FWWC multiplayer game 2 or 3 day scenario

[Almskaar]

So who’s up for an experiment? Here’s what I’d like to try – a FWWC 2 or 3 day scenario as a multiplayer game. FWWC because those are the only games I own, and 2 or 3 day scenario because I imagine there'll be a learning curve to this and we'll not want it to drag on too long. Maybe this has been done before, if so, please comment.

The idea is to add a layer of simulation in having corps or divisions commanded by individuals as well as someone taking the role of overall commander for each side. I think this could add a whole new dimension to these games like writing and interpreting, and perhaps even disobeying, orders. Good humor will be required.

Here’s how it would work, at least this first time –

We give it a few days until we get around a dozen participants.

People state which side they want to play (CP, Allied, or either). They can also state what sort of command they want like infantry or cavalry.

The highest ranking player on The Blitz for each side is made overall commander, unless they don’t want it then they can kick it down to whoever’s next. I just figured this would be a quick and easy way to assign those roles. In the future this can be done differently to give everyone a chance if this catches on. These two then pick the scenario, maybe some of the fog of war can be preserved this way.

The overall commanders then assign the corps or divisions on their side to their various sub commanders (it would just depend on the size of the scenario and number of participants). I imagine if a corps was broken up and assigned as divisions the HQ and corps artillery etc. would be given to one of the division commanders. We’ll have to be careful with things like fixed units, if they’re fixed for the game the overall commander should probably take them, if they’re to be released at some point they could be assigned to someone.

Now we’re ready to start a game. The overall commander would, of course, have to think up the strategy for their side.


1. Decide which one of their sub commanders should move first.
2. Send that commander an email with orders and the game file.
3. That commander then takes their turn, saves, and sends the file back to the overall commander. I think subs should aim to complete their moves in a 24 hour window to keep things moving along, this should be doable with only a division or a corps to command.
4. The overall then sends orders and the game file to whoever should go next.
5+... And so on.

Once everyone/thing has been accounted for the overall commander ends the turn and sends it to the opposing overall commander (just like normal) who repeats this process.

Sound interesting?

[Almskaar]

I'm happy to play either side.
Cavalry would be fun but I'm happy to take whatever

[itlnprd]

So who’s up for an experiment? Here’s what I’d like to try – a FWWC 2 or 3 day scenario as a multiplayer game. FWWC because those are the only games I own, and 2 or 3 day scenario because I imagine there'll be a learning curve to this and we'll not want it to drag on too long. Maybe this has been done before, if so, please comment.

The idea is to add a layer of simulation in having corps or divisions commanded by individuals as well as someone taking the role of overall commander for each side. I think this could add a whole new dimension to these games like writing and interpreting, and perhaps even disobeying, orders. Good humor will be required.

Here’s how it would work, at least this first time –

We give it a few days until we get around a dozen participants.

People state which side they want to play (CP, Allied, or either). They can also state what sort of command they want like infantry or cavalry.

The highest ranking player on The Blitz for each side is made overall commander, unless they don’t want it then they can kick it down to whoever’s next. I just figured this would be a quick and easy way to assign those roles. In the future this can be done differently to give everyone a chance if this catches on. These two then pick the scenario, maybe some of the fog of war can be preserved this way.

The overall commanders then assign the corps or divisions on their side to their various sub commanders (it would just depend on the size of the scenario and number of participants). I imagine if a corps was broken up and assigned as divisions the HQ and corps artillery etc. would be given to one of the division commanders. We’ll have to be careful with things like fixed units, if they’re fixed for the game the overall commander should probably take them, if they’re to be released at some point they could be assigned to someone.

Now we’re ready to start a game. The overall commander would, of course, have to think up the strategy for their side.


1. Decide which one of their sub commanders should move first.
2. Send that commander an email with orders and the game file.
3. That commander then takes their turn, saves, and sends the file back to the overall commander. I think subs should aim to complete their moves in a 24 hour window to keep things moving along, this should be doable with only a division or a corps to command.
4. The overall then sends orders and the game file to whoever should go next.
5+... And so on.

Once everyone/thing has been accounted for the overall commander ends the turn and sends it to the opposing overall commander (just like normal) who repeats this process.

Sound interesting?

I am game is the France 14 or e Prussia 14 count me in!

[Almskaar]

I am game is the France 14 or e Prussia 14 count me in!

Awesome!
Do you have a preference as to which side?

[Liebchen]

I am game is the France 14 or e Prussia 14 count me in!

Awesome!
Do you have a preference as to which side?

I was in a team game of the Minsk '44 campaign. It lasted a few years, we Soviets gave up after a strong German counter attack. In my sector, as a matter of fact. 

It was fun, but turn-around was slow at times and quick turn-around is really important for these team games. To that point, the more layers you add the more delay there will be in completion of any given turn. 

Think of the purpose of the higher levels. They wouldn't be moving any units, so their purpose would be to watch the replay and confirm prior orders to their team. How many of these upper echelon players would each side have? They would all have to pipe in every turn to indicate whether they needed to move any specific units, but really, I see them as basically reassigning Army level assets to their front-line commanders, and issuing redirectives when circumstances require. 

The front-line commanders wouldn't even get to do their moves until all of the upper echelon give the go-ahead to start modifying the turn file (i.e. to do their turns). So I'd think twice about going beyond divvying up the Army or Front commands (as the scenario may call for).

But bearing those thoughts in mind, a shorter scenario would be fun to try.

[Almskaar]

I am game is the France 14 or e Prussia 14 count me in!

Awesome!
Do you have a preference as to which side?

I was in a team game of the Minsk '44 campaign. It lasted a few years, we Soviets gave up after a strong German counter attack. In my sector, as a matter of fact. 

It was fun, but turn-around was slow at times and quick turn-around is really important for these team games. To that point, the more layers you add the more delay there will be in completion of any given turn. 

Think of the purpose of the higher levels. They wouldn't be moving any units, so their purpose would be to watch the replay and confirm prior orders to their team. How many of these upper echelon players would each side have? They would all have to pipe in every turn to indicate whether they needed to move any specific units, but really, I see them as basically reassigning Army level assets to their front-line commanders, and issuing redirectives when circumstances require. 

The front-line commanders wouldn't even get to do their moves until all of the upper echelon give the go-ahead to start modifying the turn file (i.e. to do their turns). So I'd think twice about going beyond divvying up the Army or Front commands (as the scenario may call for).

But bearing those thoughts in mind, a shorter scenario would be fun to try.

Thanks for the input. That's cool that it's been tried before. Minsk '44 sounds big, I'm thinking this 1st attempt will be small, mostly based on how many actually sign up. Then if people want to do another round we'll do a scenario like one of the bigger ones we had in the tournament.

I'm picturing one upper echelon player on each side, I've been referring to that position as the overall commander - he figures out what his side will do and gives orders accordingly, it would be almost completely administrative. Seems like having one upper echelon player should streamline things pretty well. Everyone else, the sub commanders, will be in charge of moving a corps or a division's worth of troops each. I think 3 to 6 subs per side sounds good, it would mostly depend on what's available in the scenario.

If each sub did their best to get their forces moved in a 24 hour period, there's always things that come up, that side could complete its turn in a week. Yeah, it's slow for some, I think for the subs this will be like a side project, the overall will be much busier.

So, are you in?!

[agmoss99]

Liebchen makes some good points.

I have experienced multiplayer games where there are all sorts of issues. Personalities and time zones being the commonest. Then there is the issue of somebody accidentally pressing advance turn.

I'd recommend 4 or 6 players at most, and forgetting the overall commander.

I'd be up for something like that.

[Almskaar]

Liebchen makes some good points.

I have experienced multiplayer games where there are all sorts of issues. Personalities and time zones being the commonest. Then there is the issue of somebody accidentally pressing advance turn.

I'd recommend 4 or 6 players at most, and forgetting the overall commander.

I'd be up for something like that.

Duly noted, thank you.

Regarding personalities - Part of my idea of having overall and sub commanders is to introduce a quasi-roleplaying element to this. Ideally, since not everything will go according to plan, I'm hoping people will have enough sense to not sign up if they're gonna have a hard time with that.

I don't think accidentally pressing advance turn needs to be an issue if every time a file is received it is saved. That way if say a sub flubs up they can simply re-open the file they had received and do over. Moving a corps or a division isn't a huge investment in time.

If we only get a handful of folks I'm happy to scrap the overall and go for it, we'll see...

[Deturk]

I'd be up for a France '14 team game.

[agmoss99]

We seem to be four then.