Abstract Tournament Campaign with DBN

The context of this article is related directly to DBN gaming, but the concepts would be applicable to more than that particular set of rules.

The idea is to run a tournament, either at a convention-event or a couple of consecutive Sunday meetings, where the tournament took on a little more meaning than just your personal scores by adding the notion of an abstract campaign.

The campaign tournament is similar to a typical DBX tournament where numerous two-player games occur. However, within the context of an abstract campaign a player’s force can grow, shrink or even improve or degrade during the campaign based upon the outcomes of a player’s individual battles. Those outcomes also determine which “team” is winning the campaign.

Getting Going
When the players have been determined, divide them into two teams. One team is “France and its Allies” and the other team is “The Allied Coalition”. The nationalities and army lists for each team are obvious in the context of various points within the Napoleonic period.

Each player chooses an appropriate nationality within those available to his team and creates a 12-point army with which to begin the campaign. Use the following points chart and the army lists in the rules to build your army:

• Command Element: 0 Points (1 allowed per army in beginning)
• Baggage Element: 0 Points (1 allowed per army)
• Horse Artillery Element: 1.5 Points
• Linear Fortifications Element: 0.5 Points
• All Other Element Types (Infantry, Cavalry, Foot Artillery, etc.): 1 Point
• Element Graded as Elite: + 0.5 Points (Allowable only if in army list)
• Element Graded as Militia or Irregular Cavalry: - 0.5 Points (Allowable only if in army list)
• Element Graded as Old Guard: + 1 Point (Allowable only if in army list)
• Upgrade Command Element to “Good” (+1 PIP Bonus): 1 Point
• Downgrade Command Element to “Poor” (-1 PIP Penalty): -1 Point

With the last two options, a player can decide to begin with fewer elements than normal but enjoy a command bonus. Or suffer a command penalty, but enjoy additional soldiers in the army (because you have an extra point to spend).

Scenarios
Rather than typical tournament games where there really is no scenario being played, I’d prefer to invest a little time into creating scenarios. For example, let’s say there would be four scenarios – each with a pre-determined terrain set-up. Perhaps, for the sake of conversation, we can say that the scenarios are “meeting engagement”, “flank attack”, “holding action” and “break-out”. Scenarios could get creative where appropriate – allowing for things like ambushes, reserves, allied support, field works, etc.

Having the terrain pre-determined on each scenario speeds the gaming along since there would be no manipulation of the terrain between games.

As I mentioned earlier, a player’s force is not a static “12 elements” during the campaign. So, we can use this as a device in the scenarios. For instance, in some scenarios the “attacker” could be the player with the largest army or the player with the most cavalry. When conditions are equal the typical die-roll can be the determining factor I who is the attacker and defender.

Scenarios could have special scoring circumstances in addition to the normal scoring process. So, perhaps a player scores 1 point for each enemy element destroyed during the game and 2 points for winning the battle. Then any scoring for special scenario rules would also be added. Perhaps the army that holds specific positions also receives 1 point per position. Your imagination is the limit.

Sure, armies that change and non-standard scenarios may produce the occasional out-of-balance game. Not every single case would be a “fair fight” in the sense of typical (boring) tournaments. I say, good! What campaign in history is filled with fair fights where everything was equal for both sides in each battle? For the most part, battles will be pretty closely matched. We’re looking for fun and we’re looking for challenges, not cakewalks. 

Battles
Players are paired up in whatever manner is desired and matched to the scenarios. Like in the typical tournament format, it is wise to time each battle, perhaps 1 hour is allowed.

Battle Aftermath
Each scenario is scored and the campaign score is adjusted. Each battle won by a side advances a sliding-counter in their direction by a number of points equal to the difference in points of each battle. So, for example, during the first round of games the counter is at “zero”. After the first round of battles, the net difference in all of the scores of the battles fought favored the Coalition side by 3 points then the slider would move 3 ticks to the Coalition side – indicating that currently they are enjoying a minor campaign victory – hopefully motivating the French players to perform better in the next round.

After the campaign points are tallied, each player administers the aftermath of battle to his army.

Determine Status of Destroyed Elements
 For each element that was destroyed during the game, roll 1D6. On a result of 1 or 2, the element was in fact destroyed and is out of the campaign. On a result of a 3, the element does return to the army but was weakened by the losses and has a -1 for the next battle. If that element was unlucky enough to suffer the same fate in the next battle, the -1 would simply continue, we would not want a -2 element. If the result was a 4, 5 or 6 then the element returns to the army without ill effect. Perhaps it has been supplemented by a draft from the reserve battalion or the battle damage was more moral than physical.

Gods of War
It is possible, if the gods of war determine it to be so, that a player could have a lot of losses and end up with a small army. Like mentioned earlier, we’re looking for fun and challenges, not cakewalks. So, the campaign should have some mechanisms to counter extreme losses. The idea is to mitigate the effects of a player being reduced to a rump of an army – that is no fun at all.

Many things are possible. Players with small armies, let’s say with 8 or less elements, could always opt to be the defender and even claim a scenario bonus of adding fieldworks to their forces. Perhaps they could call for “allied support” and receive some free elements to add to their army – but at the cost of some campaign victory points. Maybe when determining after a battle losses no army could have more than 2 non-command elements lost.

Determine Status of Destroyed Command Elements
If a command element is destroyed during a game, roll 1d6. On a result of 1 or 2, the command element was destroyed and is out of the campaign. It is immediately replaced by a new command element. The new command element has no bonus or penalties. On a result of 3, the command element returns to the army but is weakened and suffers a -1 PIP penalty for the next battle. If the result was a 4, 5 or 6 then the element returns to the army without ill effect.

If desired, any replacement command element could begin with a bonus or a penalty. After all, casualties to command lead to promotions, and sometimes the new commander is found to be quite skilled. Of course, some new commanders are inefficient at the new level of responsibility. If this option is desired, roll 1d6 for the new commander. On a result of 1 the new commander has a -1 PIP penalty. On a result of 6 the new commander has a +1 PIP bonus.

Determine New Command Bonus or Penalty
During the course of a campaign, generals can get better or even lose ability. These things we attribute to the stresses of combat defining or reducing the character of a general.

If your general won the battle, roll 1D6. On a result of 5 or 6 the general receives either a PIP bonus of +1 or an increase of 3 inches to his command radius. This is the player’s choice to make. These bonuses can be cumulative during the campaign.

If your general lost the battle, roll 1d6. If the result is a 1 then the general receives a PIP penalty of -1. This penalty can be cumulative during the campaign.

Purchase New Army Elements
A player will typically earn points by winning a battle, but often even the loser of a battle can earn points. These points can be spent to add new elements to the player’s army or to improve the units currently in the army. The following actions are available:

• Add a second Command Element: 1 Point
• Add a Horse Artillery Element: 2 Points (Allowable only if in army list)
• Add a Linear Fortifications Element: 1 Points (Allowable only if in army list)
• Add Any All Other Element Type: 1 Point
• Upgrade an existing “Regular” Element to “Elite”: 1 Point (Army List requirement is waived)
• Upgrade an existing “Militia” or “Irregular Cavalry” Element to “Regular”: 1 Point
• Add an Old Guard Element: 2 Points (Allowable only if in army list)

Big Battle
Big Battle DBN is a lot of fun. Not all, but certainly some playing formats would allow a big battle to occur pitting two players from one side against two players from another side. What interesting dynamics would be in play when two players on the same side have to look after the interests of their own army plus that of the overall campaign? “Hey Fred, why don’t you storm the hill with your infantry?” “Uh, no Bob, my army took a beating in the last battle…why don’t you storm the hill?!”

Conclusion
Maybe the best player on each side or the overall best player gets a prize? Maybe the winning side buys the losing side a round of Pepsi-colas?

We do play some tournaments within our club, and those tournaments are fun. I was thinking of ways to inject a little more fun and a little more incentive into those tournaments.

What thoughts can you share on this subject?

On to Nashville!

Looking into some of the deep dark recesses of my other computer's file system, I came across a program I wrote. This program was the "after action" material for an American Civil War campaign that was played by six members of our club. The program is pretty cool, I wrote it in mid-2002 in Visual Basic 6 (yuck) and was given to all of the campaign players on CD's. That way, the guys could look back on the fun times we had!

Well, my CD has been long gone, but I found the compiled program on my machine and ran it. Yep, memories of fun times with the gang. In fact, I am glad to have found it as I don't get to game with some of these guys too much anymore. One has dropped out of the hobby mostly, focusing more on work and family, one has recently moved to Virginia and another - although very active in the hobby - has shifted the majority of his gaming to a different club.

About the Campaign

“On to Nashville!” is the name of the campaign, played it in the summer of 2002. The concept of the campaign was that Matt Grippin and I would set ourselves up as the campaign moderators and place 4 players all on the same team and guide them through scenarios. We used Johnny Reb III and 15MM miniatures.

The CD Cover

By doing this we could have total “fog of war” for the players during the tabletop battles (we played the opposition troops, the Yankees) and avoid some of the typical campaign pitfalls like orders, map movements, grossly uneven battles, etc. In addition, we could link the scenarios and offer the players “command decisions” to make between scenarios that would affect things in the campaign. Also, we shaped the scenarios to challenge the players to different conditions. Defense, coordinated attack, attack on prepared works, etc. Of course, losses in one scenario were never recovered in full before the next – so the players had to fight like casualties mattered.

The only thing was how do we get the players to compete with each other? So, we decided that the players would compete for victory points earned by actions, elan, style and successes on the battlefield. So we concocted the following conditions for the campaign:

“The setting for the campaign is Central Tennessee in the fall of 1862 (September and October). The players are brigade commanders in Connell's Division, Polk's Corps of the Confederate Army of Tennessee. The campaign is not historical, except for Nashville, the place names are fictional, as is the strategic situation in the theatre.”

“General Connell is a fictional character. He is Major General Rupert Connell, a popular preacher with no military experience. His appointment to the command was purely political, owing to his Tennessee popularity and his close friendship with the governor. His style of leadership is decidedly hands-off, preferring to allow his staff to handle the details. He is generally looked upon as an incompetent glory hog, as he as recently claimed successes that were not of his works. While his lack of involvement is good in that it allows the professionals to act, it is also bad in that often the brigade generals lack a clear direction, and squabble amongst themselves as to what the plan of action should be.”

“Given successful scenario outcomes by the players, the Confederate Army will advance upon and attack and capture Nashville with the hopes of causing Kentucky to enter the war on the side of the Confederacy. Beginning with the attack upon the hamlet of Carnack Springs, the players will begin their movements towards Nashville.”

Organizational Chart

The Generals

The players were asked to write biographies for their fictional counterparts – in fact all 4 players and the 2 referees were all actively engaged in writing fictional “letters home”, orders, reports, etc. throughout the campaign. This provided all of us with a wealth of flavor as well as lots of material for the CD to be made afterwards.

The Generals

Above is a portrait of the 4 player-generals taken at the first battle game. The back rank, from the left is Todd Pressley as “Brigadier-General Patrick Augustus Pressley” and Dave Minor as “Brigadier-General James A. Minor”. The front rank, from the left is Binhan Lin as “Brigadier-General Buford Algernon Lynn” and Jeff Lambert as “Brigadier-General Jefferson Lee Lambert”. If you don’t know them, these are four great guys to call friends and play games with (same for the unseen co-referee, Matt Grippin).

I’ll post more about the campaign’s actions and outcome. And, I think I shall, as time goes on, post the fictional biographies that were created by these gentlemen. Spectacular stuff! At least one of these fine generals would be wounded during the campaign, and two of them would mortally fall at Nashville.

Campaign Thoughts

As I think back on this campaign, I desire to do it again – maybe civil war, maybe something else. I like the format of the campaign where all players are on the same side. Sure, there is some work to be done for the organizers, but it is basically done before the campaign starts. Not much to do during the campaign.

Campaigns offer great context to our gaming, as we all already understand. This context can be enhanced by the creativity of the players by involving them in creating the persona of those they are modeling on the battlefield.

If you are lucky enough, the context-based gaming, in a period you enjoy, with gentlemen gamers, will reward your work with some of the most memorable games and times in the hobby. So, my thanks go to the 4 players and to my co-referee. As you can tell, I am still enjoying this, eight years on.