'When I were a lad...' I well remember the head of our accounts department showing off his party trick to the juniors - his ability to copy other peoples' signatures, no matter how indecipherable (Yes, those were exciting times indeed!). His secret was that he turned the signature upside down, claiming that this broke down the psychological barrier between forging a name and copying a meaningless pattern. Now where is this all leading to? No, it's not a cunning plan to enlarge the coffers of the society but it suggests a different way of looking at rule design.

The moral of the above story is that it is easier to complete a seemingly complex task by clearing away the mental clutter and preconceptions of difficulty by concentrating on the basic task itself without the pressures and diversions of visualising the finished product and its implications (i.e. the sum of the whole being greater than the parts). Still no mention of wargaming? Very well, I will begin:

Recently I have been trying to design a simple set of skirmish rules for the colonial period. I soon became bogged down with historical and technical detail. I was so busy concentrating on the ranges and rates of fire of a whole panoply of firearms, producing reams of statistics and comparative data that I lost touch with the game itself. I soon became bored and my butterfly mind alighted on another wargames topic.

The important thing is to sort out the basic mechanics - primarily movement and combat. When, and only when, these are working, then its time to fine tune the rules with all the historical twiddly bits and assorted complications.

Now, I could not actually turn my manuscript upside down to block off all my preconceptions and visions of the end product. Instead, I decided to start my rule writing afresh, but this time to design it as a set of Sci-Fi skirmish rules - no historical contamination to get in the way of the game mechanics (I deliberately avoided specific genre like Star Trek or Babylon Five et al. as this would defeat the object of avoiding preconceptions).

The object being to create a set of simple skirmish rules for troops using distance and close combat weapons, suitable for solitaire play. Casualty removal to be by base or element (as favoured by DBA) with no order writing and a minimum of record keeping. Once the pure mechanism had been tested and 'perfected', I would then turn the rules the right way up and add the historical detail required for the colonial period. Whatever historical research that was then required would be specific to an area of the rule system (to add period flavour or 'realism'). The historical tail would not be wagging the dog!

I was also keen to experiment with elements from a variety of rule systems using my rules as a testbed comparing different methods of achieving the same result. I was particularly interested in finding simple ways of record keeping.

Record Keeping: Degradation or 'Sudden Death'? One problem facing the would-be rule designer is how to indicate that a unit has undergone some change in its circumstances since it started the game (e.g. casualties, confidence, exhaustion, supply, etc). The two most common solutions are record keeping and markers.

Record Keeping: To keep a written record or log for each unit allows the rule maker to impose more detailed (and some might say more realistic) cumulative effects upon each unit or individual. Each element must be easily identifiable and unique from its comrades. The more units, the more record keeping (and with solo games that means doing both sides) which can prove time consuming and boring (best relegated to a computer - but you still have to input the data).

Record keeping is best used with a small number of units that represent individuals. Record keeping allows units to slowly degrade in effectiveness. If your rules require written orders (a thing I always try to avoid) then it is easy to attach the unit's record onto the order sheet. Record keeping avoids having to clutter the table with markers.

Markers: If record keeping avoids clutter, then markers avoid record keeping. A marker placed near to a unit can indicate basic information e.g. that a unit is shaken or pinned or out of supply. It can display quantitative information: e.g. a numbered chit or dice face indicating how many rounds of ammunition remain. Markers are quick and easy to use and allow for some use of cumulative effects on troops in your rules. The problem is that unless the markers are disguised to blend in with the battlefield (e.g. as smoke / shellbursts / flags or casualty figures) then they detract from the visual appeal of the game.

Markers could form an integral part of the unit: In 'De Bellis Renationis' (The new renaissance variant of the DBA DBM rules), artillery limbers are used to denote whether a gun is limbered or not, according to the limbers position and facing. Ideally, one should only attach one marker to any one unit to avoid confusion and excessive clutter - if the markers outnumber the troop units, then why not play boardgames instead?

Display Panels: A compromise between the two and a simplified method of record keeping is to produce a display sheet or card for each unit and place any markers or information cards on the units' sheet. The problem here is that you need a large clear area to set up the cards. A variation on this theme is to use a set of playing cards per unit to indicate orders or its state of health. This system was used to excellent effect by Steve Ayers in his series: Legation Siege; LW 87 onwards.

There is another way around the problem....

Sudden Death!: This is the method employed by the DBA family of rules. A commander cannot be expected to know the precise welfare of each of his units. He will see them fall back if things are going badly, but if things get any worse, the first thing the commander will know about it is when he sees them break up and disintegrate as a military unit. There is little middle ground between the quick and the dead. Sudden death avoids the need for record keeping or markers and adds uncertaintv to a units' fate.

It does however mean that unit performance cannot be degraded over time and that the possible effects of cumulative hits must be factored into the combat results.

Figures: I already possessed some 20mm Zulu, Mahdist and colonial forces from the Esci range (based according to TTG 'Zulu' rules), but I lacked any Sci-Fi troops. Games Workshop produce a box of ten plastic space marines and a set of ten plastic 'Gene Stealers' (ideal alien creatures: all claws and jaws), both in 25mm. The rules were to be designed for the figures and thus had to work for both multi figure based colonials and individually mounted Sci-Fi troops. Hence the preference for casualty calculation and removal based on elements or bases. My initial idea of using one-inch square bases had to be modified when I discovered that the multiple limbs of my alien figures stuck out too far!

Starting out: I first outlined my Sci-Fi rules using human -vs- human (or at least humanoid) combat. Once that seemed to be in order, I incorporated some rules for a randomly controlled enemy. For this I decided to add alien life forms - Now the very mention of the word 'Alien' conjures up images of a creature featured in three movies of similar title (in the same way that I cannot listen to the William Tell Overture without thinking of the Lone Ranger! ). I accepted my preconceptions but still intended to convert them later to the Colonial period!

Morale rules were to be kept to a minimum and the effects of leadership (officers, NCO's and commanders) to be left out and added later (I still have not got around to that bit).

A series of test games highlighted the need to achieve the correct balance between gun range and movement rates (how long would a unit be in the field of fire before making contact to melee?). I was not looking at 'accuracy' so much as getting the right feel. I used a base number (the Standard Movement Rate or SMR) and altered this single value or its ratio until my fine tuning achieved the right balance and feel. Having ironed out the wrinkles, I soon had a simple but passable set of futuristic Sci-Fi skirmish rules. But would they easily convert to the wars of Queen Victoria?

Continued

Part II in Lone Warrior 115
Part III in Lone Warrior 116