An Apology For Wargaming

Many people today seem to think that if you play wargames this means that you are a lover of war. Some refuse to play such games on principle, others feel strangely about playing them, as if they are breaking some kind of moral code. Some would even shy away from military history in general. In this essay, I will endeavor to give good reasons for playing wargames. It is the aim of this essay to show that just the fact that you play a wargame does not make you a lover of war, more confrontational, or morally suspect.

Now, of course, it must be said that the term "wargame" is perhaps a regrettable accident of history. Real war in the real world is certainly not a game, and should never be treated as such. Perhaps a better word might be "Strategic Simulation" or "Tactical Tutorial." But, since few people know what such things are, I suppose we are stuck with "wargame."

Today our society is exposed to much senseless and non-senseless violence. This finds expression on the small screen, the big screen, and the computer screen. I don’t need to tell you that there are many movies and television shows that use senseless and non-senseless violence as a theme. But perhaps there is even more senseless violence that is found on computer games. One can, of course, play many computer games constructively, but there is a temptation to devolve the game into trying to cause as much damage and senseless violence as possible. I’ve played games which were just about running away from the cops and car-jacking as many cars as possible. While fun, the hours spent playing such games were probably not my finest.

Wargames do not tend to increase violence. The aspect of violence in wargames is always abstracted out into the rolling of dice or the playing of cards, or a mixture of these two. Sure, losses are taken in many wargames, and these losses usually are represented by huge piles of figures, chits, or blocks that are in the "discarded" pile. But there is no blood. There are no pictures of dead and dying bodies grotesquely torn to pieces. There is no gore. Wargames are rather tame in this respect when compared with other "violent" endeavors.

Also, wargames have a positive effect on people’s desire to learn history. It has been repeated so many times that it has become a cliche, but it still needs to be said: "Those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it." Playing a wargame is an intensely historical enterprise. One begins to get a feel for a certain era in history through wargames. Whatever the case, usually one learns something one did not previously know about the era represented: who the characters in that era were, what were the strategies and tactis used, and what was the reason why the war was fought in the first place.

Wargames do not just teach history, but they also teach geography. Wars are always fought on real terrain in the real world. Wargames almost always either use maps representing the real world, or terrain pieces representing real world terrain. Therefore, wargames usually teach people where the rivers, roadways, cities, and mountains actually are. This is invaluable expereince that could benefit anyone willing to learn.

Given the current dearth of both history and geography instruction in our public schools, perhaps wargaming might be a helpful tool in the classroom. Of course, there would be many who would raise their hackles concerning this helpful suggestion. The fact remains that many kids these days don’t even know where Europe is, much less when the Second World War took place. I learned these things in history class, but I also had much experience with them on the wargaming table.

Wargames are also great tools that teach logic and optimal use of resources. One can learn how to think in a logical fashion by playing a wargame. Questions wargamers ask themselves include, but are not limited to: "How do I respond to what my friend just did?" "What do I do if he does this?" "How can I most effectively produce the things I need?" "How do I use my resources to provide the maximum impact?"

A word might possibly be said concerning competition in wargames. Most wargamers play wargames in a competitive spirit, striving for something called "optimal play." This means that they do whatever they can to play the game and use their pieces in the best way possible. It is true there have been a couple times when I have found someone’s presence at the wargaming table offensive. But most wargamers, while competitive, are also gracious in both victory and defeat. Most of the time, wargamers play for two reasons: First, to have fun in the atmosphere of a wargame. This involves the people one is playing with and the game that is being played. Second, most wargamers play to learn something about history, geography, strategy, and tactics. We do not play, for the most part, in order to place our opponents under our mental boot-heel. Although playing a wargame is an intense mental activity, it should not be used to belittle someone’s intellect.

As with any gift, wargames can be abused. But hopefully this essay will convince those who have an aversion to wargaming that it can’t be all that bad. And hopefully this essay will show the wargamer that playing a wargame is not so bad after all. At least it’s not as bad as watching some television shows or playing some computer games, and I would say it’s even more fun.

Bertonian Ancient Miniatures!

Yes, that's right, you heard right... The Bertonian Battles rules have gone into the Ancients category. I suppose you might see thes guys as Ancient Romans, Carthaginians, and maybe Greeks, but I know better. They're Bertonians and Liliputians... (Bertonians are in blue, Liliputians are in orange...)

While the Liliputians break down on the Left and the Right, the middle is left open for the Liliputian Heavy Cavalry. They will decimate the Bertonian Bowmen...

And this is how things ended up... It was a pretty dirty battle, but the Liliputians actually had units that were coherent at the end, while the Bertonians had few, if any, that were not broken, or in danger of breaking. The rules are simple, just that each unit has 3 stats. First, movement in inches. Second, firepower equaling the number of six sided dice each unit rolls in combat. And third, armor value. When you attack, you seek to roll above the armor value. Each die rolled above the armor value equals a hit. 1 hit = target is "checked" 2 hits = target is "pushed" 3 hits = target is "routed" and 4 hits = target is "eliminated." Dirt simple, really... :)

Axis and Allies Pacific

I had the privilage of enjoying some Axis and Allies Pacific at President Oakes' house last Thursday. I, of course, as Emperor, played the Japanese. Oakes played India, Australia, China, and the United States. Now, get this... The US starts out with 72 IPC's! That's 72 million man hours of production! Japan starts with 19! So, you can see that I was at a disadvantage.

My strategy was simple... After Perl Harbor (simulated rather nicely in the rules by allowing Japan to attack at full strength and forcing everyone else, except the Chineese, to defend at 1.) I decided to give the US a "scorched water" policy in the Pacific. I decided to retreat and keep on retreating in the Pacific until the US came close to the Home Islands.

On the other side of the board, where my fleets, armies, and airpower confroted those Brits and Chineese, I dominated. By the third or fourth turn, I had almost completely destroyed the British seapower in the area. The Ark Royal (British Aircraft Carrier in the Indian Ocean) went down in a shower of bombs.

Now, of course, on land it was a near run thing. I did take the Philippeans, Java, and the Dutch East Indies, but for a time I had a hard time holding onto French Indochina. This was remedied, however, when I took my armies from all of the other islands and landed them there.

After the sea was clear of British vessels, I was able to land troops on the Indian subcontinent at will. The Brits had a nice army sitting in India, with lots of tanks, and I thought that maybe the Brits would push into French Indochina... If they would have done that, I probably would not have been able to attack India. But, for some reason, the Brits were on the defensive and didn't push. India was a close battle, but the Japs ended up victorious.

The turn before, the US had moved its fleet into the Japanese home waters. After destroying the original Jap fleet that bombed Pearl Harobor, the remainder of the US fleet was destroyed by Jap fighters. Of course, the US had a lot of stuff on the board, and they were pushing through the Pacific. But, because I took a capital and held it for a turn, I won the battle.... :)

I'd certainly like a rematch, this time with me having some 72 IPC's to start with... :)

Strategy... If you are Japan, kill the UK navy as quickly as possible. Then, do as much as you can to take a capital.

If you are the UK, basically what you should do is try to take out as many Jap ground forces as possible. Husband your navy, guard it and keep it, for you don't want the Japs to have the run of the sea.

If you are the US, you need to push NOW. If you are able to push into the South Pacific and retake some of the Dutch East Indies, then you will take some pressure off of your UK allies. If you don't do this, look for Japan to run roughshod over you. I don't think that the US going after the home islands is helpful, although I've seen it work before... (and I was the Japs that time too... I think that was the last Axis and Allies Pacific game I played against Ryan. If I remember, I barely took Japan back... Maybe that was a good idea, after all...)

Well, Happy Gaming!

One More Thing for Tonight...

I've been painting and basing some army guys lately. Here you can see a small squad consisting of a rifleman, a HMG (Heavy Machine Gun) and a Bazooka defending some of the centerpieces we bought at the auction for Trinity's One Hunderedth Anniversary. (Which did go rather well, by the way..., thanks be to God!)

And here you can see some of the havoc that squat made for a poor squad of riflemen... I'll probably have terrain and rules for a skirmish game like this for BertBatCon2008. Brian Ketelsen played a game like this at PALS a couple months ago. He wiped the floor with me, as usual. (But someone once told me that that was the sign of a good game, if you consistently loose a game that you created... :) ) Anyway, I'm excited. These guys paint up quite easily, and the bases are just cardboard covered with a layer of green paint and crushed parsely flakes... :) Look for further posts concerning a set of skirmish rules, probably in about three to four weeks due to pastoral, familial, and synodical commitments... :) Again, tell me what you think so far!

How 'Bout a Ship Game?

Well, How about a ship game? I don't know how you all feel about a naval game, but Jacob my cousin made me these lovely ship miniatures a couple years ago, and I decided to use them. I thought that would be a great tribute to his woodworking creative powers. Anyway, here's the simple idea.

First, two players roll for "initiative." This means that the winner gets to decide the direction the wind is blowing. He usually says, "It's blowing right where I want to go..." Anyway, then players turn over playing cards that correspond to their ships. This lets them know when their ships will move. Players move and then fire, one at a time, one card at a time, until one player conceeds victory to the other, or until time has expired. (We could probably play a decent game of four ships on four ships in something like 1-2 hours....)

Here's a sample of the ship data cards...

Basically, this game requires buckets of dice. For each square you see in the ship schematic (one side for port, one for starboard) you roll one six sided dice (1d6). At long range, you need a 6 to hit. At medium, 5's and 6's hit. At short, (which is six inches) you need a 4, 5, or 6. If you fire on your opponent when your opponent does not have you in a 45 degree firing arc, you are "raking" that ship, and receve a +1 to each of your dice. At medium and short ranges, you get to choose what you want to shoot at, i.e. whether you want to shoot at the sail or at the hull of your enemy ship. Shooting at the sail will slow your enemy down, and shooting at the hull will knock his guns out.

I don't have rules made up yet for critical hits, but that wouldn't be too hard to accomplish. Here's a couple other ideas I've been thinking about with this too...

You've gotta have some special effects for these ships, so to the right of the wind direction indicator, you will see a couple counters. One reads "Gunnery Officianado." This ship is captained by a man who drills his crew mercilessly in the art of firing their canon. All of his rolls are at +1.

Expert Sailors receve a +1 to their movement.

A ship with "Ironsides" status (purely metaphorical..., as in, "Her sides are made of iron!" which was said of a wooden ship, the USS Constitution) gets to ignore 1d6 of the hits given to her when an enemy fires at her.

I didn't put the turning circles or the fire arcs in a close up, but you'll probably get the idea through some pictures. Here they are...

I really think a game like this could be a hit at our BertBatCon2008, especially because you could have each participant commanding 2-3 ships in one massive battle, or you could have a tournament where you fight frigate duals for a trophy or something. Hey, I can't wait to see you guys! Let me know what you think so far of these rules...

Well, Wargamer Bert is Back... Thanks to a couple posts by Rev. Oakes. Thanks! (by the way, Citizen Mueller laughs a hearty laugh as the zombies close in...)

Sorry about the short / long hiatus, but here we go again...

You all should have received BertBatCon2008 in your mail recently. Hopefully nobody threw it away, thinking it was Synodical Convention News... Ha ha... :) I've gotta wade through all that stuff myself, or else I'll look pretty silly voting for people I have never read about. Anyway, this is NOT a blog about the SYNODICAL convention.

I decided that I would spend some time this evening talking about a couple of the wargames I hope to play at BertBatCon2008. Hopefully you will find this a little interesting, and just so you know, I've got pictures!

The Word War Two Tankwar Game...

Maybe you've seen this, and maybe you haven't, but Wal-Mart is carrying 1:144 scale tanks for $1.97 per. (I've heard on other wargaming blogs that they are actually selling for less in other places...) Anyway, I just thought this was screaming for a nice quick wargame. They're cheap, and I've got the terrain... so... this is my attempt. Let me know what you think...

Tankwar has a simple system of rolling buckets of six sided dice (d6's) for successes. Normally, successes are 5's and 6's, or just 6's.

Each tank type has a quick reference card like this. I decided to put some of the historical details I found on the web for each of the tanks, just to generate a little "flavor." Anyway, I have abstracted some of those details in three categories.

First, movement. Generally, tanks of the period had a top speed around 40 kph. Therefore, most tanks move about the same speed. I decided to keep this relatively simple, so I said, "12 inches, that's simple enough..." There are modifiers for going through rough terrain, however.

Second, Armor. I sorta guessed here, and with the firepower. But when you put armor and firepower into a matrix, you get the dice you roll in combat. Then you count 5's and 6's as successes, and figure out the results. Here's an example...

Let's say the Panzer above fired on the Sherman at a range of 40 inches. The Panzer's firepower is 2, and the Sherman's armor is 3. Therefore, the Panzer rolls three dice. However, since this is long range, the Panzer loses one of his dice. Therefore, the Panzer rolls 2 dice. He rolls a 5 and a 3. The shot missed/the Panzer didn't even see the target.

Next turn, another Sherman fires on the Panzer at a range of 20 inches. The Sherman's firepower is 3, oweing to it's 75mm gun, and the Panzer's armor is only 2. Therefore, the Sherman rolls 5d6. He scores one success, and therefore the Panzer is "damaged." If next turn, the Panzer is damaged again, it is taken off the board.

The rule mechanics are simple, but also provide for "overwatch." This means that if you move a tank toward an enemy that can see you, that enemy tank may fire at your tank during your movement phase, but with a couple penalties. First of all, because he is trying to hit a moving target, it is at -1 dice that the overwatching unit rolls. Secondly, firing while in overwatch means that you forego firing that vehicle in your next turn. If you're confused, don't worry, I plan on publishing a full blown rule book. Advanced rules could include "indirect fire" and "morale."

Here are some pretty tank pictures...

Four Panthers and a Kingtiger move off toward a town somewhere in France. Little do they know, but a group of Shermans, re-enforced by some self-propelled artillery, is waiting...

Here's the US side. The US tanks are "hull down" which means they are defending the back of the hill and receive a +2 armor bonus. It'll stink to be the Jerrys when they get through that little town...

Hopefully this'll give you a flavor for World War Two Tankwargame... :) If you've got any questions, just put them in a post. I'll answer anything you ask... :)