marshalGreg | 23 Jun 2014 2:00 p.m. PST |
All, there was a very interesting TMP post regarding double blind play and using the physical method of function through a match box system- TMP link During this discussion a few mentioned use of a computer and specifically using Excel spreadsheet. To me this is the optimum of wargaming play – to not know where everything is – and would like to run games with some amount of this system. It would best to do so with a computer. The physical matchbox is just not an option to store and or travel, which may be typical for many others! So I would like to open the request for "how to" or existing method using the excel spreadsheet to those with strong programming backgrounds than mine. I Thank you in advance for any contribution or suggestions "on how to go about" using a spreed sheet. MG |
fred12df | 23 Jun 2014 3:11 p.m. PST |
From a 30s think about this. Have 3 worksheets / tabs in Excel, 1 for you, 1 for the enemy. And an overview. You input your locations Switch to the overview Your oppo inputs his. Switch to the overview The overview has a formula that matches the same cell on all sheets and shows up a match. If you want to be able to see more than 1 cell then it gets a bit more complex |
Boone Doggle | 23 Jun 2014 9:10 p.m. PST |
Rules on double blind computer dating? |
CATenWolde | 24 Jun 2014 2:22 a.m. PST |
I'm thinking that you could make a physical system, like the matchboxes, but much less space intensive. For instance, you could just get a big sheet of construction paper and divide it into small squares representing the table, big enough to hold a small coin or token. You would then use those small tokens (with labels) to represent the forces. All you would need is a way to cover the tokens (or a small stack of them). That could be done with much smaller boxes, small construction paper covers, or even small plastic cups. I really want to try something like this after the summer break, but I'm not convinced there is an easy way to so it in a spreadsheet, especially if you use different sighting ranges. |
Gnu2000 | 24 Jun 2014 5:01 a.m. PST |
The Berthier campaign management system might be of help. |
marshalGreg | 27 Jun 2014 7:10 a.m. PST |
Good question @ Terrement! I was wonder that my self. The last I reviewed during its earlier development its was intimidating. I no longer can find the link to see where it has progressed, unfortunately. I have since concurred C&G on my computer so more confident to address a new system/ app. program. Hopefully the other can jump in or someone can link to him/program. MG |
marshalGreg | 27 Jun 2014 7:12 a.m. PST |
It would be nice still to make something simple most anyone can do and with their Excel spread sheet! Still open to how to proceed suggestions
MG |
Andy ONeill | 27 Jun 2014 8:02 a.m. PST |
The human referee adds enormously to double blind games. They interpret situations so you don't need complicated rules to resolve stuff. They add to the story by giving atmostpheric descriptions. They add to the suspense by hiding the actual details of results that wouldn't "realistically" be obvious. In short. Forget software. You want a storyteller for a referee. |
CATenWolde | 27 Jun 2014 9:58 a.m. PST |
That's true – except in small groups where one person is always GM, and may want to occasionally actually play
|
Widowson | 27 Jun 2014 11:41 a.m. PST |
Also, you might find that your referee is inclined to one side or the other. I played Suchet in a Peninsular Campaign where the ref was an Anglophile. I fought a battle against the Spanish at a river, where the Spanish had three ways over the river: fords on the flanks and a bridge at a village in the middle. My engineers at the bridge had a 4% chance of blowing the bridge on any given turn, but they did it on the very first try. The ref removed the bridge and allowed the Spanish to cross as at a ford in combat formations! I would have been better off NOT blowing the bridge and making them cross in road column. Can you tell it still irks me to this day? |
CaptainKGL | 28 Jun 2014 10:41 a.m. PST |
Think about using a cyberboard. This idea I obtained from JJ via his Oporto game discussion on his blog. If tweeked it could work for you. link |
Demosthenes Of Athens | 24 Jul 2014 4:18 p.m. PST |
Berthier is based on the matchbox system – it just automates it and extends it somewhat. If you want to simulate a pure matchbox system in Berthier it is quite easy. You create a new campaign – * Make the number of rows and number of columns equal to your matchbox equivalent. * You use just one of the terrain types. For this terrain type you define movement of your unit types (e.g. infantry, cavalry, artillery) in terms of matchbox moves. For example infantry move 1 "matchbox" per campaign move. * When you create your order of battle, units should have a recon range of 0, which is the default anyway. This stops them scouting nearby "matchboxes". * You leave everything else in Berthier as the default values. From then on you use Berthier to move units from "matchbox" to "matchbox" i.e. from Berthier grid square to Berthier grid square. And because Berthier is software you have a double blind system without the need of an umpire. But if you want an umpire to add more flavour to the campaign they can run it in Berthier. BTW I'm hoping to release a Berthier update in the coming weeks. |