figuresales | 27 Jun 2018 3:15 p.m. PST |
Looking for some thoughts and discussion on Random Initiative sequences for wargames. Given a set of rules (mass battle, historical, pre-radio) that features card draw initiative: ie a player one activates a command on red cards player two on black cards type mechanic. What are you thoughts on drawing a single card immediately prior to the beginning of the turn, or, a series of 5 or 6 drawn at once and left visible to both players, with a new card added to the end of the displayed ones as the first revealed card is used? The former gives great uncertainty and a chaotic feel to the turn sequence while the latter allows some element of planning and co-ordination. Not especially about the cards, could be tokens or counters or anything else drawn at random, but about whether it is better to have the uncertainty of a single reveal or the advance notice of knowing the move sequence 4 or 5 initiative phases in advance. |
Zephyr1 | 27 Jun 2018 9:01 p.m. PST |
For red/black card activation, forget assigning colors to players. Instead, the current player draws a card from the deck, then draws another card. If the colors don't match, the player gets only one action (and turn of play shifts to next player.) If the colors -do- match, the player can then perform 2 actions, then draws another card (Doesn't match = turn of play ends / Matches = get another action & draw again. Personally, I'd have the players draw cards until a mismatch, then perform actions.) Yes, players can potentially have runs of good cards, but they don't have to worry about having to wait/hope for cards to come up if they've been assigned a color. And play can get more aggressive by being allowed to activate more than one unit per turn… ;-) |
UshCha | 28 Jun 2018 1:55 a.m. PST |
While it doez seem that Planning seems to be a rude word on TMP if you read accountd most go according to at least some sort of plan. Thus I would say your second para method is bets. That is ASSUMING that you have players that play regularly. They will get to understand the subelty of the system. If you are going for a convention game then your expectation of their ability will be marginal and the simplest possible is best. |
CAPTAIN BEEFHEART | 28 Jun 2018 4:48 a.m. PST |
Another system could be a card/chit pick. The name of the unit, sub unit or 'all' is on the chit and is deposited into the pile/cup/box before each turn. When drawn the unit(s) are activated. ie 2nd foot or 3rd Brigade or all units. All chits are in the same cup with players alternating draws or 2 cups with each containing the players choices of chits. The first technique is very random but the second guarantees alternating moves. Let us say you wanted to begin the turn by scouting with cavalry and moving infantry in columns, individual cavalry regiment chits would be dropped in and the infantry would be activated by larger groupings. The odds are the cavalry units would be drawn more frequently than the infantry (planning). As opponents move, your newly drawn units can react to their actions. While an draw of 'all' may seem advantageous, it leaves less room for reaction. When the chits are all drawn the movement is over. This couples decision making with random activation and can provide an entertaining game element. It also works for all game scales and eras. |
Andy ONeill | 28 Jun 2018 5:27 a.m. PST |
Have you checked considered building a hand? You can have most cards 1 action, some two. A few also have specials like seize initiative. Player start with so many cards and can play say 2 alternately. Hand building evens things out and adds interest with a sort of sub game. Static defenders start with less cards in their hand. The way i do it in sg2ww2 is you declare a unit each side at start of bound and roll off. After that it's alternate but the side with less units unactivated may pass. This and variable movement under fire is usually enough unpredictability. |
figuresales | 28 Jun 2018 2:26 p.m. PST |
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I have considered many (many many) options :( I want to maintain some degree of random (ie not going down the road of freely allocating Action Points/Chits/Impulse or whatever)but would prefer not total chaotic unpredictability. The straight random draw is the simplest and most familiar approach but certainly defeats any attempt to plan or co-ordinate attacks and support units. Deck building is an option for sure and I think there is some option around which level the initiative is used. A random draw at regiment level (smallest recognised unit in the game) will be total chaos but less so as you step up through brigade, division and corps levels. |
UshCha | 29 Jun 2018 12:40 p.m. PST |
Personaly I consider I go U go at the smallest level perfectly acceptable. The player with the least chits can pass until even numbers then its alternate. The @ I go u go@ stops stupidity and exccessive co-ordination but does allow planning. In our game activating a command element allows a significant chance of doing a bit more, adds to planning but stops unrealistic levels of co-ordination. However its not an ideal multi-player system without you have players that understand. However if you have occasional gamers, KISS (Keep It Simple and Stupid) is the requirement. They probably have no idea how to plan so not really an issue. |
martin goddard | 03 Jul 2018 4:48 a.m. PST |
Just a note for clarity. I think the KISS should be "keep is simple" the "stupid" (S) is addressing the designer, to remind him/her of the obviousness of the KIS. So KIS is great but the recipient is not stupid (?). If this is not helpful then please ignore and forgive the intrusion.. |
PJ ONeill | 04 Jul 2018 2:00 p.m. PST |
For an ACW I-go-U-go rule-set I am writing, the "Initiative" alternates from side to side, every turn, but having Initiative means the CHOICE of which side moves 1st. |
Andy ONeill | 05 Jul 2018 1:52 a.m. PST |
So if you have initiative, you can tell your opponent go first and he moves all his stuff first? |
PJ ONeill | 06 Jul 2018 7:48 a.m. PST |
Andy, with the strange last name- Yes, that is what I mean. I-go-U-go (each side) is inherently a non-historical sequence, but very simple and easy to understand. Having the initiative should allow you to have the choice of taking advantage of an existing situation OR reacting to the other sides move. |
Russ Lockwood | 11 Jul 2018 10:46 a.m. PST |
>What are you thoughts on drawing a single card immediately prior to the beginning of the turn, or, a series of 5 or 6 drawn at once and left visible to both players, with a new card added to the end of the displayed ones as the first revealed card is used? A prototype of Snappy Nappy used a pull of three playing cards per player (play one and draw one), with the card numbers functioning as "pips" (for lack of a better term), with each pip allowed to move 1 unit or group of units (each player had about a dozen to 15). It worked well enough, with players hoarding picture cards to help in the later stages of battle when units advanced/retreated out of nice straight lines, but ultimately, I discarded it because it was an extra layer of mechanic that didn't seem to do much except slow down the game by forcing players to draw and look at cards. Maybe three was too many, but one was definitely too few -- made the game too dependent on a random draw. Maybe two was the sweet spot, but that didn't seem to crimp/advance plans very much. Maybe if one-third of the deck was NOT picture cards. Of course, that's within the SN system…other systems may create more applicable player decision points with cards. |
figuresales | 13 Jul 2018 3:57 a.m. PST |
Thanks Russ. Whether card play is a mechanic to achieve an aim or an actual element of gameplay is something we (in my group) discuss quite often. I make frequent use of the Printer Studio sales and tend to make up specific card decks for everything (even though I have an intense dislike of using standard casino decks in wargames). |
Aldroud | 15 Jul 2018 6:59 a.m. PST |
A system I've been toying with is card based and involves some hand management, but with a fog of war twist. Remove all face cards and '2' cards from deck. Shuffle and deal three cards. The number on the card represents the number of actions a player can do in a turn. Now for the twist. You hold the action points for your opponent and he has yours. Cards are NOT revealed. Player with initiative begins giving orders until told to stop by opponent. Opponent then reveals card to player. Now opponent goes until told to stop. I think it better shows ebb and flow of battle and captures some fog of war since you really don't know when you'll run out of action points. Repeat untill each player has used all three cards. This ends the round. Shuffle cards and re-deal. |
McLaddie | 15 Jul 2018 12:04 p.m. PST |
I think it better shows ebb and flow of battle and captures some fog of war since you really don't know when you'll run out of action points. It captures something, but I am not sure that that system or the others mentioned have anything to do with the actual sources of 'ebb and flow' as well as the fog of war. 'Random initiative' represents what? People don't have 'random initiative' Initiative on the battlefield is something that military men strive for and win…initiative isn't 100% chance…not by a long shot. How did the actual participants experience those two dynamics, 'ebb and flow' and fog of war? How did they deal with them? Once you have a sense of that, then one can go about trying to mimic it with a game system. Random is good if it replicates the randomness of the battlefield. Randomness for its own sake can be entertaining in a game, but that doesn't mean it is capturing anything of the battlefield experience of 'randomness.' [I am assuming some of that is just chance and the friction of war.] |
Wolfhag | 15 Jul 2018 3:08 p.m. PST |
In any type of a fight, whether it is FTF with fists or a combined arms attack, it is timing that is most important. Training is about timing to execute commands and coordinate with others Communications is about the timing of the delivery information A battle is about the timing of your orders being executed in a timely manner before the enemy can execute his orders. Command & Control is about timing to take advantage of an enemy weakness when it appears. In a shootout, it is timing to shoot first. Most decisions have some type of Risk-Reward associated with it. Move quickly and risk and get ambushed, move slower and the enemy gets to the objective before you do. Attack now with a weakened fore while the enemy is reorganizing or wait for reinforcements but he'll be recovered and ready to defend. Normally, the timing takes care of initiative. You "seize" the initiative by better timing and getting inside your opponents OODA Decision Loop. Friction is an issue and random events can happen but your actions to achieve the initiative are not random. Friction, poor training, poor recon and intel, and C3 breakdowns generate delays which will throw off your timing. You win battles by knowing the enemy's timing and using a timing which the enemy does not expect. Miyamoto Musashi Sun Zhu Lesson 2: Timing Is Essential Randomness is well, random. Random things do happen. Making the right decision at the right time and executing it in a timely manner to get inside the enemies OODA Decision Loop is not random. It's the Art of War. Wolfhag |