How to Play Wargames
How to Play Wargames We have discussed some of the basic elements in playing wargames. Ultimately, however, it is the quality of play which will determine who will win. Look at it this way. Two players of equally high skill in tactics, technique and analysis will play a dull game the outcome of which will largely be determined by the intrinsic bias of the game for one side or the other. This rarely happens. In chess there is often reference to "dull" games in which both players did what was expected. In wargames the situation is far more ripe for innovation and surprises.
It is relatively simple for a player to develop a good (even superior) tactical skill at games. What is more difficult is acquiring superior technique and analysis ability.
Technique is a grab bag of skills involving the evaluation of the elements of the game and the options thus available. Take, for example, our Drive on Metz. The German player has considerable variety in his forces. He has strong units, he has weak units, He has fast units, he has slow units. Because Drive on Metz is a simple game, there are none of the what we call "special" units with unique abilities. However, most games do have such units. In Drive on Metz, for example, there could be artillery units which could project their combat strength over three or four hexes.
The German player, in order to maximize his chances for success, must mentally (or on paper) draw up a list of his units ranked in order of their abilities. The easiest way to do this is to simply multiply the unit's attack value by its movement value. The resulting number would be the unit's total value. Line up all the units on the list by value. You now have what amounts to a list of your best and your worst units. Naturally enough, your best unit will be a relatively strong one that is very fast. On the other hand, units that are relatively strong and slow are also useful, but different.
The German player must then analyze the terrain that he must defend. This can also be done by dividing his front into sectors, say blocks of hexes, four or five long and three or four deep. Assign each type of hexagon a value according to its defensibility. An open or clear-terrain hex would get a value of 1. A fortified hex would get a value of say 3 or 4, And the woods and town hexes would get something in between. Thus, each sector would come up with a number indicating its relative defensibility. This defensibility is almost as good as having additional units since any unit that is placed in there is multiplied in its defense value, At this point the player can then proceed to evaluate what the enemy forces can do, rank the enemy forces and, in effect, think like the enemy. This is probably one of the key elements of good chess play, looking at the game from the other player's point of view.
Once new players realize the value of this the quality of their play increases enormously. While these techniques will improve your skill at using the games, don't forget the opportunity to just sit down and start playing the game. Most gamers do this quite a lot. While the games lend themselves to some very interesting analysis, it's also entertaining and educational to just, as chess players put it, "push wood."
Analysis With A Little Life In It
One thing you will notice is that the analysis of wargames is not the dry, systematic, mathematical (which, admittedly, some people get off on) analysis that you have in chess or other abstract games. Rather, you're analyzing a real historical situation. Because the games demand such realism and accuracy in their historical information, players get the feeling that they are participating in a study of human events, which is exactly what they are doing. This makes the analytical work more palatable.
So you study the hell out of the game. In a tactical sense, this is a pretty good approach. It still doesn't mean you're going to do very well unless you show some ability at analysis. By analysis I mean, what you can do with all of this in the game itself. For example, so what if you outnumber the other fellow two to one? If he's holding the mountains that you have to get into, this might actually be putting you at a disadvantage. Analysis means determining what type of specific tactical situations will arise in the game and what is your optimal reaction to these situations. Your tactical skill and your techniques are merely the tools that you apply on the basis of your analysis. Many gamers go back to historical accounts of the battle their gaming. They often find good analysis there, and its often by the original participants. If nothing else, you get an idea of what not to do.
Between two really skillful players, it is the analyses by the two players which will cause most of the excitement. Often both players will correctly analyze the situations in a general sense. Where they may differ is how they apply the tactics or techniques to implementing their analysis. This makes for very exciting play. For example, one player may have determined that in order to win a game of Waterloo he must attack certain British units during a specific turn of the game with a certain force. This force can either be all ground forces or it can employ a large amount of his artillery. How much of his artillery he can spare will largely be determined by what he is doing during the entire battle that turn. Thus, while the player has good tactics for using the artillery and good technique analyzing where it will usually be most needed, there is still enough room left in any wargaming situation to go one way or the other. There are so many hundreds of unconscious decisions being made when any one of these situations is being analyzed, that it is a truly creative act when one player comes up with an analysis of the particular turn of the game that is demonstrably superior to another player's analysis.
While I understand these techniques and have used them to one extent or another, I am not the greatest practitioner in the world. My knack is for designing the games, not playing them. When I do play, I get distracted by my habitual tendency to try and figure out how the game was put together and then to try and come up with better ways to do it. Meanwhile, my opponent is usually just playing the game. Many times I've been on the receiving end of much better users of these playing techniques and I find it much more pleasurable to watch two other players knock each other's brains out in a creative contest of wargaming tactics, technique and analysis.
