After many people taking the time to give me online (and offline) feedback I have sketched out the next 12 months for the future of the project.
There is clearly more to do about the development of the hobby, so I will start work with Stuart Asquith to produce some of the very best of his work. At the time I will include some of his great friends work, that of Terry Wise. I will aim to produce two books of their work and next year, perhaps produce two more. Stuart Asquith was another of the key figures whose tireless writing helped the hobby grow.
I have some done further wargaming archeology from the Cold War and I will produce one, perhaps two, more professional wargames over the next 12 months. Some key wargames have been already lost and I am aware that the Project is a golden opportunity to preserve more of the key wargames from an era when the world faced nuclear Armageddon.
Professionally I use wargames for analysis and education. I would like to document some of my ideas and work in an area where almost no-one publishes their methods for fear of others taking up their ideas. There are going to be two books in the professional wargaming space.
I have decided that next year I must seize the opportunity to start the massive Paddy Griffith archive.
Having made a plan, I may need to be flexible. I am in touch with many of the early key wargamers and if they are inspired with a project, I will seize the day and help them get it ready for market.
I have three books about to go to print. Donald Featherstone's Battles with Model Soldiers (a nostalgia book rather than anything ground breaking), Your World War by Phil Dunn (his lifelong WWII campaign game) and an American Cold War wargame from 1989.
The Project aims to research and publish key works in the development of professional, hobby and educational use of wargaming. It currently includes work from Donald Featherstone, Fletcher Pratt, Peter Perla, Phil Barker,Fred Jane, Charles Grant, Stuart Asquith and Terry Wise...
Sunday, 26 April 2015
Monday, 6 April 2015
Future Directions for the History of Wargaming Project
The Impact of the
Project (2008 to March 2015)
The project to date has made available 4.5 million words
about wargaming, through 60 publications, 23 of the books are new wargaming
books, 37 are second editions.
Five books contain sets of
professional wargaming rules from the Cold War that have not been previously
published before. (British Army Tactical
Wargame (1956), British Army Desert Wargame (1978), Canadian Army Tactical Training
Wargame (1980), Dunn Kempf, the American Army Tactical Wargame (1977-1997) and Tacspiel:
American Army's Vietnam War Game (1966)).
While all the books in the
series contain supplementary material that has not been previously published
e.g. new chapters, rules and commentary, it is worth highlighting 3 works in
particular that have added to the history of wargaming.
·
Fletcher Pratt’s Naval Wargame: Wargaming
with Model Ships 1900-1945-
Contains extensive previously unpublished material by Fletcher Pratt and material
from an interview of the last surviving Fletcher Pratt player, Commander
Bothwell.
·
The Wargaming Pioneers Including Little Wars
by HG Wells, The War Game for Boy Scouts, The War Game by Captain Satchs Early
Wargames Vol. 1 placed the
innovations of HG Wells in a sequence of early wargames.
·
Over Open Sights: Early Naval Wargaming
Rules 1873-1898 Early Wargames Vol. 6 placed the innovation of the Fred Jane Naval Wargame in a sequence of
early Royal Navy Professional Wargames.
The annual plan for the Project is largely based on an annual 3 hour discussion with a professional and hobby wargaming veteran, during the car journey to the Conference of Wargamers in July. The journey involves a battlefield tour or a military museum and (a pub lunch), but lays out the priorities for the Project for the next 12 months. The project also receives regular editorial input from Major Mouat (Defence Academy) and the veteran wargamer Arthur Harman (friend of Paddy Griffith, author of staggering numbers of wargaming articles). There are many others such as Peter Perla, Tim Gow, Michael Curry, Charlie Wesencraft, Phil Dunn and others who kindly offer advice.
The question is what should the Project prioritise for the
next 60 book?
Hobby Wargames: There are a number of books/ articles that
need to include in the project. There is also substantial new material to bring
into the public domain, largely from the archives of key wargamers who have
helped turn the obscure hobby of wargaming into a major hobby. In the last 12
months the Project has published a new book by Charlie Wesencraft, Phil Dunn
and Sue Laflin-Barker.
Early Wargame History:
The project has already doubled the number of words in print about wargaming
pre- 1960, but there is still some major (and minor) publications to get into
print.
Wargaming History of
the Cold War: Reading the work of Peter Perla (and others) highlights the
importance of wargaming in the Cold War, but almost none of the wargames
mentioned have reached the public domain. In some ways it is a race to find them
before they are lost and no-one who played in these games is left to help.
Innovations in
current professional wargaming: There are some very interesting
developments in the military application of wargaming, but the problem is almost
none of this is captured, recorded and disseminated. The new book on Matrix
Wargames was an example of a hobby technique that leapt into the professional arena
and is being used for training and analysis.
Serious Games- Wargaming in education: Wargaming techniques can be
applied to transform education. The Project produced a new book on gaming Cyber
Warfare and will soon publish one on how games are used for emergency planning in
the health service, but there is scope for producing a whole series of books
that illustrate how wargames can be used as part of a wider curriculum.
The Paddy Griffith Archive: The Project holds key material, sufficient
for many books of unpublished serious games created by one of the key figures
in wargaming in UK, the late Paddy Griffith. This is going to take perhaps a
year’s work to sort the material into a structured format before producing the
first book.
Toy Soldiers: Last, but not least, is the history of Toy Soldiers.
These have been an integral part of the development of the hobby, but their
history needs to be documented.
So the question I am currently considering is, “What
proportion of editorial effort should be directed against each of the key
themes above?”
Sunday, 22 March 2015
Charlie Wesencraft Refights Arnhem at Wargames Holiday Centre
This year the Donald Featherstone Memorial Weekend at the Wargames Holiday Centre UK involved refighting the Battle of Arnhem.
Charlie Wesencraft surveying the Arnhem town where he defeated the British Airborne.
Charlie Wesencraft and Mark Freeth (owner of the centre) commenting on the German recce adancing over the bridge at Arnhem. Lionel Tarr, the first wargamer to devise modern wargaming rules for recreational use, was there (See Early Wargames Volume 4 for Lionel Tarr rules).
Charlie Wesencraft now has 3 wargaming books in print through the History of Wargaming Project:
Practical Wargaming
With Pike and Musket
Seven Steps to Freedom Wargaming the French and Indian War and the American War of Independence
Charlie Wesencraft surveying the Arnhem town where he defeated the British Airborne.
Charlie Wesencraft and Mark Freeth (owner of the centre) commenting on the German recce adancing over the bridge at Arnhem. Lionel Tarr, the first wargamer to devise modern wargaming rules for recreational use, was there (See Early Wargames Volume 4 for Lionel Tarr rules).
Charlie Wesencraft now has 3 wargaming books in print through the History of Wargaming Project:
Practical Wargaming
With Pike and Musket
Seven Steps to Freedom Wargaming the French and Indian War and the American War of Independence
Sunday, 22 February 2015
Sue Laflin-Barker's Introduction to Ancient Wargaming using DBA 3.0
DBA is amongst that rare breed of wargaming
rules; it has been enduring and popular for over twenty five years. Written by
a team effort of Phil Barker, Sue Laflin-Barker and Richard Bodley Scott, it
was a radical shift from the wargames that had gone before. The interesting
story of the DBA rules was included
in the book DBA 2.2 Simple Ancient and
Medieval Wargaming Rules (also published by the History of Wargaming Project). DBA
has developed from the first edition of the rules presented at the Conference of Wargamers and the Society of Ancients Conference in 1989 and
now, in 2014, the rules are version 3.0.
When
the WRG Ancient Rules were first published in 1969, they were soon very popular
amongst the tiny number of wargamers in the world. As the hobby of wargaming expanded,
there were new players who were keen to start, but who needed a guide to help
them get started in ancient wargaming. There were calls for a book about
ancient wargaming to accompany the WRG rules. In 1975, Phil Barker answered
this call and wrote The Airfix Guide to
Ancient Wargaming; this so called 'The Purple Primer' provided such a guide
and was sought after second hand long after it was out of print.
The
aim of this new book by Sue Laflin-Barker is to provide a new 'Purple Primer'
for those starting the hobby of ancient and medieval wargaming with the DBA rules. It covers a range of topics
from choosing and assembling an army, to a discussion of the rules and sample
army lists with explanations. This guide has been written for the current
version of the DBA rules, version 3.0
and it is hoped this book will be of equal utility as its predecessor, The original
‘Purple Primer'.
Wednesday, 24 December 2014
New book by Charlie Wesencraft and new book about early naval wargames
I am very pleased 2 more books have gone to print.
Charlie Wesencraft's Seven Steps to Freedom: Wargaming the French and Indian War and the American War of Independence is a new book. Started a few decades ago, I provided a bit of help to polish the book to get it ready to print. About the French Indian Wars and the AWI it has a foreword by Henry Hyde, This is the third book by one of the real gentlemen who helped launch modern wargaming with toy soldiers.
The second book is Over Open Sights: Early Naval Wargaming Rules 1873-1904 Early Wargames Volume 6 Dec 2014 by Fred Jane, Lieutenant Castle R.N., Captain Colomb R.N.Lieutenant H. Chamberlain R.N. and me
Charlie Wesencraft's Seven Steps to Freedom: Wargaming the French and Indian War and the American War of Independence is a new book. Started a few decades ago, I provided a bit of help to polish the book to get it ready to print. About the French Indian Wars and the AWI it has a foreword by Henry Hyde, This is the third book by one of the real gentlemen who helped launch modern wargaming with toy soldiers.
The second book is Over Open Sights: Early Naval Wargaming Rules 1873-1904 Early Wargames Volume 6 Dec 2014 by Fred Jane, Lieutenant Castle R.N., Captain Colomb R.N.Lieutenant H. Chamberlain R.N. and me
This
aims to play Fred Jane in his correct place as part of sequence of
professional Royal Naval late 19th century wargames. Jane's innovation
and imagination were huge, but he built on the work of others.
So what next? Donald Featherstone's Battles with Model Soldiers, a new book Sue Barker 'An Introduction to Ancient Wargaming,
a new book by Phil Dunn about his massive global wargame, a new book
about using serious games in emergency planning in the health service by
Russell King and a new book about a very important wargaming campaign-
details to follow.
I
continue to get random but important contributions. Tim Gow has found a
set of amendments for the WRG 2nd edition ancient rules to convert them
to medieval use. I will add them as a pdf to my site shortly. Someone
else sent me stuff that included some military wargames and I am seeking
permission to reproduce. I have another 40 books in my production schedule...
Monday, 29 September 2014
History of Wargaming Project Reaches China
I was a little surprised to find my books selling in China. I know so little about Chinese Wargaming.
Monday, 1 September 2014
Wargaming the ISIS Crisis using the Matrix Games Methodology- August 2014
The wargame was carried out at the Defence Academy, UK at
the end of August 2014. The participants were military, academics and
specialists in international matters from Canada, USA and the UK. The session
is reported under 'Chatham House Rules', where individuals may not be
attributed.
Although the term
‘game’ is in the title, the wargame was played to explore the situation and the
test the methodology of Matrix games. The game was in the serious game space
and was not being played for recreation.
The ‘flavour’ of matrix game being used was: Player’s
stating action and its outcome, with as many supporting reasons as possible,
these were others allowed to give arguments to increase or decrease the chance
of failure. Strict umpiring stopped the situation turning into a debate. To
succeed matrix games need to move quickly.
For
further explanation of Matrix Games and further examples see Matrix Games for Modern Wargaming
Developments in Professional and Education Wargames, Innovations in Wargaming
Volume 2
What to include on the
map and what not to is a critical pre-game decision.
The map was populated
with counters as narrative devices; visual aide memoires rather than accurate
statements of military units. The choice of map and counters influence the
direction of the game. E.g. Syria was not really shown and so the game failed
to reflect the strategic depth of ISIL in Syria. 
Players could argue for additional counters to be generated upon demand, such as mobilising more militias.
The decision was to represent the USA/ Iran/ IS/ Iraq Prime
Minister/ Iraq Shia’s and the Kurds in this particular game.
The game director also threw ideas into the situation, for
example representing non-player assigned factions. The aim of the game was for players
to attempt to create a narrative and if possible build onto the existing narrative.
The players read their hand-outs and then set their own
objectives, based on discussion as each faction was represented by two
people. The dynamic of introducing a 2nd
player into each role was a useful one, but it needs strong moderation to keep
the momentum of the game up.
Game Turn 1: The
amount of time each turn represents was abstract, but the players generally
understood that in this game, each turn was a few weeks.
The Americans opened the game by failing to launch
airstrikes against IS forces. Political indecision, lack of clear targets, no
forces on the ground to direct the strikes etc… (Perhaps reflecting the real
world current indecision of the USA). Iran was the opposite and they started to
deepen the relationship with Iraq by dispatching another ambassador, clearly they
had some long term plan.
IS decisively moved on to Karbala, despite logistics
problems caused by bypassing Ramadi, they rolled a double 6 on two dice and the
outcome was the Iraq army fled and a very surprised IS was in charge of the
town.
Although the Iraq Army had fled, IS was still faced with local Shia Militia. After the game, it turned out this was actually a feint by IS to distract attention from their real plan of spreading their influence into other countries starting with Jordan.
The Iraq Prime Minister continued to attempt to form a
government of national unity, they felt it was essential to get the government
working efficiently if they were to deal with the growing crises.
The Sunni minority carried out a somewhat random attack on a
US warship in port with the somewhat optimistic aim of keeping the USA out of
the Iraq civil war. Historically, such minor attacks have been ineffective
politically, but the Americans never forget those who have attacked the.
The Kurds argued that British and NATO Special Forces moved
into the Kurdish region to liaise with them. They were clearly thinking a few
moves ahead. One of the ways of success in a matrix game is to spend one or two
arguments laying the foundation for future moves. In this case, the Kurds want
to attack but were making preparations first.
Game Turn 2 One
of the post-game discussions was the idea that the game could be run for one
turn to allow those who are unfamiliar to have a go at the game, then the clock
is reset and the game starts again, with everyone familiar with the game
methodology.
The USA dispatched its special forces into Iraq, but the
state of the Iraq government meant they only got as far as Bagdad with no
authorisation to enter the rest of the country. Iran introduced rumours their troops were entering Iraq to provide support to the Iraq government.
IS took the opportunity to secure Karbala. In game terms
this was resolved using the SCRUD method of combat (basically comparing dice
rolls), but whether a simple dice roll would have been enough to achieved the
same outcome was discussed.
The Iraq PM, now a coalition government of sorts had been
agreed, mobilised Shia militias to retake Karbala. The Sunni minority also tried
a call to arms, but disorganisation and fear led to a poor turnout.
The Kurds received heavy weapons from Iran, with military advisors
to help them use their new weapons effectively. The Kurds were now ready to
drive ISIl back.
Photo showing Iranian
heavy weapons being supplied to the Kurds. Their advisors are represented by
another counter.
Game Turn 3
The USA finally deployed Special Forces to Western Iraq to
gain intelligence. This successful action could give +1 on future dice rolls
for other arguments.
Iran, clearly moved by the humanitarian crisis started sending
aid convoys. Obviously to ensure the safe passage of this aid, Iranian regular
army troops escorted the convoys into Iraq
ISIL successes saw a flood of foreign fighters arriving to
boost their ranks.
Iraq moved troops towards Najaf ready for an offensive.
Sunni militia moved into Karbala, while the Kurds launched
their attack on Mosul. IS fled from the Kurds, but strangely enough a retreat
route had been left open by the Kurds.
At the end of the game, there was a general pause for
discussion in the game. It was obvious that IS had lost momentum.
Game Turn 4
The USA realised that the mobilisation of Iraq army units
protecting the oil fields in the south left the flow of oil very exposed. So
they reacted by sending in international security forces. Of course, in
reality, such forces take a great deal of time to organsie. Iran was very keen
to deploy troops as part of the UN forces, but for some reason the Iraq PM was
not so keen.
Iraq
launched “Revenge of the Prophet” offensive in an attempt to cut supply routes
to the IS held town of Karbala, but a giant traffic jam delayed their efforts. (The
last time the Iraq army had a large scale move was into Kuwait).
The
Sunni minority suddenly leapt into action and seized Al Qa’Im,cutting the IS
supply route from Syria. The Kurds were continuing to drive west, pushing back
IS. Game Turn 5
The USA failed with its cyber-attack v IS.
Iran helpfully starting training and equipping Shia Militias.
IS sent
a column out of Tikrit to retake Al Qa’Im (their main supply base), but
American air strikes hit them hard on the approach. However, the remaining IS
forces still managed to retake Al Qa’Im.
Forces strung
out in the desert are very vulnerable to air strikes, if America has the
political will.
Iraq
forces finally launched a new operation “Son of Heavenly Sword” to retake
Karbala.
Karbala, the scene of heavy fighting- note the weapon counters on the Shia Militia’s to show they have been equipped with extra weapons.
The
Sunni’s moved their forces to Rutbah. While others were involved in military
action, the Kurds held a snap election to reinforce their position an
independent region within Iraq.
The end
of turn discussion centred around how the Iraq government was finally becoming
effective, even if the Shia Militias were starting to get out of control.
Turn 6 the Final
Turn there
often comes a point in a matrix game where the situation is heading towards a
new stable situation. IS had been forced back, Iraq had a government, the Kurds
had secured their region and Iran had increased its influence in Iraq at
multiple levels. However, to drive IS out would take massive preparations and
would be another matrix game.
·
The USA air dropped weapons to Sunni Militia, largely as something
to do.
·
Iran argued for the UN to condemn the USA for airstrikes in Iraq,
but the game facilitaror felt this was so unrealistic, Iran was allowed to make
another argument.
·
ISIL then finally carried out its master plan and Sunni militants
took to the streets in Jordan and suddenly IS had a new area to start operating
from.
·
The Iraq PM argued for a ceasefire offer and a meeting about
creating a council of national unity, but with ISIL represented indirectly by a
3rd party. It was finally balanced if the rest of the government
would support the PM, so the facilitator got all the players to vote as it they
were part of the government. The PM’s idea was only just carried through and
the conference was going to happen. Of course, the various militias wanted to
use the final opportunity to retake territory and seek revenge.
Post-game
discussion, the Hot Wash Up
Those
with relevant experience said the idea of government handling hopping from
crisis to crisis was very realistic. One of the challenges of such games is
moderating player inventiveness, which is essential to allow them to discover unconventional
strategies or ‘black swans’, versus keeping them to exploring the most likely
options for each role. “Should the umpire nudge the game back onto the expected
narrative?”
Other
questions included, “how can a power shape the narrative in the information
age?” “Is there a conflict between bringing the game to a satisfactory
narrative conclusion and breaking the game earlier when the makings of a key
discussion appear (e.g. in this instance IS motivation)?”
The
players all agreed that in the end the Iraq Civil War would only be solved by secret deals to
conclude a peace.
“It was
a good demonstration of the utility and of the capability of such a tool. A
learning experience, really!”
The
final words go to a specialist in international matters: “I'm not a huge fan of
Matrix games but I felt the level of buy in and expertise really pushed this
one along, with some great ideas for further development. I'd definitely play
this one again.”
Notes: this game was
run for the purposes of increasing understanding of a complex, difficult and
terrible situation. It was not run for recreational purposes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)