HOLF Players Guild

In cooperation with the Studies Group, the Players Guild of the Historical Online Learning Foundation (HOLF) sponsored  Spring Session 2003.  This event was a round robin competition featuring tactical combat between "pick-up" teams of the members of the Foundation's Players Guild, using the Shot & Shell Civil War era simulation.  The Spring Session was conducted under the provisos of the Studies Group to allow it to gather some performance data from the competition to allow it to analyze proposed refinements to the SAS simulation in preparation for CWOL 7.

Spring Session Guidelines

The HOLF Players Guild offered the "Spring Session" for its current members and cadets who graduate from the Academy during the spring months of 2003. The Session was a "scrimmage" or "sparring ring" type activity for the enjoyment of all Guild members who participated and granted bragging rights once completed.  The Session featured a single bracket of teams  to play a series of tactical battles in a generic scenario using the Shot & Shell (SAS) game system. Each game consisted of 6 to 12-turns. The "session" began on March 21st, the first day of spring and ended on August 2d. The results of the Spring Session are posted in the links noted on this URL.
 

Team Responsibilities

Each team consisted of a team captain, a team quartermaster, and team members. The team started the Spring Session with its recruited team members and had the following resources to play the game:

•  1 HQs group (one HQs or "q" unit, one ammo unit, and one rations wagon).
• 25,000 men combat troops (disposition, armament, and type to be determined by each team - see below).
• 20% of combat troops have rifled-muskets; 10% have Sharps carbines; the remaining 70% have muskets
• 7 batteries of artillery (5 can be 12-pdr Napoleon for field artillery or 6-pdr for Horse artillery)(2 are 12-pdr howitzers)
• All teams start with a basic weapons mix -- muskets, 12-pdr Napoleons, shotgun cav (except for the "modern" weapons outlined above) (the team can switch around weapons internally if it wants).
• team captains determine OOB - tactical units on the map can be a mix of brigades, regiments, and battalions for infantry/cavalry; brigade, battalion, batteries for artillery. Smallest inf/cav unit is 350 men; 160 man battery for artillery. Large units have to have the same weapons (SAS code limitation). Largest unit for Inf/cav is 4000; 640 for artillery. (go here for background information on OOBs)
• there will be no reinforcements or replacements during the tournament. POWs will be paroled. Units keep their end strength/morale/weapons from game to game. Original OOBs stay in effect unless team captain petitions for a change (may not be granted if his team is addressing one of the OOB issues that these games are designed to examine)

Background Information

The general scenario was an expedition to conquer Baja California.  The teams represented two notional competing neo-colonial powers. The operational context will be an meeting engagement at different strategic locations on the peninsula in the initial phase of the campaign.  The tactical situations grew more complex as the session entered the latter rounds culminating in an invasion of one country by the other.  Games were from 6-12 turns in duration. Teams may play the entire battle or one side can capitulate if it wants. Given the parameter that no team will receive any reinforcements or replacements for the entire session - a cease fire or withdrawal may be warranted (especially since the SAS straggler code does not kick in unless the unit leaves the enemy-occupied strategic square).

Each team chose whether to be a "c" or "u" national designation. Additionally, each team chose up to 4 state designations for its units. Each team's designation was unique and not duplicated by another team.

Competition Results

The winner of the Spring Session was determined by the won-loss records and amount of EPs earned. Each match had a "purse" of a specified amount of EPs. The award of these "purses" were also used for the purchase of weapons and unit upgrades by the teams between the matches using a modified version of the CPAG software.

The winner of the Spring Session 2003 was the Pennsylvania Reserve captained by Jon Mattes (for team roster, click here).

Each of these team members will receive an award of the Guild Medal of Endeavor -

Study Findings

The findings from this experiment/competition will be integrated into other  HOLF events if possible and used to adapt current simulations under development. The main findings of the study are:

• the preferred table of organization, initially, was the "triangle" corps formation - one or more corps with 3 divisions under each corps headquarters. This configuration was replaced by the Model B or the "wing" configuration as losses mounted and the teams did not have the assets to support a multi-corps formation of set assets. The "wing" orgainizations were revised after each game to conform to the assets that the team retained. Only one team - the one using Model A, the field army using a single commander, did not modify its OOB during the entire match. (for more on OOB configuration, go here )

• 70% of all acquisitions were rifled-muskets; rifled artillery was a distant 23%. Only one requisition was made for a unit conversion.

• the use of breastworks, as currently defined in the SAS code gives the defender an advantage that will cause a 1-3 turn delay in any attack on a "bw" position.

• teams chose to refuse combat on 5 of 15 opportunities or at a 33% rate to conserve casualties.

• each team started the session with 26,340 men of all arms. The average loss, on T41, Match #5,  for each team was 12,927 men. Ending team strengths ranged from a low of 4642 men to a high of 20,457. The two teams that fought in the majority of contests had the lowest end strength.

• defenders suffered higher losses than anticipated - especially in the last Match - 42.7% of all Astoria forces were casualties versus 9199 (14.3%) of attacking UC units. (NOTE: these numbers are for core UC forces and does not include the losses suffered by the 6400 men in "HI" units. HI units lost 1445 men or 22.3%) The use of rifled artillery and the proliferation of rifled-muskets were the main sources of this trend.

• the size of combat units did not provide any performance data. This was due to the frequent decisions by team captains to forfeit matches.

Study Recommendations

Main recommendations from the study to the Director, Distance-Simulations Group.

• Modify the existing rules for amphibious operations to ease their employment in SAS.

• Introduce more stringent guidelines for the use of the breastworks "bw" formation.

• Increase the number of rifled cannon in use in SAS from previous years.

• Modify the current muster rules to reduce their impact on the operational planning and play in CWOL.

• Review the number of HQs - "q/r/w" - units in play in CWOL and investigate how to lessen the amount of "q" units in play and increase the number of "r" units.