Commander-based vs unit-based activation

As a small follow-up to my ongoing game report, I did a little analysis on how many units one can activate on average using a roll-for-activation mechanisms. You can read it on our sister-blog, Wargaming Mechanics.

I use an activation system in my ACW house rules. For a long time, we have used activations based on commander rolls, an idea we borrowed from game such as Black Powder. Each turn, a commander can issue an order to a unit by rolling vs its activation number, and if he fails, that commander is done for the turn, but other commanders still can issue further orders. Typically, each commander also has a "command radius" . Units outside this radius cannot be activated. I used some fix for that (you can activate one unit per turn anywhere on the table), but it never felt quite right.

Therefore, I decided to switch to unit-activation: units have an activation number (usually 7+ on 2D6), and you roll for any unit you want to activate. A failed die roll still stops the turn. Commanders can give a bonus if they are within their command radius. It is a nuance, but it does make a difference in actual play. Instead of looping over commanders, a player loops over units, with commanders merely providing some bonus.

I use cards for commanders, to be drawn at random at the start of the game. Different commanders have different modifiers for different type of orders, and hence, it's up to the players to use his commanders as he sees fit.

A selection of cards for my ACW commanders. I have  10 cards per side, players draw typically 3 or 4 at random at the start of the game. Modifiers are for move, fire and charge order. Cards are from Dixie (Columbia Games), but are only used for illustrative purposes.

 So why my analysis?

• I wanted to know how many units one can activate on average using activation-based systems;
• I wanted to know whether a bonus of +3 for some command rolls wasn't a bit too generous.

So, if you want to find out, read about it here yourself :-)