Civil War Brigade Series, Antietam or Gettysburg thoughts

[GJK]

So I've been playing Scourge of War Gettysburg/Antietam a good bit lately and it's quite enjoyable.  What I miss is the human interaction.  Yes, of course, I realize that I could play head to head online but I mean the interaction between commanders on the same side.  So I had this idea and thought I'd reach out to see if there was *any* interest with what I think would be a quite fun gaming experience:

Using VASSAL and The Gamers Civil War Brigade Series games; either Gettysburg, Antietam or smaller battle for now, and have sides set up.  This would be a Pbem game.  The commander for each side would generate orders and then pass the log file to any subordinate (player) that is due to check for order acceptance.  If accepted, that subordinate then attempts to comply with the order by moving only his forces that have thus been ordered.  He can also attempt to gain initiative and issue his own orders.  So basically, the play would be a slow, casual pace as the log is passed from commander to commander, one side at a time (per CWBS rules).
The games are pretty easy to play and I have ebook format of the rules and pdf's of the rules are freely available from MMP's website.  I created the VASSAL modules for the games so I know that it would work.  I'd be willing to help anybody that might be interested but doesn't know how to set up or use VASSAL or that is new to the CWBS rules.

What do you all think?

[Dolan50]

I may be interested in this sometime in the near future.
I own 2 games from the Civil War Brigade series(3 Battles of Manassass and Strike Them A Blow) but haven't played them yet.

I've pretty much gotten over my Russian Front Graviteam obsession for awhile at least.
And started reading the 4 Gordan C Rhea books about Grants 1864 campaign in Virginia.
I was pretty heavily into the American Civil War about three years ago and am just starting to rekindle my interest in it again.

I still need to learn the rules for the brigade series and learn VASSAL as well and can get back to you on this if my interest still holds after I finish these 4 books.

I've always had a special interest in the American Civil War.
On my Mothers side of the family her great great grandfather served in the Maryland militia from 1863-65.
On my fathers side of the family his great great grandfather served in the 5th Michigan cavalry,I don't know what years during the war He served though.

[GJK]

Cool!  And yes, this may take a little while to organize. 

I do have some old Pbem log files from Pbem games of various CWBS games that I played over the years.  Those could be great learning tools for somebody trying to learn the system.  Again, it is not a difficult game system AT ALL and I would even suggest that if all the players were new to the game, then we could be very loose in applying the rules as long as somebody isn't clearing breaking them to gain an advantage.

I see the game flowing like this (via email).  The Confederate player (they always go first unless a scenario specifies otherwise) that is the Commanding General on the battlefield would begin the turn.  This would be the primary player for that side.  He issues any orders that he desires and then he sends the running log file to his first subordinate commander.  That commander conducts stoppage checks for his corps, attempts to gain initiative (if desired), rolls to see if any new orders have arrived or if they are still delayed and if arrived checks for order acceptance.  He then conducts movement, close combat, ammo resupply for his corps and then passes the running log to the next commander on the Confederate side who then repeats those same steps.  Once all commanders have gone through the first half of their turn (steps just listed), the log is passed to any of the subordinate commanders on the Union side who conducts non-phasing combat with any units from his corps then he passes the log to the next Union subordinate, etc.  The log is then returned to the Confederate side where each corps commander conducts phasing player combat.  The log is then returned up the chain to the Confederate CG who conducts straggler recovery checks and makes any rally attempts. 

Maybe sounds convoluted here but really, the turns would be easy to play out and a commander would only have his corps to worry about so 10 minutes to do your log and you're sending it along to the next commander literally.  It would make the game really cool if by going on an honor system, corps commanders and the CG's didn't chat outside of the game to keep the FOW between their own commands in tact.   I'm excited just typing about it imagining each corps commanders wishing for the CG to issue them an order and weighing the option of just trying to get initiative instead and the CG trying to figure out what the heck his corps commanders are doing and why they aren't following his orders!  It would be fun with a group of 6 or so.

[Nefaro]

A few guys at this forum have been doing coop multiplayer games against the AI.  They're always looking for more, if you wanna register and give them a heads up.  I think they've been doing it a couple nights a week lately.  I'm gonna join them again after my gaming burnout has passed.

http://www.maddogdrivethru.net/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=14774

[GJK]

Yeah, I'd love to join up with those guys.  I need more practice at the Scourge series though.  They play "in the saddle" and don't use any God view and issue all commands via courier.  I haven't even tried to play it like that yet.

[Nefaro]

Yeah, I'd love to join up with those guys.  I need more practice at the Scourge series though.  They play "in the saddle" and don't use any God view and issue all commands via courier.  I haven't even tried to play it like that yet.

They weren't enforcing it.. I played from a god's eye view with them, every time.  We only sent free-form courier messages to each other - not our AI subordinates.  It was just chat messages sent by courier instead of the in-game chat system.  It made the coordination between human players more interesting.

[GJK]

Ah, ok.  Well I'll have to check it out then.  Thanks.