"Chaos on the Battlefield vs. Our Perfect Knowledge" Topic

"In our games, command and control (hereafter C&C) rules are used to lessen the effect of the all-knowing, 100-foot tall telepathic general. In real life C&C is about alleviating the confusion on the battlefield.

Some players dislike C&C rules; each to their own. If you have more than two players per side, you don't need C&C rules because any plan other than attacking all along the line will soon go down the drain. (This is the advised plan for convention games.) Players aren't interested in watching others play. They want to roll dice and cause mayhem. More than once I've seen players in strong defensive positions leave them to attack. Long-range artillery fire was boring. Bayonets!

In smaller games I find C&C rules important. The Fencibles are a small club. These days it is a stretch get 4 players together…"

The Corlears Hook Fencibles

link

Armand

I agree with the sentiment. As long as it is not "the dice hate you this turn" I'm interested in command rules.

(smile)

Armand

I agree with the sentiment too. I was hoping there would be some simple rules included to accomplish this.

Tom

Imperfect knowledge is not a single, universal thing. Different types of ambiguity require different approaches.

I agree with Etotheipi.

I generally agree with the linked article's conclusion, although in games that I run, I tend to center the chaos on incomplete and inaccurate information about the other side:

I prefer simple C&C rules and chaos in the games. I think profiling the command environment of the armies portrayed is as necessary as getting the numbers of troops and their weapons right. Bring on the chaos and the petty feuds among the generals.

Thanks

Armand