A New (Old) Idea for a Team Battle

[Cross]

28 maps? Or am I seeing that wrong? Those maps will have to be built so that roads and streams match. Is that going to be a problem? Time and Vis will have to be the same, won't they? It wouldn't be right to have direct fire weapons shooting from one map to another. What about arty?
Won't there have to be a referee? Or something like that.
What if some commander breaks his opponents front and sends a recon in force into another map, finds nothing there and sends it into the map beyond that?
This sort of battle is very much into the operational part of warfare and it would be good to resolve some of the operational issue now, instead of after the games start.
It's sounds like a great idea, but there are some practical issues that need to be addressed. Step 1 would be seeing if they have already been resolved and how those solutions worked out.

Hi Low Bidder,

Thanks for the feedback.

28 maps shouldn't be a problem, we would use pre-existing maps; there's no reason at all why the streams and roads should match. Perhaps half the maps wouldn't even be used.

All turns would be the same for all battles and visibility would be the same for all battles in a round. No problems there.

Each sector/map is independant, so no direct or indirect fire will cross sectors/maps. Artillery support will have been committed to a sector prior to the battle.

I can't see a need for a referee. What would he referee?

If a 'front is broken' (on a particular map), a player is probably going to win that battle. So on the next battle he get's to start on the map that is deeper into enemy territory. IRL a battalion is highly unlikely to move two maps (10 to 12KM) in one battle (one to two hours) you'd out-run your supply, and there's casualties, repairs and replacements to organize before the next battle.