Massive Assault Part 2

[Greybeard]

WW2 would be better IMO.
Of course, buy points would have to be reduced, accordinly to the skill and amount of players for each side, for example. would a newbie want or should, control a possible 3 BN's?
I guess last years ladder statistics should be considered on who gets what based on thier abilites thus far.
Newbies should be welcolme to play, however, that's what makes it realistic, some veterens mixed with greener players with a Overall Commander with the best statistics or whoever is voted in or takes that position willing and everyone agrees.
This could take some time, a very long time to play out, so with dedication and with a rule if someone fades or can't play his force in the allowed time, then the Commander either takes over or delgates to one of his sub's untill that player can resume command of his force's again.
I could see a Rhine crossing on the map you have being a very definate possiblity.
I'm rambling some now, hope you get more interest;)

I also like your idea for the team game thing.. yes it does take a large commitment, as for 2 players per side it works out to about 3 turns completed every 2 weeks.. so you can see how long winded a 60 turn assault game will take.. a long, long time.. about 6 months..

My idea?
Actually, it was yours i was just expanding on it a bit (-:

Something else just crossed my foggy brain ,depending on how many players per side, can not some chose to be an Arty Commander or Air Commander, with free licence to use their command in the the way they see best,within the outlines of the main battle plan of the Overall Commander "OC"?
There would calls for an airstrike or arty barrage on points from those in the front who need it.
There could be also be one or 2 the better players to be as assault sub-commander as the on point force, and maybe one in reserve,(always good to have a reserve) depending of course how many on each team.
The OC's job would be the very most important one, to keep everything coordinated,give advice or overrule some bad actions, and have to pick up slack when someone is unable to play,but if all goes well with the subs his job goes a whole alot easier,,,,yeah right we all know that never happens in battle! lol
Also with the likely length of this, if someone can't continue, delegate those forces to one who can, or recruit a new player, but have no penalties against the one who had go on leave(has benefits as actually played all way through)
Might have to have only CD users on the frontline, as formations might get mingled,free ver. users don't have the "5 key" function, formation cohesion would be critical for front line forces, not so Atry and Air commanders however(-;

Maybe i'm just a dreamer,as difficult as this may seem,i really like to see it happen

Hello Gila,

One thing to remeber is that the more players you have, the longer this sort of thing takes. In my opinion based on experience, 6 players for a game would be about max that I would recommend.

as for keeping units identifiable for each player.. simple expediant is to re-name the units.. this is what Gunslinger and I chose to do in the team game we are involoved with right now.. my units are renamed to stuff like: GB Mortar, GB Infantry, GB M-18.. GB being short for 'Greybeard'.. Gunslingers are similar: 'Gun Infantry', etc

easy to find your units even when all mixed in all over

GReybeard