Campaign System

[Copper]

I agree that an operational and historically functional campaign system would not be a ladder player's wet dream. The simplicity of a solution to that is as easy as just not recording campaign system games.

I for one am interested in becoming engrossed within the real strategic, logistical and operational elements of what a campaign system could offer the players: realistic simulation of battle conditions that develop from the overarching generation of long term strategy.

This does not rule out the fact that extremely interesting and even balanced battles would take place.

Assume a map that has several terrain obstacles that do not allow for the rapid advance of an attack, such as marshes, forest, or even cities. The impetus would be very much focused upon the actual variables that operational commanders would face when making decisions with regards to troop movements, troop quality, troop unit diversity, fortifications, attack/defense and other things.

You would not send a panzer KG to attack a marsh, nor would you send an SMG regiment to defend an open steppes.

I think the emphasis must be solely concentrated on the aspect of reality that ground the functioning of the campaign system to a set of criteria that is designed to simulate the strategic factors that were the mainstay of world war 2 divisional commanders.

I for one would take part in a campaign system that gave me the strategic choice to make logistical decisions, even if it meant that some extremely lopsided battles were generated. I think that the severity of these unbalanced engagements are being overexaggerated IMHO.

Cheers!

Leto