I am constantly thinking, pondering, cogitating, and even when going to sleep, thinking about wargaming, wargaming campaigns, history, and what I'd like to see in my ideal wargame.
A few things I know that I like, which some commercial games provide elements of, with possible answers or provisions for dealing with them are listed below. It is not an exhaustive list, but merely a start on some things I have been most recently brainstorming.
1) Variable starting unit strengths. Given that the unit strengths of a battalion or regiment (or whatever the organization was) on the day of battle would NEVER match their paper numbers, I am a fan of games that present me with the paper strength and then have me determine whether my forces have suffered from attrition.
2) Deals with our perfect knowledge of historical contexts. Whenever I see someone or a group of someones tell me they are going to play a certain historical battle scenario, I slightly cringe. Now, I am not taking away from their enjoyment, we all have things that interest and inspire us, but for me, a "historical refight" is nothing of the kind. My favorite Napoleonic battle to study has always been Austerlitz and almost a decade ago my gaming group (in California) play that battle using Age of Eagles on a 12' x 4' table and, for me, it was a miserable experience. I had fun being with my friends, but meh and I was not a huge fan of the rules (I do kinda like F&F for this variant of those rules does not do it for me) so maybe that had something to do with it. My team, the French, won, but that is likely because we really prepared for it, including having meetings on tactics and determining our overall battle plan, days before we met for the actual game. However, I digress...
ans.) Some publishers deal with this by giving me a basic roster of guys and then rolling dice to see how many of a particular unit will show up for the battle. This is easy to resolve and makes for a very interesting game.
I want a game system that takes in to account my perfect knowledge of what is going on and forces me to have to deal with some uncertainty in outcomes. For example, in many games we know what "to hit" number we will need and any modifiers that will help or hinder that, and then attempt to play in such a way to min/max the desired outcome.
ans.) I think opposed rolls help with this, but in a solitaire game, most especially, we still have a perfect awareness of what is going on, unless there is some mechanism, whether it be cards, a flow chart bot, or something, that we are aware of in the way of possibilities. So, what I am thinking of is whenever my campaign battles (for my Imagi-Nations) calls for me to roll a d6 in an opposed roll situation, I will roll a d6 for my side and a d8 for the opposition. So, if my math is right, in a straight-up die roll, I have a 25% chance of losing, because I cannot roll a 7 or 8 on a d6. With modifiers, for both dice, these percentages change, but even if I max my modifiers in my favor, I still suffer from the known unknowns and can have things go wrong when they otherwise would fall in my favor, guaranteed.
For example, let's say I am attacking with infantry in the open against an infantry opponent in the woods. I know that I'll be better off in open order, so I perform that formation change, I known that I will be better off if I am attacking from uphill (I am using a generic set of modifiers that we should have all seen before in SOME ruleset), so I move my troops in such a way to be attacking from uphill. I also know that having a friendly unit of mine on their flank or rear will give the enemy troops a combat penalty, so I arrange for that as well. Now, I have successfully used my knowledge to limit my risk and promote my advantage and will now need to roll a 5 or 6 to hit on X number of dice and the enemy will have fewer dice, because of my maneuvers, and will need a 6.
Or, I give the enemy forces d8s and make the outcome less certain for myself, because in a solo game I am moving the enemy troops and maybe I moved their infantry into those woods because, although militarily justifiable, I also knew that the rules would favor my counter-attack. In games where my opponent is present, this is not as necessary, but in a solitaire game, I think I need to look at including it.
3) Solo campaigns. A lot of very good games, many by my favorite designer, provide solo bots to play against, often utilizing a flow chart of decision making processes. A solo map campaign can use similar methods, if perhaps not going through the mental gymnastics of creating such flow charts.
In a point to point map campaign, I have an enemy who is going to attack me, along a common border of several points. Where will they attack from? Well, in certain games, there's only one or two options and then our best defensive position will be very obvious and so we'll stack our forces there, but that is not how reality works. Sure, they COULD come from the best position, but we'd have to guard against them knowing that we know this and thus decide to attack us from where we are not expecting (Ardennes Forest ring any bells?).
I think my answer to this is to work up a quick and easy system where I roll a single die, with modifiers, to determine where the enemy will move and as battles are fought, the success or failure of the enemy force will give modifiers to their rolls for movement choices. Also, potential targets would factor into this decision-making process, for example if I have a fortress point on the map, but failed to leave a garrison there, perhaps that will add a modifier to the enemy roll, if they are within striking distance, or maybe they won the last battle and are in a position to pursue my weakened army, so they get a modifier to their roll that will, perhaps, push them into following my army.
I don't know how, or even if I have the persmissions, to post images here, so look at the link below for an example of what I am thinking about. Two of my favorite boardgames are Friedrich and Maria, both of which use nearly exact systems. These are perfect examples of point to point maps, although my own campaign will have less points, but take a look and then read on.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Syz2lKL3xYY/ToGXOzRletI/AAAAAAAAU6U/EscHHtRMNw4/s1600/hcs_20110918_2865.jpgThe orange and read markers with the flag symbol on them are leaders, the other disks are approximately divisions of troops. Let's say I am the red player in a solitaire campaign game. It is orange's turn, after having defeated my forces on my campaign turn. What system will I need to create to give Orange some decisions beyond only chasing me down? Does he head to Cham to cover it or is the orange leader too timid to follow up and thus having done his duty, choose to fall back on Landshut?
My thoughts are that I would dice for it, using a designated leader quality (probably, poor, competent, excellent, and impetuous) to provide modifiers, but also a modifier for how badly he beat me in the previous battle. In this case, it may be that the orange commander is poor so he is less likely to pursue, but he did achieve a minor tactical victory against me before his turn, so that gives him a positive modifier to follow my trail. On the other hand an impetuous leader would follow me up, ignoring my cavalry screen (the red cube and attempt to destroy my army. Further, the overall policy for that campaign season would also be a determining factor, were his orders to defend the borders or to push into my territory, those would necessarily be modifiers to the die roll.
I am considering having a chart for each of the leader types, instead of having modifiers for them, giving a range of options, but not eliminating any option only increasing or reducing the odds of it occurring. So, it could be that a poor commander would pursue, but unlikely unless other mitigating circumstances push him in that direction.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1gwUdCllSfcT-WPfo3So1v5OnUfK4XjRW/view?usp=sharingAn example of such a chart is in the link above.
While I could just decide what I want orange to do, my goal is to help remove some of the effects of my gamer's perfect knowledge and include something the reality that some leaders just did not behave as expected or even ordered (like Meade immediately after 3 July 1863)
There are other variables to consider, but for my projects, these are some things I am dealing with and need to write out so as to provide a foundation for further work and consideration.
Any thoughts?
Justin
Topic: My Imagi-Nations (Read 5416 times)