Battle of Borodino Aka Battle of Moscow 1812

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
14 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Battle of Borodino Aka Battle of Moscow 1812

HardThunder
As the topic indicates I am working on a Battle of Borodino game mod. I am doing it first in / for Strategic Command 2 Blitzkrieg because of the ease that I can do it. But do wish to capture- pass it on to a greater group/ larger amount of people.

Work on the Art is no problem, and the basic concept for the first version will be in basic terms an open battle with the French Units being more powerful then the Russians. The Russia goal will be to hold the French for a time, and retain as much of the Army as he can. I will test out the concept of having each unit being two steps to better represent the real battle (although there was 70,000 casualties very few unit had been completely destroyed)

imagebam.com

The map will look somewhat like the one above although I am thinking about Stretching it in width to better fill the screen.

 imagebam.com 

Units for now will look somewhat like above, and will display  points for Attack , defense , movement, and I am hoping range.

My quandary is the issue of Artillery and range. Unlike air units that are destroyed in a attack or defense artillery fires over units, and is unaffected by combat in adjacent areas.

So there is one of the issues I have yet to find how I can do it with this game engine.

Any help, comments, and or suggestions would be great.

Q&A Why the Battle of Borodino
Well unlike large scale battles like Gettysburg and others around that time it is the only one that both sides had a somewhat balanced force. Also the plan is once I make this game others will have a foundation to make other representation from the same time frame, and or even things like WW-2 battles.

Anyway I thank you for taking the time to read this, and hope you found it of some note.
I don't hate you, just the person that plays you in the real world
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Battle of Borodino Aka Battle of Moscow 1812

Cernel
TripleA is purely a strategic, not tactic, game. It is not good at simulating battles.
History plays dice
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Battle of Borodino Aka Battle of Moscow 1812

HardThunder
From Cernel
Cernel wrote
TripleA is purely a strategic, not tactic, game. It is not good at simulating battles.
I thank you for your comment. And in your view, and in many ways that is true.

It took the US Army (US Military) over a Hundred year to say that three views operations are of note. Of course you have Strategic as you have pointed out, Operational, and Tactical. As Maj. Cooper would say "Which one it falls into depends on how broad a net you cast".

Having said that the battle of Borodino is cast in an Operational view point in most accounts, and simulations mostly because of the size, and scope of the battle, as are most battles of that era. Unlike Terrible Swift Sword A board Game that represents the three day battle of Gettysburg on a Grand Tactical level. Even at that it has some limitations in representation as does any simulation.

Games Like MBT would also have some limitations (but I may do a version for it, and open up that game engine also).

In short I understand, and have understood that TripleA has limitations in representation of Scales, and is very bulky in it operation, this does not displace the the fact that I am and have been working on making a mod using the TripleA game engine.
I don't hate you, just the person that plays you in the real world
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Battle of Borodino Aka Battle of Moscow 1812

Cernel
The operational level, especially as a distinct level from the strategic and the tactic ones, not a subset of either, is a post Napoleonic addition (I don't like). Under the Clausewitzian theory, the battle of Borodino would be a tactic thing.
Anyway, what I meant is that you have a tactic scenario when your artillery unit is firing at some other units in some other territories, while you have a strategic scenario when your artillery unit is fighting something else in the same territory only.
TripleA is no good at tactic, but I guess you devised some workarounds.
History plays dice
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Battle of Borodino Aka Battle of Moscow 1812

HardThunder
This post was updated on .
Cernel wrote
The operational level, especially as a distinct level from the strategic and the tactic ones, not a subset of either, is a post Napoleonic addition (I don't like). Under the Clausewitzian theory, the battle of Borodino would be a tactic thing.
Anyway, what I meant is that you have a tactic scenario when your artillery unit is firing at some other units in some other territories, while you have a strategic scenario when your artillery unit is fighting something else in the same territory only.
TripleA is no good at tactic, but I guess you devised some workarounds.
Clausewitz who just so happen to have been at the Battle of Borodino IMOHO would not have seen it as a Tactical way. From my studies Clausewitz spent most of his time looking at War in terms of conceptual ideas of the troops, and population (feelings), and trying to not only define what War is but that in order to wage War constructively you must have an Objective (something that is not always clear).

Most things in life are a compromise.

The operational , and Strategic simulations have much more in common then do the Operational and tactical.

Then again the projection of a simulation deals with scale what your main objective is, and the compromises you make within those. Just about any form of Melee combat can be represented using TripleA. More so if you make the scale larger then an arms reach.

As the guns at that time could not hit a target at much more then about 70 meters, and the map scale is going to be about 300 meters per hex/square bombardment will do for connecting squares. And I may just leave it at that.

Given the scale , and the effect thing had TripleA would work for many operational, and Tactical simulations outside of the scope that would best be covered by something like MBT as in the case of Terrible Swift Sword.
imagebam.com 

Game map with grid overlay
I don't hate you, just the person that plays you in the real world
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Battle of Borodino Aka Battle of Moscow 1812

crazy_german
I have wanted to do a more tactical level tripleA map for some time. Some ideas-

-make everything sea units. There are several interesting features for naval battles that land units can't use, like isSub, or isAir with carrierCost=0
-make artillery an isInfrastructure unit. This will let them not be taken as a casualty, and will instead be captured or destroyed once all friendly units have been destroyed

Nice art BTW
Correctly crazy, disingenuously German
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Battle of Borodino Aka Battle of Moscow 1812

Cernel
In reply to this post by HardThunder
Under the Clausewitzian theory whatever pertains to a single battle is tactic, so the only way Clausewitz would have possibly seen Borodino as strategic (there is no operational), is affirming Borodino is not really 1 battle, but a summing up of loosely related multiple engagements.
Anyway, Clausewitz referred to Borodino as 1 battle.
I agree that in a boardgame strategic and operational are pretty close; and if you are going for something operationalish, then I guess it is good, but the stack limits are pretty raw. Especially, be wary that they don't work for retreat.
History plays dice
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Battle of Borodino Aka Battle of Moscow 1812

captaincrunch
I just wondered and popped in to ask where the game Squad Leader fits into all of this ... it was so tedious and used hexagons and I'll guess it was tactical since it was kinda small scale battles like the one mod I had was the Battle of Stalingrad so I guess it was tactical ...

so tedious though and, personally, the triple A engine > * (and funnest)
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Battle of Borodino Aka Battle of Moscow 1812

HardThunder
captaincrunch wrote
I just wondered and popped in to ask where the game Squad Leader fits into all of this ... it was so tedious and used hexagons and I'll guess it was tactical since it was kinda small scale battles like the one mod I had was the Battle of Stalingrad so I guess it was tactical ...

so tedious though and, personally, the triple A engine > * (and funnest)
Basic Rule of thumb is everything from WWF to Battalion size unit representation is Tactical. Battalion to Corps is Operational, and above is Strategic.

So Squad Leader etc are Tactical.
I don't hate you, just the person that plays you in the real world
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Battle of Borodino Aka Battle of Moscow 1812

HardThunder
In reply to this post by crazy_german
crazy_german wrote
I have wanted to do a more tactical level tripleA map for some time. Some ideas-

-make everything sea units. There are several interesting features for naval battles that land units can't use, like isSub, or isAir with carrierCost=0
-make artillery an isInfrastructure unit. This will let them not be taken as a casualty, and will instead be captured or destroyed once all friendly units have been destroyed

Nice art BTW
That concept is of worth. I will have to do some work in looking into movement cost.

Thank you
I don't hate you, just the person that plays you in the real world
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Battle of Borodino Aka Battle of Moscow 1812

Frostion
In reply to this post by HardThunder
One way to make artillery shoot is to have the artillery units generate ammunition units each turn, and then have these ammo units actually be kamikaze airplanes. These can then be multi move units that fly over territories and crash into enemies. Have triggers remove all the unused ammo units of a players after their turn if they are not used. Otherwise the ammo units would be sitting on the map and be ready to launch even without the artillery gun unit, if the gun moves away.

I use this system in the Age of Tribes map. That map has mortar units and rocket launcher units that shoot ammo. It is not a perfect system, but maybe you can modify the concept or something.

If you want to try it out and study the XML you should download the TripleA prerelease version and download and play the Renaissance version of Age of Tribes.

Maybe there are other options for your artillery, but I have no other ideas.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Battle of Borodino Aka Battle of Moscow 1812

HardThunder
Frostion wrote
One way to make artillery shoot is to have the artillery units generate ammunition units each turn, and then have these ammo units actually be kamikaze airplanes. These can then be multi move units that fly over territories and crash into enemies. Have triggers remove all the unused ammo units of a players after their turn if they are not used. Otherwise the ammo units would be sitting on the map and be ready to launch even without the artillery gun unit, if the gun moves away.

I use this system in the Age of Tribes map. That map has mortar units and rocket launcher units that shoot ammo. It is not a perfect system, d see but maybe you can modify the concept or something.

If you want to try it out and study the XML you should download the TripleA prerelease version and download and play the Renaissance version of Age of Tribes.

Maybe there are other options for your artillery, but I have no other ideas.
A interesting Idea/concept. I like the Idea of being able to target specific units/squares. I will try it and see your application.

Thank you
I don't hate you, just the person that plays you in the real world
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Battle of Borodino Aka Battle of Moscow 1812

Cernel
In reply to this post by crazy_german
While on a strategic level capturing the enemy artillery (and ships...), instead of destroying it, is surely a must for whatever decent ("Napoleonic Empires" of TripleA of course is not, also for many other reasons) Napoleonic wargames, on a tactic level (meaning in a scenario representing only 1 battle under less than 1 day timeframe) I don't really know which way this should or even can be represented the best, under the constraints of the TripleA engine.

But interested about opinions on the matter, since I know little about Napoleonic battles.
History plays dice
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Battle of Borodino Aka Battle of Moscow 1812

HardThunder
Cernel wrote
While on a strategic level capturing the enemy artillery (and ships...), instead of destroying it, is surely a must for whatever decent ("Napoleonic Empires" of TripleA of course is not, also for many other reasons) Napoleonic wargames, on a tactic level (meaning in a scenario representing only 1 battle under less than 1 day timeframe) I don't really know which way this should or even can be represented the best, under the constraints of the TripleA engine.

But interested about opinions on the matter, since I know little about Napoleonic battles.
Ok I do understand what you two are talking about. Yes we/I could do this in a few ways because most of the options is a manipulation through script in simple terms.

The truth is in real terms the capture of arty would have little effect on the current battle. Yes I have seen accouonts -- the major effect in those accounts was shock/ moral. And even then it was for a limited time. The supply factor was in some cases greater. The thing is having trained people at the location at the time.

Even back then it takes time to learn to not only know what to do, how to do it. To do so as a team/unit , do it in correct order, and well. One thing that is missed by many is that even with the great range these things had at the time they used them in most part as a kind of direct fire weapon (shooting at what they could see for the most part).  You just did not have trained people hanging around doing nothing.

Teaching someone to be a soldier takes about 4-8 weeks. Addition training for front line troops again 4-8 weeks. Today it is even a greater issue because of not only the complexity of the weapons systems but the way we use them. Just jumping into an old M-35 2-1/2 ton you could not start it without knowing how. An M-1 tank --- good luck on ever coming upon doing it without being trained. And that is just starting it. I could go on and on.

A little about me. I was a tanker for about 10-14 years (I did other things at the same time or for a short time within those 14 years), a Grunt for about 18 months, and a MI puke. In that time I also got 6 logistics MOS qualifications. I really don't know of anyone that knows more about the M-60 tank then me, and used not only others (M-48, M-1 T-55,62 etc). Familiarized with many personal weapons.

Anyway. Yes for the next battle or the one after that it was a key factor. Or of course for a battle lasting for a few days (I can mash together a team in a case like that).  Note that back then even if they abandon a gun the sight would almost always be missing.
I don't hate you, just the person that plays you in the real world