Barbarossa PBEM campaing

[Narwan]

May I suggest an alternative way to model such a campaign that still sticks to the basic idea but stays closer to the basic strengths of the SP games?

Now the idea is to have players fight and determine the outcome of each phase of the campaign. But instead of letting the battles the players fight determine the whole outcome, you can scale down the scope of specific battle fougth having them represent only a small part of the forces involved (much more SP-like) and let them just influence the outcome.

Specific example: In the opening stages of barbarasso many pockets, big and small, of soviet forces were created. So a round one scenario could be about closing the pocket (let's say historicaly all soviet troops got trapped). If jerry wins the pocket gets closed, if ivan wins some troops will get out. If they do then the next phase will be a bit harder for the germans as they'll be facing these ivans (again) were none were there historically. If the germans win by a wide enough margin they have managed to reduce the pocket quicker than historically making the next round a bit easier for them as the follow-up troops will be available faster than historically.

The campaign will diverge gradually from the historical battles, not in leaps and bounds, and to a large degree under control of the tourney organisers. It also means you can have battles of forces that are between battallion and regiment in size (don't forget people, a german '41 battallion nearly equals a soviet '41 regiment in points in SP) that still have a great effect on the outcome of the campaign at large. Whether those formations represent the real thing or are scaled down divisions can be determined per specific set-up, it doesn't have to be the same for each battle in the tourney.[/i]

Narwan