With the formation of wargame clubs all over the country, the multiple wargame, in which more than two people engage in a single game rapidly becoming the rule. The multiple game has all kinds of possibilities which make it inherently more interesting and realistic than the game pitting only two contestants against each other. In this article I will consider the various types of command arrangements for the multiple game, and will also offer a system for use of staffs and the relaying of orders. TYPES OF COMMANDS One logical and simple command system derives from a game in which two or more players on a side contribute two or more national contingents to their army. Each individual would then operate his contingent as his own, in which case the whole army is then established under a co-equal command. Thus a French army and a Prussian army might combine to fight an Austro-Russian army. The commander of the Prussian army would have equal status with the commander of the French force. historical accuracy in choice of allies is not necessary, but historical realism should still be achieved, since co-equal commands were common. This would also introduce the problems of coordination and cooperation which have always been a major problem of coalition warfare. Another type of command setup would be the subordinate command, which offers even more scope for innovation and realism. Here, there is a supreme commander who controls the whole army, and perhaps a particular part of it also, and one or more subordinates who command divisions of the army. Thus a British army on a game table might have one commander, who also personally handles the right wing, while the left wing and center are each commanded by a subordinate. A variation would be to introduce a subordinate national contingent, as for example a left wing of Portugese troops within and subordinate to the British army. If the number of people available allows, even more realism and diversity can be achieved by adding commanders of various arms. There could be a commander of all the artillery or a commander of the heavy cavalry, particularly if these arms are grouped together on the battlefield. Or each division of the army could be divided into brigades with a commander for each, and so on. The possibilities are limitless. In establishing such a command system, the degree of control exercised by the supreme commander could vary, depending upon the personalities involved. The supreme commander may desire a high degree of control over his subordinates, or he may allow them considerable independence. One subordinate might desire a good deal of guidance and may frequently ask the army commander for advice, while another might prefer to be left pretty much alone with only general instructions as to objectives given at the beginning of the battle. Such a subordinate might even disregard direct orders if he thought they were unrealistic. This follows real historical situations pretty closely. THE STAFF AND HEADQUARTERS The mechanism for putting the ideas outlined above into effect can be simple or relatively complex. At its simplest, orders could be given by the army commander to his subordinates orally or in writing, the latter being simply passed from one hand to another. Councils of war may be held, during which all subordinate commanders would assemble with the chiefs. This should be kept to a minimum in the interest of realism, since in reality such gatherings generally took place before of after a battle rather than during it. Certainly the most realistic way to develop battlefield command system is to locate the headquarters of the army commander, or commanders, and their subordinates directly on the war game table. These headquarters would consist of a mounted general officer figure, a small staff of two or three mounted aides (preferably in brilliant hussar uniforms) and perhaps a security escort of cavalry. When orders or requests are issued they would be written on a sheet of paper, then be carried at the normal light cavalry movement rate by one of the aides from the officer issuing the order to the one for whom the message is intended. Upon delivery the aide may return to his own headquarters of may wait to carry back a reply or another message later on. This system introduces the critical element of delay in receiving messages, which might or might not have much validity when received, another highly realistic problem for commanders to deal with. The messenger may be killed or captured so that the message may fall into enemy hands, or a commander might himself be killed or captured if he ventured too close to the fighting. The possibilities are indeed marvelous to contemplate. Staff officers and commander figures may also be used to head off routed units to rally them, if your rules allow for such situations. When enough people are available to wargame this way, the results can be most interesting, with all kinds of scope allowed for individual personalities and eccentricities. Try your next war game with the headquarters and staff system I have described. You may find that you never had more fun. Back to Table of Contents -- Courier # 83 To Courier List of Issues To MagWeb Master Magazine List © Copyright 2002 by The Courier Publishing Company. This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web. Other military history articles and gaming articles are available at http://www.magweb.com