First video featuring the Pub Battles Brandywine Campaign game. This links the three battles (Brandywine, Germantown, Monmouth) into a connected campaign, where results from one affect the next. In this case, Monmouth never happened because of a stunning upset at Germantown. All in exactly 8 minutes!
Mr. Q Uncategorized 1 Minute
Published by Mr. Q
I semi-retired at 47. I suffered a sever brain injury at 25. I have written 3 books about living with brain injury and have had a regular column in the Brain Injury Alliance of MN's quarterly mag since 1999. I received my BA in English with honors in 2014. One of my avocations is developing simulation games. Weather permitting, I enjoy a round of Disc Golf whenever possible. View all posts by Mr. Q
4 thoughts on “Brandywine campaign10”
Excellent idea and excellent AARs! Did you decide all possible repercussions of each scenario in advance, or did you use a more a free Kriegsspiel/Engle Matrix approach?
PS – Do you think a more conservative approach could have served the British better at Brandywine once they saw they hadn’t catch the Continental army as unprepared as they hoped?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Excellent questions Mark!
The campaign game is found in the Germantown scenario book.
Like I do with all my Pub Battles combat results and chit draws, I create my own narrative that explains what happened in the game. I used the guidelines for which units and under what terms the following scenario was played, and then “colored it in” with description.
There is a combat in this last video where militia fights a detachment. The actual combat result was one hit on each, which eliminated the detachment and forced a spent/retreat on the militia. I described it as the detachment chasing off the militia, and then rejoining their main unit across the river.
This is one of the best aspects of Pub Battles. By focusing on combat results, not the minutia of battle, the system simulates a much wider range of possibilities.
When to opponents retreat from combat, it doesn’t mean they both ran away from each other. It means that after a relatively heated exchange, no one was left in control of the disputed terrain, and it will probably be occupied by the first organized unit to arrive on the scene, or it may mean that the issue was not decided, and the outcome will have to be decided later.
Regarding your question about the British in the last game, in hindsight, with those combat results, the British would have been better served by a more cautious approach, but if the exact same situation were to happen again, I would probably react the same way. Those combat results were not forgone conclusions. In fact, it is pretty rare to suffer two elite losses in one combat. The next time this happens, Howe may just roll over Sullivan’s forces and conclude with a British major victory!
Aha! I didn’t get there was a campaign game included in Germantown – good to know.
Thanks for the detailed answers. I really like your narrative approach: my own preference is to give it (a bit) of structure via Engle Matrix argument dice-offs. These can neatly represent unknown stuff on the fly, eg “was the pontoon bridge on the Bormida really destroyed”? Or “they cannot see that artillery unit beyond the ridge, but they can surely hear them firing”? Now I see how this can be expanded to cover, e.g., how easy was to recruit militia between battles or similar questions. Great stuff!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m not exactly sure how the Engle matrix would apply to a refereeless campaign game.