Napoleonic Wargame Club (NWC)
https://www.wargame.ch/board/nwc/

Poll: Preferred After Action Report (AAR) Format
https://www.wargame.ch/board/nwc/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=17879		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  Alexey Tartyshev [ Tue Jan 27, 2026 8:03 am ]
Post subject:  Poll: Preferred After Action Report (AAR) Format
Gentlemen,
I would appreciate your feedback on the preferred format and length of After Action Reports.
Example of AARs can be found here:

https://www.wargame.ch/wc/nwc/Club_Webp ... r_2025.pdf

and there is more in the pipeline.

Please select up to 3 options that apply.
One option is also ok, but no more than three so it gives meaningfull results.
Author:  Chris Savoy [ Tue Jan 27, 2026 10:27 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Poll: Preferred After Action Report (AAR) Format
Maybe it's just with me - but the link doesn't work? Maybe French sabotage :lol:
Author:  Alexey Tartyshev [ Tue Jan 27, 2026 10:58 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Poll: Preferred After Action Report (AAR) Format
Good spotting, sir. The godless revolutionary agents, acting in defiance of the divine order of true European monarchies, have been neutralised, and the link is now restored.
Author:  David Luna Pena [ Tue Jan 27, 2026 3:44 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Poll: Preferred After Action Report (AAR) Format
General-Leytenant Alexey Tartyshev.

Since I read AAR's to learn I like longer ones with in-depth analysis and also many images to properly visualize the situations.
Author:  Antonio Simon [ Wed Jan 28, 2026 6:47 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Poll: Preferred After Action Report (AAR) Format
Alexey Tartyshev wrote:
Gentlemen,
I would appreciate your feedback on the preferred format and length of After Action Reports.
Example of AARs can be found here:


I think that, on the contrary, the whole club is grateful to you for your work.

As a novice, your AARs and latest writings are helping me a lot to better understand these games, which I have been playing for years without really delving into them.

I find the AARs with images to be the most important and revealing, and I would like to be able to analyze my battles in the same way. How about a guide on how to make AARs? I have tried the podcast format, but I am not fluent in the language, which makes it difficult for me to follow them, something that improves with videos, although I always prefer reading.

I would like to see AARs of small engagements, more tactical than strategic, showing how to use different weapons in different situations.

Anyway, thank you for your work, and I hope this novice's opinion is of some use to you.
Author:  Alexey Tartyshev [ Wed Jan 28, 2026 9:08 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Poll: Preferred After Action Report (AAR) Format
David,
Thank you, noted!

Antonio,

Thank you for the feedback.

The easiest way to start doing AARs is by using ChatGPT’s voice function. My routine is simple: I watch the turn, then go for a walk and record a voice note (in any common language) describing what happened, the situation on the map, my concerns, opportunities and my planned response.

There is a psychological benefit to this. PBEM games trigger a wide range of emotions—from over- confidence to desperation —which does not help clear thinking. Talking it through with ChatGPT helps structure thoughts and turn them into an analytical, emotion-free narrative. What you get is essentially an AAR, or in fact DAR (During Action Report).

As you progress you can then ask the AI to shorten, expand, or refocus sections as needed. AI handles Spanish of course and then you can just ask to translate it into other languages, if later you want to share it with your opponent or publish as AAR.

If you want to go further, the text can be combined with images in a PowerPoint or similar format to create a more complete AAR.

Tactical detail is harder to show, but I can add more images in future AARs to highlight key positions and terrain
Author:  Antonio Simon [ Wed Jan 28, 2026 5:35 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Poll: Preferred After Action Report (AAR) Format
Thank you for your detailed response.

I'll take note of the idea of using AI to record battles. It's something I'm just getting started with, and I think it's a very good application of the tool.
As for the tactical aspect, I wasn't referring so much to tactical detail in large battles, but rather to clashes between a few units to explain its use.

As a novice, I think the problem of not managing large armies well stems from my lack of understanding of the use of combined forces, and I think that could be better studied in smaller engagements.

I seem to remember someone doing something like that in the days of Battleground games.
Author:  Sandro Lasco [ Thu Jan 29, 2026 5:06 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Poll: Preferred After Action Report (AAR) Format
Mon General, I believe it is important for everyone to be able to experience a different approach, an alternative to one’s own way of fighting (that is, playing). This allows us to compare battlefield decisions related to deployments, defensive and offensive tactics, and to refine our skills.

We could almost think of AARs as a sort of privileged observation posts, from which one can see deployments and maneuvers and, through the commander’s report, understand how and why certain choices and decisions were made.

A Kriegsspiel told through words and images. I would conclude by saying that this would be a great enrichment to add to one’s body of knowledge, not limited solely to games.

Thank you again for your valuable contribution
Author:  Alexey Tartyshev [ Fri Jan 30, 2026 8:07 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Poll: Preferred After Action Report (AAR) Format
Gentlemen,
For your interest - apart from AARs, the plan for this year is to add two more articles to the Theory section of the NWC manual, both focusing on infantry:

- The Art of Melee

-The Art of Musketry

For example, yhe musketry article will be more technical in nature. It will start with very basic concepts such as firepower values and then move toward more complex topics—for example, how companies within battalions deploy over 100+ meters of frontage and how this directly impacts FP output. My feel is that many players do not fully realise how significant this effect is.

The combined-arms topic is harder to theorise without becoming overly generic (like: “choose the right force mix for the right terrain”). That said, I will give it more thought to see what training materials can realistically be produced.

One idea is a quiz-style exercise, where cadets are given a scenario and asked to produce a battle plan following a fixed structure, such as:

- OOB analysis for both sides

- Terrain analysis

- Main effort allocation

- Supporting attacks

- Force mix by sector

To keep this manageable, each step could offer multiple-choice options rather than open-ended answers. This would provide a clear model for pre-battle preparation, which I believe accounts for at least 50% of success in combined-arms warfare.

The other half of success—the actual execution—is much harder to teach, as it largely comes with experience. That said, PBEM files could be provided to show real combined-arms cases, demonstrating the initial setup and how those decisions played out over subsequent turns.
Author:  Sandro Lasco [ Fri Jan 30, 2026 12:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Poll: Preferred After Action Report (AAR) Format
Interesting idea — it’s an exercise in quiz style. Even a PBEM game structured as a tactical example could work well, revisiting the quiz themes and allowing people to see and read what the two commanders decided, executed, and adjusted along the way.

Kind Regards
Author:  David Luna Pena [ Fri Jan 30, 2026 9:12 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Poll: Preferred After Action Report (AAR) Format
Alexey Tartyshev wrote:
Gentlemen,
For your interest - apart from AARs, the plan for this year is to add two more articles to the Theory section of the NWC manual, both focusing on infantry:

- The Art of Melee

-The Art of Musketry

For example, yhe musketry article will be more technical in nature. It will start with very basic concepts such as firepower values and then move toward more complex topics—for example, how companies within battalions deploy over 100+ meters of frontage and how this directly impacts FP output. My feel is that many players do not fully realise how significant this effect is.

The combined-arms topic is harder to theorise without becoming overly generic (like: “choose the right force mix for the right terrain”). That said, I will give it more thought to see what training materials can realistically be produced.


Seems like a very good idea Mein General-Leytenant, I'm learning and experimenting many things playing the Hunting Davout scenario from Campaign Eckmuhl. It seems like an evident truth, but there is a big difference between the musket fire from a shortened line than from an extended line, that wasn't that evident for me until experimenting the difference in the battlefield.

Alexey Tartyshev wrote:
One idea is a quiz-style exercise, where cadets are given a scenario and asked to produce a battle plan following a fixed structure, such as:

- OOB analysis for both sides

- Terrain analysis

- Main effort allocation

- Supporting attacks

- Force mix by sector

To keep this manageable, each step could offer multiple-choice options rather than open-ended answers. This would provide a clear model for pre-battle preparation, which I believe accounts for at least 50% of success in combined-arms warfare.

The other half of success—the actual execution—is much harder to teach, as it largely comes with experience. That said, PBEM files could be provided to show real combined-arms cases, demonstrating the initial setup and how those decisions played out over subsequent turns.


This is essential, I'm enjoying a lot my Hunting Davout scenario thanks to this previous exercise. We are at Turn 34 and at this point everything is going according to the initial battle plan that was made taking into account all of those points that you enlisted. It's a very hard fight with an expert french general in defensive tactics, but I think I'm doing a decent job.

I'm an Austrian General but with the Russian formation from the Alexey Tartyshev School and Doctrine. :russianveryhappy:
Author:  Antonio Simon [ Sat Jan 31, 2026 1:11 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Poll: Preferred After Action Report (AAR) Format
Alexey Tartyshev wrote:
Gentlemen,
For your interest - apart from AARs, the plan for this year is to add two more articles to the Theory section of the NWC manual, both focusing on infantry:

- The Art of Melee

-The Art of Musketry

For example, yhe musketry article will be more technical in nature. It will start with very basic concepts such as firepower values and then move toward more complex topics—for example, how companies within battalions deploy over 100+ meters of frontage and how this directly impacts FP output. My feel is that many players do not fully realise how significant this effect is.

The combined-arms topic is harder to theorise without becoming overly generic (like: “choose the right force mix for the right terrain”). That said, I will give it more thought to see what training materials can realistically be produced.

One idea is a quiz-style exercise, where cadets are given a scenario and asked to produce a battle plan following a fixed structure, such as:

- OOB analysis for both sides

- Terrain analysis

- Main effort allocation

- Supporting attacks

- Force mix by sector

To keep this manageable, each step could offer multiple-choice options rather than open-ended answers. This would provide a clear model for pre-battle preparation, which I believe accounts for at least 50% of success in combined-arms warfare.

The other half of success—the actual execution—is much harder to teach, as it largely comes with experience. That said, PBEM files could be provided to show real combined-arms cases, demonstrating the initial setup and how those decisions played out over subsequent turns.


I think it's an excellent approach, and if you need a guinea pig, I volunteer. You might be surprised at how clumsy some officers can be.
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/