players each ran much "faster" than eight one-to-ones.

But as many have mentioned, there are a lot of other aspects to game flow than just this one. Still I like the 3-5 CS feel, independent of how many players and separate unis map to those CS.

We do sometimes play games in a committed style, there isn't much option with Command and Colours type card games, but we recently ran The Siege of Rhodes with teams. All that happens is that either one or the more mouthy players (me in this case) ends up dominating the decisions, or every minute point gets debated back and forth and nothing happens.

Depends on the game I guess. Pandemic is designed for cooperative play, but everyone has their own character.

I think it depends on how the chain of command and control system is modelled in the rules being used. Personally I like everyone taking part to have some independent decisions to make. These might be at different command levels though. I'd usually expect two or at most three levels of command at most. You really can't beat having real people at different command levels for that true command friction effect.

That said a lot of my gaming is one person on each side.

If I follow the definition correctly. One per element in alternative activation games.

If you're playing something like Napoleonics, ACW, SYW, or FPW, you might be commanding a brigade with 4 to 5 battalions in it. So what is that? Are you commanding one brigade or five battalions? What if you're commanding a division or a corps?

Are you commanding one brigade or five battalions?

Depends. What orders are you giving? Do you give one order to the brigade, which leads to five things happening or do you give five separate orders, one for each battalion?

This is one of those questions that's phrased so complexly, I doubt I'll be able to parse it when the poll runs and I haven't had sufficient coffee yet in the morning.