To me, the campaign is the best way to play miniatures. Our local group here in Fond du Lac, Wis. has done many over the years - some lasted a couple of years real time and others flopped quickly. Some methods we tried have worked great, others found to be unworkable or adding nothing to the game. To those MWAN readers out there who are of like mind and enjoy campaigns or even reading about other people's campaigns like I do, I thought I would describe my current campaign effort. I'd just like to add that in this I was very inspired by both the articles and enthusiasm Jon Laughlin brings in his play-by-mail Ancients campaign (see previous MWAN articles this past year or so).

I'm going to start right at the beginning (clever fellow some of your more astute readers will no doubt notice) and go thru step by step what I did to set the campaign up. To do it right, there actually are a lot of requirements so the thing works and even then there is no guarantee of success.

First off, what war, historical or mythical, are you going to be campaigning in? Will it work? Do you have the necessary miniatures and tactical Jules? Is it at least balanced enough to make for some interesting battles?

I picked the Russian Civil War of 1918-1921. Why? Lots of reasons. I love reading about that war; the research was a lot of fun. I already had a sizeable collection of 20mm B&B miniatures for that war painted up and would just add some special units I still wanted. Recently changed the rules we use and liked the new version. The real campaigns were very fluid and the fighting would not be like the giant WWI western front trench battles. Cavalry is just as useful at times as infantry. Our previous RCW miniatures battles were often closerun and fun games. That last part is crucial in my opinion.

As an example of one of my earlier disasters, I once did a Seminoles-US war via campaign style with strategic map and miniatures. The map and strategic rules worked well we had enough miniatures BUT the campaign play itself didn't turn out to be fun enough. The Seminoles could and did strike at isolated farms and outposts to wipe them out then disappear and usually elude the overstretched confused US regular army. The couple of times the Americans did bump into the Indians, the Seminoles gave them a sharp bloody nose then fled. The US players were too frustrated to enjoy it, the Seminole player didn't like having to massacre civilians (can't say that I blame him). We soon pronounced the campaign quite realistic but not very enjoyable. So you do want decent miniatures battles.

Once I had my campaign decided, I sat down and began to analyze just how I wanted to do it. The map would be key - would it be completely hand drawn or box to box movement or hex grid? I loved GDW's Bathtub Barbarossa campaign game and was tempted to do the whole civil war with all its far flung fronts. I abandoned this because I couldn't find or draw the proper map of all Russia. Also it would be just too big and involved too many fronts, armies, even foreign contingents like Poland, Britain, USA, France, Japan, and Finland.

Fortunately I did happen to have an excellent map of the Ukraine and Caucasus originally part of GDW's Bathtub Barbarossa. It was just perfect fox what I wanted including the RR lines so important to RCW campaigning. I did add in some smaller towns and place- names then made several photocopies. Don't try to do everything with just one map copy, make extras.

This also determined for me which part of the civil war I was going to do. I would concentrate on Denikin's campaign in the south against the Reds. Since I had the figures for it, I also threw in the Ukrainian nationalists (called the Petylurists) and the peasant anarchists (Makhnovists). Now I had my factions for the campaign.

To return to the strategic map, I left the original alone as a source for more copies in the future but did color the rivers and forests of the photocopies so other players could easily tell them ( the cities and roads were dark enough). Then I bought some pins with flags at an of flee supplies store - you make your own if you like. Another option, which I ended up rejecting, is to use blank board game counters you can write on your own info but I wanted to be able to set the maps upright or carry them with ease. I merely glue the maps onto pieces of old cardboard from big shipping cartons. Push the flag pins in and bingo .... you have some cool looking strategic maps to help you keep track of everything. Each player running a side got copies of the strategic map too and more about the players latex.

I then began to work on the strategic rules now that I knew what kind of map and its basic scale I would be using. I really didn't strain myself on exact scales or historical movement rates - I just set up what seemed workable and reasonable. I had to handle strategic map movement, command control, terrain effects, supply lines, effects of being out of supply, losses in miniature battles and how to translate them into game terms, how does each faction get reinforcements or replacements, random events, leader abilities, etc. I won't be able to go into detail about all of these but a complete set of strategic rules has been sent with this article so hopefully Hal will print both in the same issue so you can judge for yourself how or even if I handled the above concepts.

Once those were done, and the faction victory conditions/replacements rules were the hardest to come up with, I typed them up in the computer and made several photocopies again - extra for myself plus one per active faction player to use. I also made sure I had plenty of copies of the tactical battle rules so players who show up fox Sat. night battles can refer to them.

Next, I proceeded to create a set of starting Orders of Battle for all sides. I obviously wasn't going to have as large a force mix as the real war even figuring I can use my figs over again and again representing more than one unit. I also could not find any real OBs even though I got several excellent books thru interlibrary loan . While I read them, I did pick up some unit designations in the books which I copied along with lots of commander names, into a notebook for later reference.

Now I created lots of units by name or number, number of figs in the unit, morale, number of MGs etc. all stuff needed in the tactical rules. I made no great effort to be historic except that I wanted at least twice as many Red units as White with smaller numbers for the other two minor factions. As an example, I ended up with 40+ White infantry battalions, 20+ White cavalry regiments, 16+ artillery batteries, and a few pontoon-engineer-armored car/tank units as support. Each faction also gets so many trains although these will probably never appear on the tabletop itself, as I don't have a 20mm train.

Can I ever field that number in one place? Of course not, but this force is scattered over a wide map and indeed no way are there enough units to form any cohesive fronts. This spreading thin guarantees more of a maneuver campaign then WWI western front. A large pin/force could have maybe 8-10 miniature units, very playable.

To aid in the miniatures battles preparation and in keeping track of things campaign-wise (the ever mundane book-keeping) I made unit cards out of ~/z index cards putting all the crucial stats on them. I wrote the names of units in ink but penciled in strengths etc so these could be erased and adjusted with future engagements. Then I bought some slide-holder plastic sheets in an office supplies store which fit into three ring binders. It cost 25 cents per sheet and could hold 25 cards each. Easy way to keep the units together in one place or binder. You just slip out of their jackets the needed units for a particular battle and hand them to the players for using in the game. Then at the games end you just adjust the losses and mark them in pencil then put them back when the game is done. A bunch of initial work - yes - but very useful and fast the rest of the campaign.

Also to help keep track I have sheets of looseleaf I keep in a big binder with PIN numbers on the margin left, the units in that pin written in the middle of the sheet, and the commanders in the right margin. Do all this in pencil so you can transfer tens or leaders from one pin to another. Just erase them from the old column and write them in the new one. Or you can add new pins and columns for freshly split-off forces. I have my copy to keep track of and each player gets one too to track on their own if they wish. Or they can, depend on me to do it.

Now for turns I let the players operating the factions write up their orders such as "Pin 12 march to city of by road". The White player has even made his own slightly bigger hex map copies of the original and draws his map moves on them. Great idea!

I said I'd talk about players a bit so now is as good a time as any. We've done campaigns where everyone playing has their own strategic control and runs all their own forces but for this one I was a bit more picky. Being busy adults too many guys can't make it enough or find the time/organization skills to keep up the effort of running a side. So I took on two volunteers to run the Whites and Ukrainians that I'm trusting will do their part - they are in complete charge of their particular side. I myself run the Reds. Sometimes we do have a ref to do this who doesn't play but I couldn't come up with one for this and I really want to play in this myself (after all, I did all the work) and my real life sympathy was with the Reds. However I don't want to get into politics and no, I am not a Communist I'm playing this fair and square and trust the other two to do so also - it's the sporting thing!

Other guys who come for Saturday night battles take up roles as tactical commanders in the battles that occur due to strategic maneuvering. A couple only want to be White or Red while a few don't mind being either side for the sake of a good game. In the event of a dispute during the game I'll let the actual commander of the faction (if he's there that night) make the final decision as to what that side is doing that battle. In real history, subordinates often did not do what the overall leader far away wanted them to do anyway.

We aren't very far into the campaign right now. Just three turns. So far it's working out well. There were no encounters the first turn and several the second turn - a few of those actually turned into tabletop fights.

The first one found a Ukrainian battalion holding a town against a two pronged assault by Maknovists. The Ukrainian player was under the misguided impression that the Maknovist partisans were just scum with little combat ability. He soon found out they can be excellent troops and Makhno himself was there leading his best troops supported by tatchankas (formerly civilian riding coaches pulled by horses now mounting Maxim MGs). The poor Ukrainians were cut to pieces.

The second baule had the Ukrainians attacking the Red held city of Cherkassy in an effort to straighten out their supply line problems. However the Red garrison, mostly just unmotivated infantry with artillery support, outnumbered the Ukrainian attackers. His best unit, an elite rifle battalion gallantly cleared three blocks of defenders routing them in bayonet and grenade close assaults but in the end was overwhelmed by fire from all sides and was almost wiped out. A second support battalion in the attack, a Kiev militia unit of conscripted unmotivated troops proceeded to dither about and finally fled without even engaging in any firefights. Half of them are permanent desertions. Both battles were fun and each one has a reason why it happened, consequences, and commanders must think about tomorrow.

In all honesty, the Ukrainians are a sideshow - I expect the Whites to soon meet the Reds in the major conflict of the campaign. I'll try and write up some battle reports when that happens. Also, if there is interest, I'll write some more about the campaign happenings strategically and in general. Finally if anyone wishes to discuss the campaign or rules in more detail I can be reached at: Michael Huskey, 443 3rd St., Fond du Lac, W154935.