Solo/Co-op Games & the “Bad Guy” Dilemma

 “Evil is unspectacular and always human, and shares our bed and eats at our own table.”

— W. H. Auden

I often grapple with the issue of playing the “bad guys” in historical wargames. Villains in our history have committed heinous atrocities and human rights violations, beyond the death and destruction war brings to soldiers and civilians alike.* I’ve explored the issue before, mostly in the case of using games to engage and teach kids about history or in examining delicate periods or perspectives. It’s all fun and games — literally, at the most basic level — until one takes a deeper look at the context of historical games and reflects on some of the weightier implications...and our involvement in them in the abstracted ways games allow us. In some cases I’ve included follow-up material to help students further consider on the consequences of their game actions (notably cards with historical information about their roles in the attack on Pearl Harbor). Sometimes switching sides can alleviate some of these concerns, with participants playing games or scenarios twice, so each gets a chance to experience the other’s perspective. As I veer more toward solitaire and cooperative games, I’m discovering their very one-sided nature can absolve players of taking the role of the “bad guys” and allow them some guilt-free game experiences...which ultimately might lead to the after-action reflection I feel remains necessary to learn from games.

The more I play solitaire and cooperative board games the more I enjoy them. Solo games eliminate the need for other players, who are all too often busy with other pursuits, have little interest in my seemingly elaborate games with specialized subjects, and require far too much convincing to join me even halfheartedly. I can set them up and play according to my own schedule and leave them as I’m interrupted by other duties (assuming I protect them against the attentions of our three cats...). Cooperative games with fellow humans provide a less competitive experience that brings everyone together collaborating about how best to use their resources to move the game state toward our own victory conditions against the faceless foe of rules governing an “automated” opponent and escalation mechanics driving the tension.

Both solo and co-op game designs have advanced in recent years to explore different approaches for both player actions and the rules for the opposition, often called a “bot” (drawing on terminology from the electronic realm). The mechanics for interacting with the game state, other players, and the adversarial bot have become as diverse as the different titles emerging in the board game “renaissance” ushered in during turn of the century with such titles as Settlers of Catan (now simply Catan), Carcassonne, and Ticket to Ride.

While I’ve enjoyed a number of non-historical solo and co-op games — Forbidden Island, Alien: Fate of the Nostromo, Aliens: Another Glorious Day in the Corps, Star Wars: The Clone Wars — I find historical games a bit more challenging because they inform me through game components and experience about issues surrounding the events they portray, offering some food for thought after the game’s packed away. I offer a few examples below with brief overviews to demonstrate how these games represent opponents participants might not particularly want to play themselves. Some of these I’ve featured in the past, with links provided for further reading if desired.

The Fields of Normandy: Mike Lambo’s solitaire wargame book pits squads of British soldiers against Germans in action shortly after D-Day. Each spread offers scenario rules on one page and the map on the other, 15 missions in all. One can cut the counters out of the book or print them from downloads. Initial rules provide the basics for gameplay, both ordering British units and carrying out the German counterattacks. The player has some limitations in the two orders it can give each unit every turn, with those suffering from low morale carrying out only one order. The maps and scenarios provide a good sense of small unit tactics in northwest Europe (within the abstracted game form). I’ve briefly mentioned the game before and often find myself wanting to return when I yearn for squad-level WWII action. Lambo’s published numerous books with a similar approach for engagements from various historical periods.

Maquis: While it isn’t a wargame in the traditional sense, it simulates a historical situation from World War II. This solitaire worker-placement game allows a player to experience the activity of the French underground — the eponymous Maquis — in its various missions against the occupying Germans. The player manages agents and resources to maintain the network of resistance fighters, acquire materials necessary for missions, and avoid the ever-present French Milice patrols and eventually Germans soldiers. The gameplay juggles many moving parts, all integral to the mission of resistance fighters of the time; once a player grasps the core rules it’s easier to immerse oneself in the period. It includes lots of uncertainty that easily interrupts the player’s plans. The few times I played (in the easiest of five difficulty modes) I felt a keen sense of the tension and paranoia agents needed to survive while conspiring against the occupying enemy forces.

Battle Cards: I featured this series of print-and-play games simulating battles from World War II before. With one page of rules and one page for the map/board, they provide short games one can easily replay and require a minimum of pieces (usually just six-sided dice). The series offers includes several battles, all but one from the perspective of the Allies. Game mechanics dictate the movements of enemy forces, including reinforcements when necessary, and push players to carefully consider their options; failure in one area often prevents victory within the allotted time. They’re a compact introduction to wargames requiring little investment in cash and time. Each game includes a page of historical notes to help players put the action in the context of World War II history.

Worthington Games: Worthington Publishing releases quality wargames covering many historical periods and using various components and mechanics (including blocks for fans of block wargames). Hidden Strike: American Revolution pits the Patriot player against British forces using some interesting block resource management and card play representing historical developments and events (and despite playing it more than 20 times, I came close to winning only twice). In Chancellorsville 1863 the player manages Union forces crossing the Rappahannock River to bring the fight to Lee’s Confederate army. Tarawa 1943 sends waves of American marines against the strong fortifications of a Pacific atoll, with some clever dice mechanics and more historically based cards. Pacific War 1942 Solitaire is waiting in my “to be played” pile, but it looks like a relatively light wargame with some interesting mechanics enabling a player to command Allied forces in the Pacific on their drive against the Japanese.

Wings of Glory: During the pandemic, to mitigate a lack of interested players, I discovered the Wings of Glory WW2 AI app enabling one to hand the controls of enemy planes to an electronic program that compared the position and attitude of planes to determine their next move...while players planned out their maneuvers as usual. This stands as the one of the few cases where I’ve used electronic methods to accommodate my solo and co-op gaming. The few times I tried it — both on my own and with my son — it worked fairly well to control enemy planes (Japanese Aichi D3A1 Vals on a bombing mission over China, which our Curtiss P40 Warhawks from the Flying Tigers sought to intercept).

These games represent ones I own and have played; I’m sure I’m missing a good number out there I’ve simply never had the means to explore...Brian Mayer’s Freedom: The Underground Railroad comes to mind.

Well-designed solo and co-op games can free us from some of the moral burden of controlling the more heinous elements within a game, pitting a human opponent against the faceless bureaucracy of the rules in the form of “bot” mechanics. They still don’t really address the issue of “playing” at war, of abstracting the horrific violence, destruction, and loss of life into an accessible game for entertainment or even edification. But such games can provide an immersive experience with history (without initial moral qualms), an invitation to explore and discuss weightier issues from our past.

“History is moving pretty quickly these days and the heroes and villains keep on changing parts.”

— Ian Fleming

* I’m also aware even the “good guys” carry their share of responsibility and guilt for terrible acts during wartime, intentionally or otherwise; though our collective cultural (and often nationalistic) mythology of various wars tend to ignore these distinctions and paint things in black and white.