Seven Days Campaign Game

Winterfest #19
tombeach
Major
Major
Posts: 151
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 6:30 pm
Location: Rochester, WI

Re: Seven Days Campaign Game

Postby tombeach » Sun Nov 01, 2015 4:10 am

Please forgive my lapse in responding to your posts Ron and Roger. I have been out of town working for the last ten days. And where I'm located I have been unable to use my computer till now. Sorry for getting back so late to you.

Allow me to get back to you Roger regarding the optional rules questions you posed as well as clarifying the Gaines' Mill McClellan question. My days are so long right now that I'm unable to concentrate on the rules to where I would feel confident in giving you clear and accurate responses. Please hang in there as I will be coming home at the end of this week and promise to get back to you immediately on these questions.

Welcome aboard, Ron. Room? Absolutely! The campaign game can easily accommodate multiple players. As it appears today, we will now have five: Ron, Roger, Todd, Dave and Tom. Others would still be welcome.

Both Ron and Todd have a preference for Federal while Roger and Dave N. are open to either side. My personal preference is Federal. But I will play either side with equal enthusiasm.

More to come.

Tom

tombeach
Major
Major
Posts: 151
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 6:30 pm
Location: Rochester, WI

Re: Seven Days Campaign Game

Postby tombeach » Thu Nov 12, 2015 2:50 am

HI Guys,

Sorry for the late reply.

Defensive Orders

As for your question on Defensive Orders (optional) I and those I've played with have always chosen not to use this rule. We have instead chosen some very simple house rules (more interpretations) that were provided by discussions in the Consimworld folder for the series. In particular, this concerns the issue of exactly what Commands with No Orders are permitted to do. This discussion was also influenced by Dave Powell's "Writing Your Orders: What do they mean?" essay (see No Orders) also included in the back of the v3.2 rules book. So by extension, the consideration of what Commands currently under No Orders are permitted to do also addresses the Defensive Orders issue, if not admittedly, obliquely. So what I'm saying is that we have always chosen not to use Defensive Orders but have made clear interpretations as to what Commands who find themselves under No Orders situations can and cannot do. There were two camps of thought on this matter. Basically, we went with the Powell camp which said that Commands under No Orders conditions are free to move within the command radius of their divisional leader, but are not allowed to advance beyond their present front lines. If you wish to advance, write the orders to do so.

I hope that makes sense.

Extended Movement

This is a fascinating optional rule! I confess I have never attempted it, although it reads at the very cool level. My feelings are that there are an awful lot of new and untried rules associated with this optional rule and it definitely complicates things across the whole game. I also feel that use of such a rule would strongly recommend a judge to help ensure that such sweeping unseen movements were correctly executed at every step and that the opposing side received it's due where discovery and the like is concerned. So given we will all be players, I am of the opinion that this rule should probably be avoided. Having said that, I would entertain everyone's thoughts on it. And additionally, I will do some inquiring with Dave Powell and Chip Pharr to see if they have ever used it in play and their thoughts on it's use. So for now I'd say no to using it.

The Campaign Game

From everything I understand, the rules in the Malvern Hill game supersede all other individual games. So everything that applies to the full Seven Days Campaign game is contained within Malvern Hill save for the counters needed for play which will necessarily come from the games in the Seven Days series.

Fatigue

While optional, I feel this rule is integral to the play of the entire Seven Days Campaign and would highly recommend applying it to our game.

I am studying the differences between the two campaign scenarios, those being 7.6 and 7.7 and the variable entrance of Jackson's Valley Army. If you have thoughts on this please let me know.

At some point soon I will post the House Rules we have adopted to clarify the most common issues that have come up over a lot of play and discussion via the Consimworld folder. Its not that much and it really does clear up those minor gray areas. Please look for that sometime soon.

Tom

kqrgcw
1st Lieutennant
1st Lieutennant
Posts: 98
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2014 1:25 am

Re: Seven Days Campaign Game

Postby kqrgcw » Sun Nov 15, 2015 2:19 am

I do think fatigue is needed. I wasn't sure the defensive thing would do so well so I think I understand your statement on No Orders. I think the variable entry of Jackson might be worth doing but I think it needs tied to his lethargy during the whole campaign. I am just about done with all the rules but don't have them in front of me. Did the Malvern Hill stuff have anything in it that limited the Union Army from pouncing on the Rebs early or did it limit that?

Whatever set of rules it was in it might be needed to give a fighting chance to the Confederates and prevent an ahistorical drive on Richmond from the south.

I fully understand delays from work.

Just some thoughts.

Roger

tombeach
Major
Major
Posts: 151
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 6:30 pm
Location: Rochester, WI

Re: Seven Days Campaign Game

Postby tombeach » Sun Nov 15, 2015 4:34 pm

Hi Roger,

Did the Malvern Hill stuff have anything in it that limited the Union Army from pouncing on the Rebs early or did it limit that?


Yes, this is clearly addressed in Malvern Hill by rules 2.2 and 2.3. The first is a severe application of a -2 McClellan Anti-Initiave to any Union Commander who would attempt Initiative to launch an attack. The second, McClellan's Paranoia applies a -2 to any Union Corp Attack Stoppage check. These are both quite punitive to the aggressive union commander and should easily be considered both historical in application as well as a good balance in helping Confederates.

A quick couple of notes:

I do not advocate using the Procrastination optional rules under Command.

I DO advocate the use of the optional Road Column rule under Formations.

Tom

tombeach
Major
Major
Posts: 151
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 6:30 pm
Location: Rochester, WI

Re: Seven Days Campaign Game

Postby tombeach » Sun Nov 15, 2015 5:15 pm

Dave Nelson and I began our CWB training this past week with the Mechanicsville scenario from 'Gaines' Mill.' It felt good revisiting the series after a break of some time. And while neither of us had ever played the scenario, it proved to be a great time! As ever, the games play quickly and reminded me of just how quickly fortunes can change on the Civil War battlefield.

Closing immediately with A.P. Hill's division with Ripley's attached brigade, I instantly began taking my lumps from Dave's artillery. But the Confederates got lucky and forced back the Federals far right flank brigade, permitting what appeared to be a chance for A.P. Hill to climb the banks of the Beaverdam Creek and assault McCall's PA Reserves. Just then, A.P. Hill managed two snake eyes rolls consecutively! The first, his Corps Attack Stoppage check which immediately halted Hill at the foot of the heights. The second, Hill's attempt to use Initiative to issue new Attack orders caused him to become a Loose Cannon! Naturally he was ordered by Dave to move directly backwards from whence he came!

We will continue our training this week. Anyone else getting some game time in on the series?

Tom

tombeach
Major
Major
Posts: 151
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 6:30 pm
Location: Rochester, WI

Re: Seven Days Campaign Game

Postby tombeach » Wed Nov 18, 2015 11:00 pm

Dave Nelson and I reset the Mechanicsville scenario today and played it through conclusion. Unbelievably, as the Confederates again, I managed to roll snake eyes for A.P. Hill yet a second time when the moment came to roll for Initiative and commit his reserves. And of course that promptly ended the scenario. I would like to encourage anyone who is going to be playing in this game to do whatever possible to ensure a position on the battlefield directly opposite me.

So Roger, Todd and Ron, have you guys begun training yet? With less than three months to go I would expect to be hearing about some current on-going games or AAR's and any rules questions we might need to be discussing.

I also think it would be wise for us to settle on sides at this time for all of the obvious reasons. Ron and Todd have already expressed an interest in playing Federal. Meanwhile, Roger has expressed no particular side preference. So then, as Dave Nelson and I would like to play on the same side, the logical arrangement would seem to be:

Federal

Ron and Todd

Confederate

Roger, Dave N. and Tom

Roger, if you prefer Federal just say so as this presents no problem. Whichever side you prefer in the end is fine.

Tom

kqrgcw
1st Lieutennant
1st Lieutennant
Posts: 98
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2014 1:25 am

Re: Seven Days Campaign Game

Postby kqrgcw » Sun Nov 22, 2015 2:15 am

I am fine with the Confederates. In fact, it will be best for me to be with more seasoned people than me. I have none of the brigade games the Gamers did on the Civil War. Due to my wife's injury in the summer my gaming time is down but things should be all right by February.

I am looking forward to this and expect to have a great time. I just won't be as fast as others.

Roger

tombeach
Major
Major
Posts: 151
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 6:30 pm
Location: Rochester, WI

Re: Seven Days Campaign Game

Postby tombeach » Sun Nov 22, 2015 5:21 pm

Hi Roger,

Hope your wife's recovery is progressing well.

If you or anyone else would like to play a small learning scenario from any of the available CWB games on Vassal (see link) I would be happy to do so. Please let me know if that is something anyone wishes to pursue. Unfortunately there are no games from the Seven Days on Vassal. And while we can't explore the special rules from that series, playing any of the games would reinforce and clarify all the game basics.

Tom

http://www.vassalengine.org/mediawiki/index.php?search=Civil+War+Brigade+Series&title=Special%3ASearch&go=Go

tombeach
Major
Major
Posts: 151
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 6:30 pm
Location: Rochester, WI

Re: Seven Days Campaign Game

Postby tombeach » Thu Nov 26, 2015 5:47 pm

With some side games beginning to look like main games (i.e Korea) I would like to request that those who intend on making Seven Days their primary game confirm that as soon as possible, please. With time growing short, this will permit us to firmly determine sides, properly train for strategic planning purposes and iron out rules questions. Please also bear in mind that while Seven Days has very low counter density and a relatively simple rules set, it is a big campaign game with corps command levels. And given its size and scope as well as the importance of written orders, players really need to be pushing counters around at home to gain working experience and come to the game with a firm grasp on the series rules. Thanks.

Tom

Racine
Sergeant First Class
Sergeant First Class
Posts: 38
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2014 4:50 am

Re: Seven Days Campaign Game

Postby Racine » Fri Nov 27, 2015 8:04 pm

Roger,
An A unit that extends in one direction becomes 2 B s. If it extends in two directions it becomes a B with 2 C extensions. I think it costs the terrain entered by the extension to extend; i.e., the same as if the parent unit had moved into that hex ...... although I am not able to find an explicit rule to that effect..


Return to “Winterfest XIX - 2016”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests