Usual FoB goodness in the shape of unpredictable battlefield and managing the chaos/fog of war that ensues - wargaming as it's meant to be!/?
Highlights of the campaign system :
for the first time, with the campaign end in mind, I was thinking about which units not to risk when things went sour. This changes your entire outlook in a battle, and a system can have detrimental effects on future use of fatigued units forces you to think of winning the campaign and series of linked battles - winning the war, not the battle in essence. Your outlook and focus on how to fight changes completely.
I was struck with the dynamics of choosing the battlefield and the mechanism by which strengths and weaknesses, surprise and key deployments are handled via the card game (Blackjack) system and miniature maps. This allows you to decide where, when and how you will attack - if you get the drop on your opponent, though does not guarantee full control, and is a great pre-game.
So then the ideas started going off for other games:
- Nine Years War campaign - with months between battles (there were only about 4 major battles in Flanders anyway).
- Pick all of the Irish built up areas during the same era - 1690s - and try to cross the lines of the Shannon over a three year - five battle epic, with the same units getting better/worse on the basis of performance.
- Saratoga campaign - days/weeks between encounters managed on a 3 battle season.
- ACW - practically begs for this treatment.
- The WWII Corps/Division level campaign - Ardennes, Market Garden, Russian Front - this just writes itself for the WWII version of FoB.