American Civil War Game Club (ACWGC)

Gentlemen <salute>!

Members of the Club on the USA side and those on the CSA side should receive an email from me or Nick Kunz within the next hour transmitting an ACWGC Recruiting Plan (Plan). As described in the email to you, we are requesting that you post your comments and ideas related to making the Phase 1 part of the Plan more effective in a reply to this thread.

Please let me or Nick know if you did not receive this email.

Respectfully and sincerely,

Col. Walt Dortch and General Nick Kunz.

_________________
Walter A. Dortch
Commanding -/4/V AotP
UA Cabinet Secretary
UA Operations Officer
UA Wolverine Team Leader

Got the email.

One venue I didn't notice mentioned is youtube. I spend a lot of time there. If someone could make a time lapse video of a short scenario with a plea for reinforcements it might get some attention.

I recommend no longer than ten minutes.

_________________
MG Mike Mihalik
Forrest's Cavalry Corps
AoWest/CSA

So far so good but I miss the prerequisites of the drafts as they acknowledge that some things have to be in place first before recruiting is expanded in that way.
The first 2 point were in the draft and are badly needed imho, the 3rd is new by me.

1) Add an "About us" page up.
The club with its many pages lacks a single point where every interested one can have a more in depth view that gives him an understanding of the club and how things run in here. Currently all we have is that tiny Club Philosophy paragraph at the bottom of the main page and that one isn't even pointing out that this club is about HvH games only.

2) Expand trainer base.
An active request send to all eligible members asking to volunteer as trainers might be the simplest way of doing it. At least on the Union side this could go hand in hand with the reconsideration of the position of Advanced Training Officer, that position is usually empty and even if filled new members usually don't do more training after the academy but go right into playing battles. Removal of that position might free up additional members as trainers for new members.

3) Rework the training procedure.
Currently there is afaik only a single training game done after which the member is assigned to the active field army. But the Club rules 1.4. points out "All members will be offered the level of training that they need or desire before they start playing.". How that is phrased I suggest a different way of conducting training, this is not the place to elaborate in detail but I just what to note that instead of doing a single training game we could set a minimal amount of turns that have to be played before graduating is allowed, and we could set a threshold of a certain OBD level to which a cadet could continue doing training games. That way they get what we consider the minimum but they are free to train further till hitting the OBD threshold. The rewarding of OBD points for the training games would also have to be adjusted to act as a little motivator for cadets to continue training as well as for trainers to volunteer.

_________________
Lieutenant General Christian Hecht
Commander I Corps, Army of the Potomac

"Where to stop? I don't know. At Hell, I expect."

General Hecht <salute>

Thank you for these comments.

1) I continue to think this is a good idea and it should have come forward from the draft into the final proposal. Who would be the person to make this addition to the Home Page? I would be happy to work up an initial draft of the language for that if doing so would be helpful.

2) Expand the trainer base. I will defer to Nick Kunz and Scott Eichelberger to take this one up.

3) I agree that training should be tailored to what the player needs based on 1) his experience with JTS ACW games in general; and) 2 his experience with human v. human play. I would be concerned that a veteran player has to chalk x number of training game turns before he can, for example, post on the opponents wanted page. In the case of a new player to the JTS games I think the solution lies 1) with the trainer providing the training requested and needed by the applicant and 2) with line officers continuing to mentor recruits after they graduate and 3) organizing newbie v. newbie games. 2nd Division of V Corps, AotP has done this either via two player and MP games intended to be played by new recruits and it has been well received. I think it would be a mistake to keep recruits out of the mainstream of club activities and privilege's for a protracted length of time.

Respectfully,

_________________
Walter A. Dortch
Commanding -/4/V AotP
UA Cabinet Secretary
UA Operations Officer
UA Wolverine Team Leader

As for 1), I will mail you.

As for 3), the minimum wouldn't be that much, the average is currently between 11-12 turns per training game so obviously the minimum would be below that. Even if a veteran player shows up these few turns are needed to explain how things run here.

_________________
Lieutenant General Christian Hecht
Commander I Corps, Army of the Potomac

"Where to stop? I don't know. At Hell, I expect."

Gentlemen, Sirs! <salute>

From the standpoint of having been involved with VMI in one form or another over the past 15+ years this is what I have always used in my opening round with new Cadets:

Quote:

I have set out some goals for your training program:

1. Check to see that all Battle titles have the current update/patches, here is the link to the JTS website: http://johntillersoftware.com/Updates.html To check, select the Help button from the toolbar, then About which will show current version which should be 3.00.

2. Getting started with a selected battle file which will include selecting battle title, selecting optional rules and saving battle file.

3. PBEM procedures for moving our battle files thru email.

4. Checking to see that you have completed your VMI Classroom studies. This also includes filling a report every 3 battle turns.

5. Evaluating your gaming skills with regards to your ability to command and control your available units on the field.

6. Some gaming tips on tactics and strategy which I hope to be able to have an on-going discussion during the course of our battle.

7. We will explore what happens next when you receive your field commission, how to find opponents for battle, game registration (both start game and end game), promotions and other club activities.

Do I think this results in a top of the line CSA Officer ready to take on the best the USA has to offer? NO! That is why I try to setup newbies to battle against each other in the Lt's Cup Match. More often than not I will follow up with an offer of at least another maneuver battle of their choice.

I recall posting for an opponent at the ACWGC Forums shortly after graduating from VMI and getting a hit from a Yankee General. We played the BattleGround game Shiloh. If you have ever played that historical battle you will know by now that there is just a teeny bit of an opportunity to sneak some cavalry into the rear of the attacking Rebels at the beginning of the game. Well after 4 or 5 turns all of a sudden some of my cavalry was disappearing! My opponent was successful at that very opportunistic task! Needless to that started a string of valuable lessons I was to learn in the Club over the next months and continues today to get taught lessons in gaming! My point, you can't teach everything there is to know about gaming these games, mostly experience helps but not always!

I would say that most of my Cadet Recruits have some gaming abilities when they join. They really want to get out there and show their opponent that they have been gaming a long time in one form or another and are ready to beat their pants off!

That is not to say that some Cadets do need additional training and in fact that very thing has happened with the last two Cadets that Col Blackburn has trained. We can be flexible but that would certainly be up to the trainer or the officer in charge of training and not some rule or regulation! But that is just my opinion and experience.

I have always felt that once assigned to an army group the new officer should be getting guidance from their officers. Does that always happen?

Respectfully,

Your Obedient Servant,

General Nick Kunz
Commandant,
Vicksburg Military Institute

Gentlemen,

Given the fact that I am newly assigned as the UMA Superintendent and still training my very first two cadets, I will defer to General Kunz’ expertise above. However, I fully concur with him that additional training post-graduation is best done within the unit command the new officer has been assigned to. This was certainly my happy experience under the able leadership of the Army of the Potomac. It also gives an opportunity for new officers to establish important relationships within their new command so essential to forming the bonds of a cohesive team.

Respectfully,

_________________
General Scott Eichelberger, ACWGC
Commander, 1/1/I/AotP
"The Iron Brigade"
UMA Superintendent 2020-2021
Union Cabinet Secretary 2020-2022

The problem I see here that this is confined to the Army instead of utilizing the whole trainer pool. Sure if someone volunteers to get a maneuver done with the newly assigned member its fine, but I think a trainer could do better in solving the problems an inexperienced member still has on the battlefield.
At last in the AotP I only see one member that has gone down this "ideal" path and conducted training & afterwards did a series of maneuvers before engaging in his first real battle.


While I have the gentlemen Kunz & Eichelberger here, despite all the stuff in both academies, what about making a "trainer manual" that lists the basics that should be covered in the mandatory training game?
Nothing detailed, that is up to the trainer, but the list that General Kunz posted might be something to consider. I think this could result in more trainers if a member would exactly know what to teach in that single mandatory training game.

_________________
Lieutenant General Christian Hecht
Commander I Corps, Army of the Potomac

"Where to stop? I don't know. At Hell, I expect."

There seems to be something of a mistaken impression about the ACWGC's academies and what they were/are intended to accomplish.

The Club Rules offer the following.

2.3 Training. New members must graduate from the Training Academy of their respective military group. These academies have been established to provide information and training to new members in regards to the Club. Cadets will be assigned an instructor and play a short game to ensure that they are familiar with Play-By-Email (PBEM) and the rules of conduct for the Club. Once the Cadet has completed his training game and demonstrated to his instructor his grasp of these basics, the instructor will recommend to the Training Academy Commandant that the Cadet be graduated. If the Commandant agrees, he is authorized to promote the graduating Cadet to the rank of Lieutenant and promote the officer from the Academy.

The Union Military Academy states the following under "Our Purpose."

"The ACWGC mandates a single, short training game of all its new members to insure they learn the rudiments of the sanctioned games of their choice(s) and especially the methods of Play By E-Mail (PBEM). In this academy the cadet will also be taught the basic organization of the club, its rules, regulations and communication conventions as they apply to his membership and good order. If the Instructors can impart a few tactical skills along the way, they are glad to do it! But the primary goal is to get new members through this process as 'painlessly' for them as possible and to have them confidently commissioned into the 'field' as soon as practicable."

VMI states the following under "Our Purpose here at VMI"

"This Club mandates a single short indoctrination game of it's new members. The purpose of this requirement is to insure that all members are on an even keel when it comes to knowing how to use the TalonSoft BattleGround and HPS Campaign games and their Play By E-Mail (PBEM) functions. If we, here at VMI, can impart a few tactical skills along the way we are glad to do it. But our primary goal is to get new members through this process as 'painlessly' for them as possible and to incorporate them into the main body of The Club as soon as practicable."

_________________
General Jos. C. Meyer, ACWGC
Union Army Chief of Staff
Commander, Army of the Shenandoah
Commander, Army of the Tennessee
(2011-2014 UA CoA/GinC)

General Meyer <salute>

I agree with these goals and they are realistic given the resources that have been and may be available to address increasing numbers of applications. I also strongly agree that passage through the academy should be quick and painless and the new recruit be immersed in the entirety of the Club as soon as possible.

That said, I think consideration of modification of the present descriptions of the duties of line officers should be evaluated to explicitly state that they have a significant responsibility to mentor and continue the OJT training of new officers assigned to their Commands. There is presently no such emphasis in Section 3.1 of the Club Rules. An alternative would be for the respective Army commanders to issue such instructions to their Officers and so on down the Command Chain.

There is definitely an attraction to each side having the ability to establish a spirit for what it means to be a CSA or USA member of the Club. However this must be evaluated carefully in terms of how much each side "rolls it own" with regards to training with respect primarily to how much time is invested in common to both sides training that is needed to get a recruit going. In my mind, there are basic goals of training shared by both sides--primarily on the "administrative" side and such could and should be documented in a "manual" that would be used by both sides (how to register a game, etc.). This document could be updated as needed and sent out to trainers when updates occur (based on modifications to the website, forum structure, etc). I have started training my first recruit and it would great and simple if I could simply send him a document that describes these procedures (of course asking him if he has any questions after reviewing such a document) which are common to both sides, and focus my energy on his specific needs based on his experience playing JTS (or other) games PBEM. Meaning focusing on his skill level with playing the games.

In summary, I think the basic goals are to 1) train a recruit with regard to administrative procedures of the Club and 2) identify what his training needs are, based on whether he is a new to JTS games or a veteran (by playing one or more training games with him); and, 3) get him posted to a unit with a note to the Commander from UMA or VMI as to their assessment of what kinds of support this recruit needs.

This is a whole Club deal. It means Line Officers have more of a stake in this than presently required by "the rules." Trainers have the responsibility to get them basic training, line officers the responsibility to bring them forward after basic training. Nothing novel about that really.

Respectfully,

_________________
Walter A. Dortch
Commanding -/4/V AotP
UA Cabinet Secretary
UA Operations Officer
UA Wolverine Team Leader

I do not mind if the mandatory training game puts its Schwerpunkt not on the battlefield but tries to make the new member familiar with how things work in this club. But in the end trainer & cadet play a game and I see no reasons, except the current way things are organized, that this can't continue into teaching the art of battle and by that doing a job that is likely not done on army level despite the current rules & duties.

There was again and again talk about the superiors are supposed to do the real training. Despite a minor note of training in the DC & CC duties in the end the AC(as there is likely no ATO) would have to do the same things that were already done:
- Find volunteers for training
- See what games they have
- See what games the new officer has
- Bring them together, if there is any match at all
- If not do the training yourself, if that is possible at all what is unlikely as all the duties of an AC(who also has to take over all the duties of the empty positions) are so time consuming that there is barely time to do so.
That all was already done when the cadet was matched with a trainer, and it's supposed to be done again because... well because it's organized this way even if it's just more work for all that are involved.

On paper this might work but not in reality. Obviously the way of training should match our resources and not rely on positions(ATO) that are mostly not filled or rely on positions(CC, DC) that barely note training as one of their duties but beyond that let the officer stand in the rain. A more efficient & practical approach is needed to enable a training that covers the requirements to get along in this club but at the same time can provide advanced training without the need to change anything as change isn't needed at all until the cadet is fully trained. So if the trainers already train and complete the mandatory training, why not ask the cadet if he wants to continue training now with the Schwerpunkt on battlefield tactics and not admin stuff.
I assume many would want to continue training, especially if they would now get taught how to behave on the battlefield.

If it's done that way the academies would not only live up their names but would also provide fully trained officer to the armies that can indeed right away start battles without falling on their faces while trying to mount their horses.



The recently shared data regarding the applicants of the past 5 years, that showed that only about 1/3 had stayed in the club, make me wonder how the combat records were of all those that left the club.

_________________
Lieutenant General Christian Hecht
Commander I Corps, Army of the Potomac

"Where to stop? I don't know. At Hell, I expect."

Gentlemen, let's not forget that every bit of administrative or instructional training that occurs within the ACWGC is done by volunteers! No one is paid for their personal time and no one is ordered about to do anything!

I cannot speak for the C.S.A. side of the club, but the U.S.A. side of the club very definitely has guidelines in place for the so-called "line officers," especially the AC's. Those guidelines are euphemistically referred to as "orders." The Union Army Standing Orders (http://www.unioneaglesonline.com/UAHQSO/UAHQSO.htm) has an entire section, Part 2: Army Commander Field Orders, for those who care to read it, that outline the expected duties of an AC, including the important topic of patronage. In fact, it is the first "order" mentioned!

Recruit Patronage - The Army Commander shall provide for the proper assignment, orientation and continued training of all new recruits entering his command.

Leadership Patronage - The AC shall make a strong commitment to encourage, nurture and promote talents from the ranks by finding employment for them or recommending them for employment external to the army. Simultaneously, the AC shall be responsible for the continued good leadership and performance of those officers assigned to both his staff and command positions within the army, making provision to relieve those officers should that be required.

And less one thinks that only the AC bears these injunctions alone, one should also read the Preamble to Part 2, entitled "Code of Conduct."

"The Army Commander (AC), either directly or through the efforts of his appointed staff, will be responsible for the continued implementation of the following Field Orders for the duration of his assignment. These orders are in respect to, and in some cases in addition to, the duties outlined in the Club Rule 3.1.2.4. Subordinate and senior commanders are expected and directed to support their field Army Commander in the implementation of these Field Orders."

Much of what has been suggested within this thread is already in place, insofar as the Union Military Group is concerned, by design and is observed as well as can be expected given that it is all voluntarily enacted upon. While the main thrust of this thread was supposedly to examine and discuss the propriety and feasibility of a club-wide recruitment program, there seems to be a wish to see each cadet graduated completely trained to successfully complete against all comers! I believe that both volunteer academy commanders have expressed themselves, quite properly in my opinion, that any additional tactical training ought to be a function of the parent field army to which they become assigned. The UA AC's are already aware of that and are doing everything in their capacity to make it so where needed. And as each UA "line officer" is obligated by the UASO's to support his AC, such training, either through a designated Training Officer(s) or the Corps and Division Commanders, may and is being accommodated. I am aware of no Union officer being refused a training maneuver at his request or not being given the suggestion of his AC, CC or DC.

A new recruit enters the club on the premise that he owns his own game(s), has at least a minimal understanding of how the game functions, and is seeking an active forum in which to participate. His road to game efficiency should be his to pursue in the manner he wishes. That is part of the entire, ACWGC experience! That we already offer an initial helping hand to those who wish it should be understood by all. But the club cannot realistically be placed in a position of becoming a tutorial entity. No one is being paid for that service! Nor should the club be able to order anyone to do anything, other than to have a good time!

_________________
General Jos. C. Meyer, ACWGC
Union Army Chief of Staff
Commander, Army of the Shenandoah
Commander, Army of the Tennessee
(2011-2014 UA CoA/GinC)

As pointed out, what is in place seems to look good on paper but from my experience I can only say that I was never directed nor contacted or in any other way involved in doing advanced training of a newly assigned officer, not as DC & not as CC. But I doubt that the academy training was so good, especially if it isn't there goal, that none needed further training to get better started. I wouldn't wonder if new members hesitate to request further training although coming from a so called "academy" indicating that they already had a training that the superiors seem to see as enough to conduct battles. Why else would someone be assigned to active field duty, so a new member would obviously have to think.

I point again the the fact that the Union already lost 21,7% of the applicants of the last 5 years while they were still on the academy. Maybe the training they got there wasn't what they expected to be if admin stuff is mainly taught instead of battlefield conduct.

And a further 43,5% are lost afterwards. And for these, if it is allowed, I would request General Meyer to provide the combat records. Afaik these were 20 officers of entered but also left the club in the last 5 years for various reasons. I can't imaging them being successful but leaving, I think the opposite is more likely and would again point to the possibility that the training process is somehow flawed.

_________________
Lieutenant General Christian Hecht
Commander I Corps, Army of the Potomac

"Where to stop? I don't know. At Hell, I expect."

I like to see the discussion and effort because sometimes a gold nugget is found. But here are my thoughts on the subject.

1. Won/loss records are important to some and not important to others. To the club, an excellent won/loss percentage means almost nothing because did they only play opponents weaker than they were, or only play scenarios where their side was heavily favored, or was it MP games where their partners in arms might have carried the day for them (and vice versa for all of this if they have a poor won/loss record).
2. The objective is to have fun, which for some might mean winning every game, but not for all.
3. For those who take pride in their won/loss record, training games are almost taboo because you need to lose some in order to train an opponent well and that training game counts against your record.
4. Commanders are hard to find and always have been, particularly good ones (and "good" is subjective).
5. Commanders are not chosen based upon won/loss record nor their ability upon the battlefield and they shouldn't be.
6. We are blessed when someone is found who enjoys being a Commander at any level and does a responsible job of it.
7. A 10, 20, or 30 turn training game is not going to teach someone new to this type of game how to be successful on the battlefield. Heck, us veterans can't even agree on how to do that because we all play differently. Every now and then we get the recruit that kicks butt right from the start, but most of us got our butts kicked and got back up and tried it again until we learned how to play.
8. Every one is not a good trainer. They might be an excellent Commander who does what is asked of them and gets their reports in on time and communicates with their command, but they may chase off any body and every body that they try to train.
9. Army Commanders have enough on their plates that we all should be taking up collections to pay those who will take the job. It can eventually burn out the best of us.
10. HPS/JTS has many options and the options that are chosen can change the way to fight successfully. That is (in my opinion) why the War Colleges practically disappeared after the BG games. No trainer/commander is going to be able to train anyone in how to fight using every option.
11. This is a niche market and our niche is small. I imagine our sister clubs (Colonial, Napoleon, etc) are having the same problems.

_________________
Gen Ned Simms
2/XVI Corps/AotT
Blood 'n Guts hisself, a land lovin' pirate. Show me some arty tubes and we'll charge 'em.
VMI Class of '00

Gentlemen, Sirs! <salute>

Ned, very well stated from a 20 year Club member from February 2000, CSA serial #CSANS413!

I am still learning, playtesting one of the Campaign Vicksburg scenarios with Major General Gerald Jensen as the Yanks, just seems like I can't get out of his way!

Respectfully,

Your Obedient Servant,

General Nick Kunz
Commandant,
Vicksburg Military Institute