CPX REPORT

At first, the results look embarrassing, and I was a little bummed out
about it:

After 6+ hours of play, the CPX of October 25th (my "training" CPX)
ended, after barely getting through 8 turns.  That's an average of 40
minutes of real time for each minute of game time!!!  

I was particularly disappointed because I thought I had done a pretty
good job of preparing for all the known pitfalls of a newbie CPX ump,
such as planning a "trial run", and having units set up on the map
beforehand, all pre-named, creating an "ops map," etc., so that there
would be less to do on the day of the battle.  But then, there were the
*un*-forseeable problems.  I know this will sound like a whiny list of
excuses, but:

1.  My workweek prior to the CPX went bananas, forcing me to work late
every night, as late as midnight some nights.
2.  For 2 nights, my apartment had no electricity! (Screwup with
billing.  Arghhh!!!). Still no setup done.
3.  On the night before, the night of the practice CPX, Chimera's server
started acting up -- which was very unusual, according to him.  We spent
the entire evening trying to find a stable server for the next day's
game, and I never did get in my practice game.
4.  James mistakenly never got his initial orders to Rocky.  Rocky, in
turn, didn't get his orders to me until a few hours before the battle.  
5.  Then when I got Rocky's orders, I saw that he had changed most of
the names of the units.  Had to rename everything... this put me behind
schedule.
6.  Just before starting the game, my computer crashed!!!  Lost Rocky's
new setup!  To ease my panic, we all agreed on a 1 hour postponement.
7.  Just before starting the game again, we discovered a mac/pc
compatibility problem with reading sitreps.  This prevented players from
getting a clear idea of what was going on in the battle in timely
fashion.  This took a lot of time to figure out.  The problem was
eventually solved, but not until after the game.  
8.  To make up for the lack of sitreps, I was asked to send a couple of
screen shots.  This seemed to take many minutes to send (15 apiece?),
and slowed my computer down to a crawl so I couldn't run turns or do
anything other than type messages.

The list goes on.  Murphy's Law at its most triumphant moment.

And yet, I now consider the game to be a success in many ways.  Mainly,
because I learned a lot, and that was its primary purpose -- to get me
through the hoops of learning how to umpire a CPX.  Just as importantly,
everyone seemed to have fun!  (Or the guys were at least nice enough to
*say* they were having fun.<g>)

While most of these problems that occurred were my doing, and I take
full responsibility for them, there is one thing that the players can
do, in fact, *must* do, to make sure the game goes smoothly.

Players *must* get their orders in by the prescribed deadline!  NO
EXCEPTIONS... NO EXCEPTIONS... NO EXCEPTIONS... NO EXCEPTIONS!!!!!

Both sides ran into some problems during the setup phase.  Chimera was
faced with domestic distractions (frequently referred to as "real life")
but Gary, his XO, took the initiative and virtually planned the entire
defense.  A great example for us all, on taking the initiative.  On the
US side, however, James somehow forgot to copy Rocky on his initial
orders and didn't discover it until a day or so before the battle. 
There was also a major time zone difference between them.  This caused a
serious delay which came into play bigtime on game day.  Not to scold
Rocky too much, but I think it is the responsibility of each player to
do whatever it takes to make sure they are going to be on time with
their orders.  If that means prodding your C.O. to get his plans sooner,
do it.  Or if that plan doesn't come by a certain time, screw it, send
your orders in anyway, then work it out between you later.  It is far
more important to get orders in of any kind, than it is to delay the
game just so you can "get it right."

Some quick observations for the next time I do a "live" CPX...

1. Get familiar with the turns cycle (what to do when, in what order)
2. Have forces named and organized, ready to plot *before* receiving
orders.  This will mean less work just before the battle, and I will be
more familiar with the units that way.
3. Get more sleep.<g>
4. Get more used to reading grid #s and processing the written orders
into TacOps ones.  Some relatively simple orders took as long as 2 min.
to get straight in my head (mostly NATO's).  An order like "move Bravo2
at aaabbb through the woods at xxxyyy and south to treeline at zzzvvv
would numb my brain.  First I'd read the whole thing just to get a sense
of it while checking the grids on the paper map to get an idea of
general location, then I'd go to the game and wonder: Which one of these
things is Bravo2? (click on 3 or 4 units to check names) By that time
I've forgotten the location (back to IRC, repeat the location 5 times to
myself out loud to memorize, then back to the game).  Okay there it is.
What route did he want me to take again?) (Back to IRC) Okay, got it.
(Back to the game) Wait, what was that final destination again? (Back to
IRC). I'm getting a migraine just talking about it!  Basically, I need
to find a way to see orders and map at the same time, not keep flipping.
5. I need to do a mini-mini-CPX *for real* -- that team HAll looked
like it would have been a perfect training scenario, if only the server
was working.:(  Maybe in the next week or so?)

Here are some reactions from the other players about my umpiring skills,
or lack thereof:

(Gary)

> NATO sure held things up.  There should be some kind of rule that units
> that fail to comply with set up times are penalized by the Umpire
> putting the units on the board in convoy or the far cornor of never
> never land.  They missed the LD time, or got lost, or something like
> that.

Noted.  Perhaps something for the CPX guidelines, Jim?

> <snip>
> 
> The scenerio is an intersting one, one I think you should run again,
> maybe do the MBX format.

After I get a couple of more CPXs under my belt, I would like to come
back to this one.  I, too, had a great time with it and look forward to
getting a full game out of it someday.  I will, however, work up a
Custom Scenario (PBEM) version of it, and hopefully post it to Chimera's
website for people to try once it's done.  (Have to figure a way of
simulating paratroopers in a PBEM game.  Hmmm.<g>)
 
> I know that this was new to you and control and reporting mistakes
> showed up.  You expected that anyway.  It takes alot of practice getting
> used to sending out the reports keeping yourself organized. 

> Organization is the key.  I spent hours training guys in the service to
> do CPXs.  If you run an MBX and treat it like a CPX, for your training
> experience, with the slower pace you should be able to figure out all
> those things that drove you nuts on Saturday. 

Good idea.  I may schedule an MBX over the holidays.
 
> I had a hard time reading the reports you sent.  You should always seen
> a screen shot and a SITEP before the game begins.  

Noted.

> For the defense guys,
> a SITREP is really of no use unless they are really engaged and loosing
> forces.  What we need is spot reports.  You are a detail guy - what I
> mean is you love the action, you love to give long detailed descriptions
> of the action.  BUT, you leave out the stuff we need for operations.  An
> example would be telling us about an action, but never giving us the
> grid, are they mounted or dismounted, what kind of vehicle are they in,
> which way are they headed.
> 
> A basic spot report would be like this;
>         2 M2's traveling south, grid 123456, engaging. 
>         4 M1's moving east, grid 123456, egaging, lost 2 BTRs.
>         Observing arty falling grid 123456.
>         Recieving arty, casulaties.

Wow, great comments!  And boy, I wish I had the above list you just
wrote on a post-it note stuck to my computer that day!

> Anyway - we could have run that game three times if NATO had been ready.
> lol.
> 
> gary

Personally, I don't think the late orders held us up *that* much.  But
point taken.<g>

***********  GAME REPORT (Chimera)  *************

> James and I will be getting together to re-do the CPX/MBX Umpire's Manual
> soon, so this could be a good place to start, procedures.  My thoughts ((
> Your mileage may vary. )):
> 
>   *  Issue orders/reports from your end.  SITREP/SPOTREP and any misc info
> (( Command, Intel, etc. )) that comes across.  Be sure that you include ALL
> pertinent info.  This could mean Arty accuracy when they are firing, etc.
>   *  End the Report with a recognizeable "End Orders" command, alerting
> players that they are now free to ISSUE NEW ORDERS.
>   *  Give the players a pre-set amount of time to issue their orders.  Be
> mindful of lag, side-specific difference in orders resolution, etc.  My
> suggestion is offset the two sides in the orders.  For example:  if you are
> running five-minute blocks of gametime between Order Cycles, then designate
> 0705,0710,0715,0720,etc as the NATO/BLUE orders time.  OPFOR is dealt with
> at 0708,0713,0718,0723,etc.  That way, you dont have to sort two different
> sides' orders at once, just one.
>   *  Once the Issue Orders phase timelimit has passed, or you are ready to
> move, and have given everyone ample time to read the SITREPs and develop,
> notify them that ORDERS OUT or something like.
>   *  Keep a large legal pad or notebook beside you on the desk.  This is to
> write down things like:  Arty fire mission times (("Fire two minutes, cease
> fire" would warrant an entry like "NATO ARTY #2 - Cease at 0713." in your
> notes.)), Reinforcement entry times, extraneous actions (( Bridges getting
> blown, airstrikes on arty TA positions off-map, forces offmap coordinated
> attacks, etc. )), and such things.  Reference it regularly!
> 
> >2. Resolve that sitrep readability problem!!! 
> 

This was solved at the end of the game: By pasting the unreadable sitrep
contents -- control charaters and all -- into a word processor (Word)
document it somehow, as if by magic, becomes readable.
> 
> >3. Have forces named and organized, ready to plot *before* receiving
> >orders.  This will mean less work just before the battle, and I will be
> >more familiar with the units that way.
> 
> THIS IS A MUST!!  Also, if given a chance, run a SITREP beforehand, take it
> into a wordprocessor, and seperate the SITREP info into columns, (( UNIT
> NAME, COMPOSITION, UNIT ID#, LOCATION ))  This way, you can utilize the
> UNIT ID# GOTO program in the game.  If someone says "Move Bravo21 to...",
> you look at your reference sheet, find BRAVO21, and read across to the UNIT
> ID#, say OP#15.  Hit (on a Mac) Command-G, and type in '15', hit ENTER.  It
> jumps you to that unit! 

> >6. Get more used to reading grid #s and processing the written orders
> >into TacOps ones.

> Simply tell your players to issue TacOps orders.  SOPs in game terms,
> movements in game terms, facings, DF TRPs, Target Types, whatever you want
> to allow players to dictate.  If you want them to be able to call
> splits/joins/whatever, let them.  But radio confusion happens.  Elevate
> your focus above "getting things done right, according to the Player's
> Orders", to something higher, like "Shit happens/What'd you say,
> Sir?/...do...copy...over?".  Game flow is critical to preserve the
> 'reallife Fog of War' feel that makes CPXs infuriating/fun.
> 
> If it continues to "numb your brain", then step back, put your shoes into
> the Platoon Leader's position and make a decision.  "Cant tie up the
> Command Net, Sargeant, do your job."  That's why Officers put trusted NCOs
> in such positions.

> >Basically, I need
> >to find a way to see orders and map at the same time, not keep flipping.
> 
> Print the map, laminate it at Kinko's or someplace, and get a set of
> colored dry-erase markers.  Works great.  Make sure you use a map that has
> grid lines and coordinates on it, or it will do you no good.  Remember,
> RIGHT and UP when plotting/reading maps.

Great tip, thanks Chimera!
> 
> >Please feel free to add to the list.  THe more learning I can get from
> >this, the better I'll feel.<g>
> 
> Is there someone that can help you run one?  I am thinking of running a CPX
> sometime, with two helpers.  Just an idea.

************ GAME REPORT (James) *************

> Actually, I never send out arty accuracy info except when players
> specifically ask for it.  8)  Mostly this is because I try to speed things
> up by usurping much of the arty control - it's faster in my experience for
> players to indicate "accomplish task X with batteries 1, 2, and 3, using
> ammo type Q, special conditions Z" than to give me separate grids for each
> battery etc.  I take the mission and play FOO....  quicker.

Certainly easier for a beginner umpire!
 
> >  *  Give the players a pre-set amount of time to issue their orders.  Be
> >mindful of lag, side-specific difference in orders resolution, etc.  My
> >suggestion is offset the two sides in the orders.  For example:  if you are
> >running five-minute blocks of gametime between Order Cycles, then designate
> >0705,0710,0715,0720,etc as the NATO/BLUE orders time.  OPFOR is dealt with
> >at 0708,0713,0718,0723,etc.  That way, you dont have to sort two different
> >sides' orders at once, just one.

If it works for you, great.  I think I'd like to stagger the reports I
send out, rather than stagger the times at which I send them.

> I tend to run this by feel, which is perhaps not always a good thing.  I've
> tried setting up a timer but I find that I ignore it - either need more for
> apparently good reasons, or need less....
> 
> I also disagree somewhat with the off-set in orders phases.  Might work.
> But I get pretty much the same effect by alternating everything in the
> reports/orders sections of the game:

Good to know.  Okay, here comes a suggested checklist for sending CPX
field reports:

> timestamp to A
> timestamp to B
> initial reports to A
> send sitreps/spotreps to A
> initial reports to B (while A digests its sitreps/spotreps)
> send sitreps/spotreps to B (while A digests its sitreps/spotreps a wee bit more)
> get orders from A (while B digests its sitreps/spotreps)
> get orders from B
> (and to be honest I flip back and forth between A and B for orders - the one
> that gets orders fired off soonest gets attention first.  This flexibility
> is, imho, a plus.)
> After I feel things have proceeded long enough I tell them "orders out" and
> start running more turns.
> 
> The hard call is when to chop off players who are in a muddle.  Are they
> muddled because they do not know what to do (run more turns!) or because
> inexperience with the game has them bollixed (run more turns but not as
> soon, or try to get them straightened out on the confused gameplay issue. 8)
> 
> >  *  Once the Issue Orders phase timelimit has passed, or you are ready to
> >move, and have given everyone ample time to read the SITREPs and develop,
> >notify them that ORDERS OUT or something like.
> 
> Note - we've been using "orders?" for "reports over" and "orders out" for
> "no more orders, headed off to run more turns".
> 
> >>2. Resolve that sitrep readability problem!!! (somehow)
> 
> Major H fixed this...  PC types can load them into Microsoft Word as type
> "text only".  Don't ask me why but it basically works.
> 
> >Hit (on a Mac) Command-G, and type in '15', hit ENTER.  It
> >jumps you to that unit! 
> 
> Actually, this is something umpires and players should remember more
> often....  The players can send the # to the umpire too, after all.  
> 
> On the other hand, the second way (traditional way?  ;) is for the forces to
> stay organized and un-snarled, and for the umpire to keep loose track of
> where units are.  Unless things are snarled up or I am not doing well as
> Umpire, I usually know more or less where most units of size (player command
> level minus one) are (so if the players are BN commanders I know roughly
> where the companies are.)

--------- End Game report -------------