Napoleonic Wargame Club (NWC)

OK, Al, all banter aside, please help me understand what your muster report actually means. You said your IV Corps has 31 officers, of which 21 stand "ready to battle", of which 11 are actually "engaged".

I understand the 11 officers who are "engaged". They are playing battles and are definitely "active members".

What is the status of the additional 10 that "stand ready to battle"? That indicates to me that they are not actually playing games, they are just "ready" to play games. I am a little fuzzy on what that really means.

But as fuzzy as that is to me, I really cannot at all understand what the still further 10 officers that complete the 31 of the muster are doing.

Can you clarify this for me? I am not familiar enough with LGA's Muster System to understand the process and criteria. As I said, I am not asking these questions as any form of the banter that I typically employ in this forum. I am seriously asking you these questions as this Club's President who needs to know what the data you are conveying actually means relative to the membership of our club.

31 Officers are registered, 21 reported for the November Muster, 11 are fighting hard for the La Grande Armee.
Some officers are working hard in support of our Armee while similar to others some are not. If an officer does not report for three musters they are removed from active duty.

I am sure someone of higher rank can explain this more clearly.

Battle On....

There are only a handful of officers that actually perform all of the administration for this club. I have heard Scott Ludwig make that statement on numerous occassions and, of course, I personally know this to be true. Rather than place you on the spot, as I realize that you are relatively new to the club, I would pose my next question to your Army's Chief of Staff and/or your Army's Commander:

Is the true complement of La Grande Armee, and by that I mean truly active officers who are either playing games, socializing in our forums, or directly contributing to the administration of this club, really closer to 33% than the numbers shown on the LGA roles?

And since LGA is by far the most active army in the club relative to its muster, I find myself wondering what this portends for all of the other armies in our club?

I cannot help but ponder the question of how many 'lifeless corpses' we really are carrying in the NWC?? This in turn begs the question of why we continue to carry them???

If we are not truthfully measuring our recruitment against our real losses, we could easily find ourselves in the situation where we have thousands of members on the books, while the Rhine Tavern goes out of business because no one is buying drinks. Let's be sure that we are being honest with ourselves in this regard. I must admit that the news I have read about the administration of the Panzer Campaign Club suddenly disappearing bothers me. I do not want to see that happen to our club.

In my opinion, and perhaps this is just me, a person who musters and does nothing else for this club is not an active member. If we ever become a club of officers who only respond to a muster without playing games or socializing in our forums, we will immediately cease to exist as a viable organization. What say we do not go there?

If a member of this club is not actively playing games, actively socializing in our forums, or actively contributing to the administration of our club in some manner, that member is not active and should be relegated to the reserves until such time that he develops the necessary interest to make a positive contribution to this organization.

Just my thoughts, freely given as usual.

I think if someone is a member, reports for muster and they may be not playing for a few months. Then come back to battle and/or the forums. They should remain a member. While I do not see the point of being a member of an organization and not participating. At the same time it keeps them involved so that when they wish to come back to battle they are ready to go. The tournaments fired some up as well as some banter and cajoling. So I will wait for the powers that be to answer any further inquirer on Brigadier General Jones.

As we make things more fun and interesting I believe active participation will increase in the LGA.

Finally, Battle On....

What is this? The Rhine Tavern going out of business? Monsieur! Mademoiselle! Quickly, a round of drinks for the administrator's here, who are surely working up a thirst with all of this talk!

Payment? But of course, I will use these bags of coins seized at the town of Gunzburg as part of the loot from a recently disposed of Swabian battle corps.
Whew, we need not fear this fine establishment to be closing, eh?

Now, where was this conversation going? Ah yes, who is active and who is not?
My ten franc's are on the officers who bother to report for muster.

I mean really, the only other way to determine whether they are active is to peruse the battle record dept each and every week (which of course, the Brigadier thru dint of his Presidency, is no doubt already wont to do), but seriously, who would want to track all of that, after I mean, tracking all of that? Not even the formidable jagers of the Hanoverian Brigade would be volunteering for that job... would they?

As well as I am sure there are a number of officers in administrative positions who are not actually doing their job either, in various armies...

I agree with Col Kling, my esteemed comrade (here, a drink for you sir), that reporting for muster must surely account for participation. We can only strive (and here I say that the Brigadier/President is the leader of a growing number of members who are trying their hardest) to enliven the atmosphere, to encourage interaction among us in these forums, and upon the battle maps.

Regards,

Now I do absolutely believe that, except that my goal is to increase such active participation in every army of this club. Although I am the Chief of Staff of the Anglo-Allied Army, I view things from a larger perspective than many others.

Which in no way detracts from my duties to counter French recruitment efforts and redirect them for the benefit of the Anglo-Allied Army.

Sorry, Al, I seem to have 'mucked up' your fine recruitment post a bit, although I would actually have to consider it to be 'enhanced'.

Now I do wonder to which Hanoverian Marechal Bardon was referring....

In answer to President Jones,

The response to muster for our army is usually between 70 and 80 percent. This is the reason why we hold so many musters, to pick up the 20 to 30 percent who do not answer to every muster. So when it is reported that 21 of 31 are ready to battle, it means that 21 have been accounted for. The other 10 may or may not be engaged in battle.

The other issue that you brought up is activity. My view is that, though this club is based on playing games, it is more than that. The rules go along with that idea as the rule that requires a member to have a game in progress has been eliminated. It is not only unreasonable but detrimental to the club to have such a rule. There are many good members, long time members, who cannot always have a game in progress. Evidence of this is how many players are forced by personal circumstances to drop out of games and tournaments in which they have engaged.

The French Army measures interest in terms of answering to muster. If an officer answers to muster, he is interested in continuing his membership in the club. This probably means that, if he does not have a game in progress, he intends to start one at some point. Why would you dump such a person and force them to reserve inactive status, which would mean out of contact?

On the other hand, if a person does not respond to muster within 3 to 6 months, it is assumed, unless they have an explanation, that they are no longer interested, and should be considered inactive.

This is a policy that has developed over the years and we have found it to be in the best interests of the members and the club.

_________________
Marechal C. Jensen
Prince de Trevise
Comte de Suchet

3ème Régiment de Cuirassiers
3ème Brigade
1ère Division de Grosse Cavalerie
Réserve de Cavalerie

I am not a hard line advocate that every member of the club should have an ongoing game at all times to be considered active, although I personally have always met this stated requirement of our Club Rules.

On the other hand, I do not consider hitting "Reply" to an email once a month as being 'active' either. Who sends the email to begin with if every officer in the club devolves into only responding with a "Reply"?

The very same concept applies to our forums. What is there to see in our forums if all of the 'active' members of our club limit themselves to reading only? The answer is very simple. If there is no one writing, there is nothing left to read, and our forum will disappear for lack of interest.

This equally applies to our websites some of which, in the past, were not updated in literally years.

The word "active" to me means much more than the taking of actions that I actually consider to be "passive".

I do fully realize that we really don't need to relegate everyone to the Inactive Reserves, particularly those that run 'hot and cold'. It would add an administrative burden that I would honestly wish to avoid as much as possible.

When you make the statement that "This is a policy that has developed over the years and we have found it to be in the best interests of the members and the club", I am not certain to whom you are referring to as "we". I suppose you mean, "we, the French". The policy to which you allude is only followed on a monthly basis by La Grande Armee. The other Army Commanders may hold a muster once a year, if even that often. This would point to the fact that not everyone agrees and certainly is not consistent in their actions. In truth, there are no consistent actions for the armies in our club from the awarding of merit points, medals, promotions, etc. There is some measure of consistency within the individual armies, but the methods of each army are certainly vastly different from one another.

Be that as is may....

I have been working to improve the activity level of our club for over two years now in more ways than you will ever imagine. To some very great degree, I have been successful, although it is a most arduous process that requires a great deal of my personal time.

There are a lot of things that develop over time, Chuck.

One of them is rust.

Chuck, we do generally agree on the direction in which we should be headed, although not in every detail of how to accomplish this end. I certainly do agree with you as to the fact that we should all work together. That is absolutely true.

Whereas I do agree that communucation is critical, I do not see 'counting' officers every month to be the same as 'leading' them. I also do not think that monthly mustering is the only way to communicate within the structure of an army, but concede that it may be a more appropriately structured method for a larger army such as LGA, as opposed to a smaller army such as the Austrians (or the Swedes!).

I would hold forum posting to be a much more active contribution to our club than simply hitting the "Reply" button to a muster request. Writing something is a creative process, not a simply responsive one, and requires considerably more time and involvement to produce.

I do not view someone who is "interested in continuing as a member of the club" to be equal to someone who is actively working for its benefit.

I also absolutely agree that we should be spending our time as leaders in this club "motivating, inspiring and giving our officers opportunities to get involved and get active".

And I really believe that all armies should work together to improve the club as a whole. What I see in this regard though, are independent factions that often argue more than converse. I don't think the armies really work together yet like I hope that one day they will.

Let's just keep plugging away, and talking to each other, and see what we can ultimately accomplish.

Mark, we both look at the same thing and see it differently.



We are not counting officers, we are communicating with them. We are leading by communication, because email communication up and down the chain of command is our only medium. We cannot kick them in the butt like a Marine Corps Sergeant.

The forum works for a few, but you cannot expect everyone to want to write creatively, especially when it does take time to produce. This has been the case since the NWC started, and I have seen the same thing in the ACWGC.

And we cannot expect everyone to be equal in the club. We do have ranks and points to highlight the difference. Do not expect everyone to be active all of the time. As a matter of fact, I have seen many members that have been extremely active burn out and quit in short order, and many less than active members stick around for years and years.

I only have authority in La Grande Armee, and I think, with the help of a good cast of characters, we do a darn good job, a heck of a lot better than Coalition Armies, I am thinking. I hope you aim as much criticism at the Coalition Armies as you do the well run French.

_________________
Marechal C. Jensen
Prince de Trevise
Comte de Suchet

3ème Régiment de Cuirassiers
3ème Brigade
1ère Division de Grosse Cavalerie
Réserve de Cavalerie

You know, Chuck, I have to say that statement is a bit arrogant. I am not certain that the Coalition Army Commanders would agree with it. I suspect that every Army Commander in this club will tend to overestimate his own accomplishments, while underestimating the accomplishments of his peers.




As a matter of fact, I do. If you want to verify this for yourself, all you need do is ask Marco. He and I have had some very painful confrontations in our past. Scott will tell you much the same. The key is that we all worked through them. It would be an extremely short sighted mistake on your part to assume that you are being criticized just because you belong to La Grande Armee. I am nothing like the Francophobe that you seemingly suspect me to be. I don't base any of my actions on a hatred, or even an actual dislike, for LGA or anything French. Some of my very best friends in this club are, in fact, French officers.

When I post about being placed in front of an Anglo-Allied firing squad, and having Marco eagerly pick up a musket of his own, I am basing the experience on some of our own very real disagreements. Now he and I have continually grown closer, and we do in fact work very well together, but that does not in any way mean that our path has always been paved with rose petals.



I have never had the expectation that every officer in this club would desire to, or perhaps even could, write creatively. I never have indicated that I thought they should. What I did say was that I consider an officer who takes the time to participate in our forums to be more active, and contribute more to the bottom line of our club, than an officer that does nothing except hit the "Reply" button every month as a response to a muster request.



Now here is the point on which you and I may actually be the furthest apart. You see, I really do see everyone in this club as being equal and deserving of respect. The ranks, medals, victories, defeats, and everything else are fictitious to me. The bottom line, as I see it, is that we are all fellow gamers. As the Club President, I really do not believe I am any better than the greenest Lieutentant that we have in this club who has just completed the first turn of his Training Game. What transpires in this club does not define me as a person, nor does it define anyone else. We are all real people. We all have real lives. Our rank and standing in this club, however high and accomplished, does not in any way make us better than anyone else. That is just the way I view the world, Chuck. I really do see us all as equal.

I have to agree that the monthly report is a great tool to assess the participation of the officers of my division. Some of them will only report as present, but I also get a detailed report of their activity and they tell me if they need help (club policy about opponent disappearing).



Also because the membership is international some officers are not as comfortable as others to participate in the conversations we could have in the forum. I always encourage the members of my division to participate more to the forum, Pierre or the Rhine tavern.






I don't think that Marechal Jensen meant that we were not equals in that sens, I think he meant in our capacity/time to participate in the club actively or not. Some of us a very active: playing and discussion on the forum. Others are very active on the Forum or on the battlefield. Others again have only time to play a game or two at a leisure pace. In that therm we are not equals, same thing with responsibilities. Some of us are in charge of others, etc... But at the end we are all equals as individuals and rights.



I will take the first part of the comment as a normal thing, we all think that our own army is the best. That's why we are in it. Especially if you are in the French army Come on, we have better looking uniforms, beautiful women, incredible food and drinks and formidable foes.

But more seriously I will echo Marechal Jensen, Mark. I see a lot of criticizing of the French army on the public space (Rhine Tavern). We can easily find topics (including this one) that end up as heavy critics of the French Army (the club entity) by coalition officers. It's like a common thing. But I hardly see anything coming from the French officers, yourself or any coalition officers criticizing publicly the allies.

I would not complain at all if it was disappearing from the forum. I am a true believer of using the Cabinet or the chain of command to pass on concerns.

_________________
Général David Guegan

3ème Régiment de Grenadiers - Bataillon d'élite du 3ème Légère
2ème Brigade
Grenadiers de la Réserve
Réserve
La Grande Armée
--------------------------
"From the sublime to the ridiculous is but a step."
Napoléon Bonaparte

Military justice is to justice what military music is to music.
Groucho Marx

Split this discussion off into another topic, as to not belittle the work of Al and the men he is honoring here....then I'll add my two cents...

_________________
Generalfeldmarschall Scott Kronprinz "Vorwärts" Ludwig von Preußen
Kommandeur des Königlich-Preußischen Armee-Korps
Chief of Staff (CoS) of the Allied Coalition
Allied Coalition Webmaster & Club Website Support

Topic split as requested. There was a bit of a learning curve here for me, but I think I finally suceeded in getting it accomplished.

Hopefully I did not miss anything....