One Battle, Multiple Games

 “There is nothing insignificant in the world. It all depends on the point of view.”

— Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Every gamer has their favorite genre periods and game systems, whether for wargames (both miniature and board), roleplaying games, or board games. Some folks maintain avid interests in numerous favorites. In many cases — but perhaps mostly with wargamers — players enjoy multiple games on the same subject, each title emphasizing something different about the theme. This seems almost stereotypical of wargamers, who fixate on historical periods or even focus on single battles: Gettysburg, Rorke’s Drift, Cannae, D-Day, and, of course, Waterloo. People interested in specific episodes in history rarely settle on reading just one book about them; they read several, often expanding their curiosity further into the period, and sometimes even related subjects. No one book tells the definitive story; neither does one single game perfectly depict a historical event. Different books contain new research, approach from a new perspectives, or incorporate particular biases; multiple game rules simulate conflicts differently in how their systems account for or interpret historical factors. Just like reading several books with different perspectives can broaden our understanding of a historical period, so, too, can multiple games on a subject present different ways of modeling a conflict and hence give us varied experiences from which to learn, both about the history and about effective simulation techniques.

I’m infamous for maintaining interests in numerous historical periods, both as a reader and gamer. So it’s not surprising I’ve acquired and played some games that focus on specific events and issues, enabling me to explore both the historical elements and the ways rules and components model them. I won’t bore readers with a comprehensive look at my obsessions; but highlighting a few cases of multiple games covering the same subject might demonstrate how different games help us experience and analyze events from different abstracted ludic perspectives.

Waterloo

I’ll start with one of the more famous battles from one of the most popular periods wargamers seem keen on replaying. It’s one of Napoleon’s most famous engagements, albeit his final, despite his imperial conquests across much of Europe and numerous famous battles. But it seems whether you’re dabbling in wargames or a Napoleonic devotee, Waterloo seems high on everyone’s list...especially armchair generals keen to prove that they could have turned the tide of the battle (and history) in the French favor.

I have and have played several game versions of the battle, each with a different system abstracting elements from the engagement and governing their interaction with each other and the terrain. I have two interpretations from Avalon Hill, Hundred Days Battles and the early Waterloo: Napoleonic Campaign Game; both cover the larger operational campaign with slightly different focus. I played Hundred Days Battles when I acquired it in my teen years, one of my first forays into chit-and-hex board wargaming. Both games offer a fairly typical experience of their time, with unit counters featuring movement rates and strenths, hex maps.

A few games concentrate on the battle itself. I’ve played the Waterloo scenario featured in the basic Commands & Colors Napoleonics set from GMT, which, true to that series, focuses on available orders related to units on the left, center, and right in the battlefield arrangement. Goodness knows I have plenty of miniatures and terrain to recreate the battle on the wargaming table using any number of miniature gaming rules, though I’m partial to Bob Cordery’s Portable Wargame system. And I just received a copy of Worthington Publishing’s Waterloo Solitaire, which I enjoyed in “bookgame” format and awaits its turn on the game table. Worthington’s Napoleon Returns 1815 offers an operational simulation of the campaign into Belgium th an abstracted card mechanic covering engagements between opposing forces. And because I can’t get enough, and I admire compact games, I’m eagerly awaiting Battle Box: Napoleonic Wars which I backed on Kickstarter and expect I can use to replay Waterloo in its pocket-sized format.

Each game offers different perspectives in both the scope and rules. Managing one’s forces — whether across the larger campaign or on the battlefield — takes careful consideration to learn how the rules simulate the period’s tactics in both attacking and moving. The operational-level games offer some interesting “what if?” possibilities to explore.

The Battle of the River Plate

I could go on about all the World War II engagements that fascinate me: North Africa, D-Day, the Battle of the Bulge, and various aerial campaigns like the Battle of Britain. But the Battle of the River Plate engages me from various angles. I’ve previously blogged about this early WWII naval engagement in my “Watch, Read, Play” series. Like Waterloo it has two distinct phases: the larger campaign to find the Graf Spee and the tactical battle to sink it. I featured The Hunt in that earlier blog post as a solid simulation of the former, with abstracted card play for the actual battle; it does a nice job simulating the uncertainty of the Graf Spee’s location and its hunting grounds while the British slowly build up and deploy their task forces to track down the German pocket battleship.

I’ve played the battle with different rules on the wargame table using miniatures. My first attempt enabled me to test out Fletcher Pratt’s Naval Wargames rules, available from the History of Wargaming Project. With exhaustive ship stats based on Jane’s Fighting Ships and a hit resolution system based on visual range-finding it proved a sometimes-complex but fulfilling exercise. I was particularly fascinated that Pratt’s 1930s wargame gatherings had fought a similar engagement between a pocket battleship and several cruisers, with similar results to the actual battle, several months before the historical confrontation.

In contrast to Pratt’s rules, I’ve also replayed the Battle of the River Plate using Bob Cordery’s Gridded Naval Wargames, a far more concise and intuitive system easier to teach kids and newcomers. Running the game as a convention event led to some interesting post-game discussion on how the rules and scenario might better incorporate historical elements...sometimes the best reflection combining both history and gaming.

Special Operations Executive

As Britain’s clandestine (and often controversial) behind-the-lines service during World War II, the SOE sent agents into occupied territory, primarily France, to establish resistance cells and carry out sabotage and other activiies to hinder German operations. I have a host of books on the subject and the numerous agents, notably women, who risked and often gave their lives to fight fascism. And I’ve tried a few games simulating these operations, something different from more openly confrontational wargames. These vary widely in their approaches despite focusing on small resistance cells. I’ve discussed espionage games before, including some non-fiction resources as well as specific titles...some of which appear below.

I’ve enjoyed Jake Staines’ Maquis as a simulation of a resistance cell in a French town. While it’s very much a resource-allocation game, it involves elements of movement and worker sacrifice, all in the attempts to fulfill a specific mission against enemy forces. The game leverages various kinds of resources, often forcing the player to make choices between ensuring the resistance group’s strength/survival and it’s ability to successfully accomplish the mission. Navigating routes around town to safehouses and locations to collect resources depends on avoiding enemy patrols and arousing suspicion that can escalate into greater and deadlier challenges.

I recently gave David Thompson and Dave Neale’s War Story: Occupied France a try using the shorter free scenario offered online (with the rules) at Osprey Publishing’s website (as a prelude to immersing myself deeper in the longer scenarios when I find time). It’s an interesting hybrid of programmed adventure game (like the Choose Your Own Adventure books but with game rules), resource management, and tactical game. The first-person perspective immerses players as they slip from one encounter to another trying to carry out their clandestine SOE mission. I was quite delighted at the level of suspense the game evoked, where every decision carried some risk and a choice to spend much-needed resources immediately or save them for future challenges. A very different experience from the more board-focused Maquis that emphasized the personal narrative of the team.

My narrative exploration of SOE gaming led me to Alex White’s A Cool and Lonely Courage: The Women of the SOE. It strikes me as part of a more recent trend in roleplaying games away from the “traditional” games from the late 20th century and toward a more collaborative, narrative, and highly focused experience. They’re a genre of roleplaying games I’ve wanted to explore, though I’ll admit previous attempts with the earlier generation of games that gave players greater agency over the experience did not really appeal to me. So I figured if I’m going to give this latest development in roleplaying games a try, I should dive in with a topic that really engages me. Alas, I’ve only found time to start reading the book, though I doubt I’ll ultimately get it to the table given my lack of roleplaying gamers, particularly those mature enough for this kind of narrative experience. That said, it represents a different approach to gaming SOE operations highlighting the very personal nature of the experience without heavy rules. I’m not sure how suitable it is for solitaire play as, say, a journaling game, but I’ll give it a try.

These subjects and games represent just a small slice of the historical events I enjoy exploring through games. I’ve left out a host of historical events for which I have (and have played) multiple games. New or related historical periods constantly tempt me.

The concept of multiple games for the same genre or play style isn’t restricted to history wargames. No doubt some folks focus on simulation games dealing with contemporary conflict issues. Roleplaying gamers and board gamers focus on titles both based on their theme and rules. The Old School Renaissance (OSR) movement concentrated on a certain play style characterized by early fantasy roleplaying game systems. Some board gamers concentrate on particular kinds of games based on their broad designations describing their core rules.)

Just like reading different books about a subject can expand our understanding, so do different games focused on one event enhance our game experience and overall understanding of the subject. A difference in rules and components can help us appreciate how designers model a conflict, abstracting the situation, participants, and their interactions into systems that play out on the game table. It presents an interesting exercise if we’re keen to reflect on our experience in the context of our historical knowledge.

“I believe everyone should have a broad picture of how the universe operates and our place in it. It is a basic human desire. And it also puts our worries in perspective.”

— Stephen Hawking