While at the PENINSULA CAMPAIGNS Convention in Three Rivers, Michigan last weekend, I had the chance to play in Chris, "Wild West" game utilizing the "Matrix" system. This was my first exposure to the system although I had read, and studied, the system prior to the convention as Chris had kindly written an article for MWAN on the subject.
I must admit that I did not understand the system after reading it, however, this is more due to my inability to understand any set of rules - unless they are very simple - without playing it first; certainly not due to Chris' written explanation of the system.
I believe that I have previously expressed my opinion that the "historical miniatures" player/rules writer could benefit from exposure to the ideas being expounded by the WARGAMES DEVELOPMENT group in England and I was glad to see Chris, EGG newsletter making it's debut here in the states as I think it holds the potential for increasing our gaming enjoyment with little "toy soldiers". It was with that frame of mind that I entered into Chris, game.
There were six players; all historical miniature types including a ten year old boy. Everyone appeared to catch on very quickly I was perhaps the slowest, which did not surprise me at all I With one turn, everyone was functioning within the game system and having a good time. I was perhaps most surprised by the fact that the ten year old was able to do as well as he did; I believe this speaks well for Chris, system. There were, however, two points which I took in and would like to share with you at this time.
Firstly, as stated before, I attempted to view Chris' system at the convention as a means by which I could increase my own games in the future. This, I believe, is a critical issue and is correlated with my second observation to follow.
After playing the game, and enjoying it greatly by the way, I thought that I could utilize the system to some degree intwo ways within miniatures games.The first way is to develop a scenario for an historical miniatures game prior to the game. This would be done within a "campaign" type of approach. Very quickly, I would provide the players with the overall situation.
Let's take the Sudan for example:There are players representing boththe Dervish and the Allied force.The Alliesare moving toward the enemy in a three-pronged manner; a desert column composed of several regiments of Camel Corps, mountedinfantry, and artillery; a Nile Riverforce moving up the Nile; and a third force moving either along the River or toward the River to meet up with the River Force.The Dervish have their forces somewhat scattered - perhaps three or four groupings.
Players are provided with maps and a detailed listing of the exact strength of each of the three Allied forces and the Dervish strength. The Dervish receive information regarding the strength of the Allied force but the Allies do not receive accurate information re the Dervish force. Everyone is asked to work within the "matrix" system to start off the campaign.Perhaps a partial outcome of this is thatan Allied force is stopped or slowed; i.e. the desertforce is dangerously low on water; the River Force is slowed by. cataracts; the Bashi-Bazouks mutiny; the Dervish have difficulty centering their forces due tothe independent nature of someDervish commanders, etc. Once this is established, and it may require several turns of the Matrixsystem to do so, a scenario is quickly developed on the spot by the umpire based upon the current situation as outlined by the matrix system.
There are several pluses tothis: the players themselves have had input into the scenario; and a scenario based upon a campaignis easily and quickly developed.
The second way in which theMatrix oyster could be used is during the game itself. Chris, during the convention game,mentioned the fact that he uses the variable length bound (VLB) during his games in which a game turn can be two minutes or two hours, depending upon the amount/type of action that takes place. If I, as the umpire, decide that action within the first few turns of the miniatures game is going to be slight, then I can use the VLB and increase movement to speed up the game.
There may well develop situations, at this time or at other times during the game, when the umpire can take a game situation and subject it to the matrix system. For example, the Camel Corps is moving down the table and Dervish scouts are following it's movement. I could open the game at this time to the players and ask for possibilities of action using the matrix system. Some possible ideas could be, for this example, the Bashi- Bazouks panic and desert or the British shoot five of the Bashi's to put down the panic; water is found and the force panics to obtain water; the list could go on and on as far as possibilities.
The idea behind this is that the list of options or possibilities is expanded far beyond that of what a usual miniatures games allows, even with the umpire providing "chance" cards. The only limiting factor is the player's imagination and/or the player, an umpire, a knowledge of the period involved. Another quick example is that very small actions could be quickly resolved, in a large game, so that the game could be moved on to the main event.
My second point concerns the potential for the matrix system, or any other "foreign" (non-miniatures approach to miniatures gaming) approach to influence the miniatures player. This is not going to be an easy process. Miniatures players (mainstreamers) like "toy soldiers" and a "regular" approach to our games. I would venture to say that of the players who took pact in Chris' game at the convention, none are going to go home and start thinking of ways to use the matrix system in their gaming except for me because, and this is my point, I entered the game with the thought in mind that perhaps I can "steal" something out of this system to use for my own gaming.
It is the "frame of mind" that we, as miniatures players, possess and I do not see anything inherently incorrect about this. I mean, we enjoy our games and although we look for "improvements" in our game(s) systems, those improvements have to fall within an "acceptable" area in order for us to embrace them. This is, however, a problem which I think can be partially overcome and I shall discuss it below.
At the close of the game, Chris and I had a most enjoyable discussion regarding what had transpired on the tabletop and we talked about utilizing the matrix system in one of my games next year at a convention. We shall be working on this and I am sure this information will be passed on via this publication and MWAN as well. I know that I am looking forward to working on this project with Chris and have already started doing more reading on the Sudan to develop possible items for the matrix system. It is via this method, namely of using the matrix, or other "foreign" systems, within "regular" miniatures games that I believe miniatures players (mainstreamers) will accept "foreign" systems beat of all.
If a miniatures player sees that something works to improve his miniatures games within a miniatures game that he takes part in, heis more likely to consider using it, or adapting it in some way, for his own game(s). I was very influenced in my thinking in this regard after reading a book on how science develops. Science does not, contrary to popular opinion, make serious advancements via the steady accumulation of knowledge. Instead, science makes large leaps and bounds when a "new" theory is developed to explain something and then everyone tires to fit their view of the world/event into that theory and it results in a differentview of the world event (they are looking at the same thing in a different manner).
Although our games do not compare to science, I believe their is a correlation involved herealthough what I am discussing is more of a half-way point than a complete turnabout for miniaturesplayers. That is to say, we are not asking the "mature" player to accept a wholly unfamiliar system by using my approach; we are asking them to view the miniatures game via the matrix system perhaps 25-30% of the time and they can still enjoy their "mainstream" approach the other 70- 75% of the time.
That is all I am asking of a "foreign" approach in my gaming. I do not wish to throw away my dice or toy soldiers or miniaturesrules framework. If that is my choice, I shall return to the "true" miniatures game and not consider at all, any other foreign ideas because I play wargames because I love toy soldiers and like to fondle dice (6-sided, being a true mainstreamer). However, if I can find something from "foreign" systems that is going to improve my miniatures games, I am going to consider it for my own games.
In reaching other "mainstreamers", the crux of the problem is in making the system as appealing, attractive, and non- foreign to miniatures gaming and miniatures gamers as possible.
I'd be interested in what others think of these ideas. This is my first attempt at writing down what I thought following Chris, games and I am sure that the ideas will evolve a great deal as I give it more thought and try it out. I would like to congratulate Chris on his matrix system and am looking forward very much to the development of ideas within his publication and doing some writing on the subject within MWAN.
It's Sunday morning following the Three Rivers Convention and I just cut the grass and showered. Feeling a little bit tired, but probably not as tired as you were due to your much longer drive home to Southern Indiana.
I really enjoyed meeting you and discussing the matrix system in relation to miniatures gaming. I also enjoyed the game as apparently did the other participants. Thanks for running itt
I hope to enclose a brief submission for your publication with this correspondence and hope that it meets with your approval. Please remember that I am a "mainstreamer", not one of you "radical types", and take that factor into consideration when you read it.
I have done some more thinking about the matrix system and miniatures gaming - the thrust of my article and also plan on doing an article for the next issue of MWAN concerning the same issue. I do not assume to know enough about the matrix system to be able to adequately transmit the idea with either the article enclosed or my proposed MWAN piece, but I do hope that the main idea(s) get across.
I have to congratulate you on coming up with this system. It is most interesting and appears well put together. If I can think of any additional points concerning the System; in a critical sense, I shall pass them on via the article(s).
The stapler may require some oil or something of the sort. I hope that it will be of assistance to you in putting out your newsletter. I also hope to remember to include Greg Novak and Howard Whitehouse's address with this letter. Please send me Tom Keller's address so I can put him on the mailing list for MWAN again. The last one I have is several years old, at least.
Again, very good to have met you. I wish you luck with expansion of the system; your newsletter; your new position; and everything in general. I am most looking forward to hearing from you soon.
Sincerely, Hal Thinglum
[It was great to meet you at Penninsula Campaigns. The games where great and the comradery even better. I believe that that spirit of friendship that I've so often found between gamers that keeps me in the hobby.
I am excited about collaborating on a Matrix Game for new years Little Wars, but I have a problem. I'm getting married on May 19th, so I won't be able to at a convention that weekend or before - least ways if I want this to be a long marriage! I'll start working on the project but we will have to see how the scheduling comes out.)
Back to Experimental Games Group # 3 Table of Contents
Back to Experimental Games Group List of Issues
Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List
© Copyright 1989 by Chris Engle
This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web. Other military history articles and gaming articles are available at http://www.magweb.com