Distilling Historical Battles into Wargames

 “It’s like a bird. If he knew what he was doing, he would fall.”

— Carl Reiner

The Battle of the River Plate on the game
table; not quite as it actually happened.

Earlier on social media I shared the news I’m returning to the City of Chesapeake’s annual reenactment event for the Battle of Great Bridge Dec. 5-6, 2026. Once again I’ll bring along my terrain diorama (sectioned off into convenient board “spaces”), paper miniatures, dice, and signage asking “Can You Win the Battle of Great Bridge?” I invite event attendees to learn about the battle, survey what the area might have looked like 251 years ago, and, using extremely basic rules, play out the fight between British forces and Patriot militia. Last year 1,100-1,600 people passed through the event, and at times it seemed like many listened to my ramblings about history and tried their hand commanding miniature forces to see how they’d fare in this historical engagement. (Spoiler Alert: In most cases the Patriots gave the British a sound drubbing, much like the historical outcome, though occasionally with a few close calls.) In my social media post an old friend, gamer, and educator commented: “Do you have a process for using miniature battles to teach history? Not just tactics, but also the commander's motivation, personality and the battle's likely alternate outcomes.” And it started me thinking about how I distill historical battles into miniature wargames, especially with my focus on using games for learning and introducing wargames to young people and newcomers to the hobby.

I’ve been presenting and facilitating games for decades. My first efforts focused on roleplaying games, primarily convention demonstrations and scenarios for West End Games fare like the Star Wars Roleplaying Game, The World of Indiana Jones, even the Hercules & Xena game. As my situation and interests changed, I indulged in wargaming, mostly focusing on historical conflicts. For about 15 years now I’ve designed and published my own rules (notably Panzer Kids and Skirmish Kids) and used those and other established rules to create public game presentations, mostly for convention events, but occasionally for educational venues like libraries and museums. Sometimes I create a hypothetical scenario to provide a sense of warfare in a particular period; but in most cases I’m presenting a specific historical battle on the gaming table. Ultimately the process boils down to researching a battle and adapting it to a set of rules.

Much like writing and editing, I just do it. I’ve done this enough times that I’ve internalized the process to a degree I don’t consciously think about it, at least in a way I can easily and clearly convey to someone else. Reflecting on my methods, though, helps me realize there is a process and I can distill it from the murky workings of my brain to an outline others might use to employ miniature wargames as games for learning. The work falls into two categories: research and rules, with a follow-up bit involving discussion.

Research

The Library of Congress reading room.

As a writer the best advice I can offer is “Write what you know.” A challenge, really, in that if you don’t know something, you need to discover what you don’t know, research it, know it fully enough to become fluent in writing about it. The same applies to historical game design. Research your topic. Presuming you’ve already decided on a battle or at least a period to represent on the game table, you want to know everything you can about that event. The who, what, where, when, how, and why can all inform some part of the game experience. The rules you choose (see below) can help focus your research on elements necessary for a specific wargame scenario. Some of the more important aspects to note include their objectives, the number and kinds of units involved, the terrain over which they fought (preferably with a map), and their initial deployment. Examining these should lead to additional research asking more questions. How did the terrain hinder or help different units and influence the course of the battle? What issues did different troop types experience? How did commanders’ objectives and attitudes influence each side’s tactics? Does the historical record mention anything notable that might factor into a game? And ultimately how might a scenario and rules reflect this on the game table?

Those interested in history no doubt have their own research resources. This aspect of game design can help reinforce research skills and build a foundation of knowledge for a particular period. I typically start from a cursory, broad perspective, then find references to inform my particular concerns and those most relevant to a wargame. In this regard I find Wikipedia valuable (though back in the last century I might have turned to one or more of the local library’s encyclopedias). For military matters the website summary sidebar does a nice job of breaking down the leaders and forces on each side. Depending on the article, one might find information on circumstances leading up to the battle and the effects of the aftermath. A general narrative covers, to varying degrees, the initial deployment, advances, retreats, and notable moments that swayed the course of battle. But this only represents an informed starting point.

More detailed resources add depth to any wargame, confirming information previously unearthed and providing a more detailed look at elements to portray on the game table. My personal library contains reference works on most of the periods in which I maintain interest. Atlases of various wars can focus on battles as well as overall campaigns. Books on a specific engagement can offer details, including quotes from the participants (from generals to privates) to enhance the game experience. Military history books from Osprey Publishing and others give many battles comprehensive coverage, including information on the political situation, objectives, commanders, weapons, strategies, and maps (and older titles even offer notes on wargaming the battle). Local libraries, especially ones with a room full of regional history resources, remain good places to find detailed information on military action in one’s own town, county, or state.

Not all the research makes it into the game itself, especially when paring it down for a non-wargaming audience. That said, research always helps in the pre- and post-game stages: discussing the context under which the battle occurs, and reflecting on how the game went, player experiences, lessons learned, the decision process, and whether the game served as a defensible model of evidence-based history.

Rules

Taking research information and adapting it to a particular set of miniature wargaming rules requires an initial decision: what rules to use? Certainly one can use any of the miniature wargaming rules on the market, adapting them to a younger audience unfamiliar with such games with enough “scaffolding” (an education term for providing additional support and guidance until one gains a better understanding to continue on their own). But finding a basic system can simplify the process converting a historical engagement to a playable experience, especially if one is intimidated by the prospect of learning and comprehending a more complex rule set to then adapt to a streamlined experience.

Some of my favorites for introductory level miniature wargaming experiences suitable for kids and newcomers to the hobby.

One-Hour Wargames: Neil Thomas’ book offers rules outlines for numerous historical periods, all relying on core concepts of movement, shooting, close combat, and morale. As each unit sustains 15 hits before elimination, one can represent forces using individual or based figures, keeping track of hits with dice, notes, or by removing pieces. The information on 30 different scenarios can help interpreting situations and terrain, and the “Background Reading” appendix offers additional ideas for rules to use.

Big Battles for Little Hands: Miniatures rules by John R. “Buck” Surdu and Rob Dean frequently used by the Harford Area Weekly Kriegspielers (HAWKS) in convention games for young people. A bit more involved that I personally would like, but it covers all the essentials and some aspects of the hobby at a far more basic and understandable level than many more hardcore rules on the market. Perhaps best used by adults seeking to guide kids in fighting tabletop battles, both large scale actions and skirmishes.

The Portable Wargame: If you don’t mind using a grid over the battlefield to delineate “spaces” Bob Cordery’s core rule set balances authenticity with a tolerable dose of complexity. (I’ve found newcomers to miniatures battles prefer game “spaces” over more freeform measurements with ruler.) It relies on strength point values for units along with the usual stats for movement and combat. I particularly like the concept of the “exhaustion point,” about one-third a side’s total strength points which, when reached, requires the side to abandon advancing attacks and pursue a defensive strategy (until, of course, the other side reaches its exhaustion point). The main Portable Wargame title provides enough to work with most eras, but additional titles customize the game experience for different historical periods.

Skirmish Kids: These rules and fare like Panzer Kids work well in specific instances, in this case, small-unit action (and World War II tank battles). Because I can’t resist I’m also developing Kids in Command! to cover larger battles specifically with a younger audience in mind. They’re all purpose-designed for staging miniature wargames with kids and newcomers to the hobby. I mention them here for shameless self-promotion purposes and because they’ve proven to work well adapting to historical battles and introducing kids and newcomers to miniature wargaming.

Ultimately choose something you enjoy, can adapt to historical scenarios, and can distill to the level of your intended audience.

With a game system in mind one can start adapting the historical specifics into tabletop realities. How does one represent units as game pieces? How far do they move and shoot? Which units were more prone to dissolve or flee in the face of combat losses? What role did the presence of leaders have? Much of this amounts to interpreting historical elements into existing game mechanics. If in this process the rules raise questions one can’t answer, go back to the research step and find out.

My past articles outlining my work developing theBattle of Great Bridge game offer an example of how to research and design a historical battle game, albeit with my own even more basic rules than those mentioned above; notably “Gaming Great Bridge II:Battle into Game.”

Discussing the Context

After the research and the rules and playing the game, one can always tie everything together with context. Some of this we naturally present before the game: the historical events leading to the battle, objectives for each side, the peculiarities of the terrain, the forces involved and their advantages or disadvantages. Other topics emerge afterward after participants have played through the engagement: historical outcomes and counter-factual possibilities, political, military, and societal factors affecting the battle and the implications of its outcome in those areas, considerations in this kind of warfare, the process of and reasons for distilling history into a playable game format, and accurate versus defensible portrayal of history as we understand it.

At the Great Bridge event, before I even dive into the game rules, I outline the situation or “scenario,” noting the reason two armed forces clashed here, their objectives, which units they fielded (and their advantages), and the terrain they fought over. For those unfamiliar with the history it provides a solid overview. After running the game we talk about how the battle really fared, casualties, and the greater implications of the aftermath. I invite participants to ask questions about the battle, the research, the situations before and afterwards, and any other things they want to know that I can capably answer. For many it’s just one of several immersive experiences they take in as they go on to shop at sutlers, watch period artisan demonstrations, and ultimately see the battle portrayed by uniformed reenactors using firearms in about as realistic portrayal as we can safely manage today.

All of this — learning the rules, meaningful play, discussion and analysis — forms an important process tying together games, history, and learning. It reflects Dr. Jeremiah McCall’s “Cycle of Gameplay and Analysis,” something that’s become a core part of my ideas about games for learning. And certainly using miniatures battles to teach history, for audiences young and old, new and experienced, at reenactments, libraries, museums, even schools (if they dare!). Anyone involved in teaching (however you define that) hopes to engage their audience, share knowledge, and inspire them to seek further knowledge on their own. Games of any kind, even miniature wargames, can accomplish this.

Framed in a historical context game participants have the opportunity to learn something beyond the board, ask questions, interact with a model of an event, and perhaps better appreciate how history emerges from an occurrence in the here-and-now we look back on when it’s long done and seemingly nicely sorted out into a clear, digestible narrative. As games play out, we might realize the many possible ways an event might have occurred, the numerous factors that, had they been different, could have affected not simply the outcome of that one event, but the resulting actions and decisions people made in the aftermath.

“There is nothing new in the world except the history you do not know.”

— Harry S Truman