Campaign attrition

[Baphomet69]

WargameHub, that is awesome, that's pretty close to what I was looking for.

The idea I have is Warsaw vs. NATO circa late 80's. The initial battles would all take place more or less simultaneously, and then I would factor in when reinforcement units would become available (based on real-life projections of same from the period). Your die-roll system is detailed enough for me (I don't want to go so far as to figure in illness, hang-nails and shaving profiles... ), I would be using MSH - division-level gaming, after all. I just want some quick/easy system to figure out who should be left to fight the next battle until reinforcements arrive.

Then again, as Voltigeur said, it'll probably never happen, I've been having trouble finding players to even play one-off games (my group is stuck on FoW, unfortunately for me)...

[piersyf]

OK, my turn again as the logistics junkie...
I agree that finding players can be a problem; quite often I have to do the book keeping for the players (as the umpire) and tell them what they have available. If they squeal, I have evidence. For me, a campaign is a whole different beast to a wargame. Wargames can be 'games' or 'combat simulations'. As I've run games using my rules for training officers in military establishments, I lean towards simulation over games (hence my disdain for FoW)

One method that has had more success than others is to look for players to fill a particular role; air, land and sea is a starter, but logistics itself can be a challenge for the right person. I'm working on a campaign at present that may need as many as 9 players, and they don't need to be in the same place, or even talk to each other! Break it down to its components, and get people to play their part. Not everyone gets to be Custer (thankfully).

P