I have been war gaming for about 12 years now, most of the time solo, through choice. Although I have belonged to a club and enjoyed it immensely, considerations of time and other commitments caused me to play solo. If I wanted a game I could set one up when I wanted and not have to wait till club night.

During recent years the amount of time spent on gaming has dwindled to almost nothing but I still painted and collected armies. Now I have a spare room where I can wargame and leave games set up for any length of time. And consequently, I have rekindled my interest in gaming and not just collecting figures. I normally play one-off battles of the encounter kind or attack and defend scenarios. But I have always had a hankering to do a campaign which I feel is the pinnacle of solo wargaming (being a meglo maniac).

Unfortunately despite all these thoughts of grandeur, I have never managed to play one. I have had several ideas for games but never managed to sort it out, my mind wanders, enthusiasm wanes and so on. Another problem is compiling a comprehensive and workable set of rules for solo campaigns. I've read many articles with many good ideas, but most cover one aspect and I have trouble pulling the various ideas and mechanisms together.

The main problem of solo campaigning as I see it is the fact that the enemy will never surprise you as it is you who write the random tables, cards and events. Another problem is that I have trouble getting the enemy to move in a way that is intelligent and random without me interfering too much. I am still working on these problems and as yet have no answers, but I do have some ideas and comments on settings that might provide an enjoyable and not too one-sided game. These ideas are only my own. Perhaps other readers might have better suggestions and ideas, but if they inspire someone to have a good game then so much the better.

A style of game that I do enjoy is the mini-campaign. I feel this is easier to play solo than a full-blown campaign whilst providing the solo player with a large battle that the player can accommodate more easily than a group of players can do. A factor that I consider to be imponant for solo wargames is that of character personality. These can have a random effect on games and provide an element of uncertainty and help to create a narrative for the battle. Many better writers than I have concentrated on this subject so I will say no more about it.

An idea that I have found works well for the solo player is the random selection of armies and units as found originally in the "Forlorn Hope" wargame rules by Peter Berry and Ben Wilkins, which have been recently covered in at least two more articles that I have seen. Under these rules, the army is made up of several units randomly determined by type with each unit randomly diced for to show numbers, training etc., depending on type. The "Forlorn Hope" rules seem to work well for solo as there are various reaction tests to be taken a various stages of a units progression through the battle and these give comprehensive results.

This coupled with random selection of armies make the rules a very playable set to use, and which I feel capture the flavour of the period very well. The random selection of armies has been written about before, but I feel that the "Forlorn Hope" style has much to commend itself to the soloist.

As the English Civil War is a favourite of mine I have tried to start a campaign in this period. I feel that this type of period and those others where the uniforms and the actions of the two opposing forces are better for the soloist than say Napoleonics. In the latter you have ten British Napoleonic battalions fielded against ten French Napoleonic battalions. Their different uniforms and respective tactics do not allow for much variation in the wargame scenarios e.g. you cannot easily pretend that the British represent another European army of the Napoleonic wars, or pretend that 5 of the British battalions are French and field 15 against 5.

In the English Civil War wargaming period the similarity of the uniforms and the battle tactics allows you to use battalions in any combination or for any army of the period (unless you're using Scots Covenanters of course).

The basis of a solo English Civil War campaign can be found in the "1644" rules by Rick Priestly. They include a full set of campaign rules which although not intended as solo can be made into a solo game. The campaign centres on two major towns; one Parliamentarian, the other Royalist, with various smaller towns dotted around. During the game, towns can declare for either side or remain neutral. The object of the campaign is to take the opposing sides major town.

Movement is limited to use of the road network which connects all towns together. The actions that can be carried out are limited to only a few options so that if one side is played solo, then the other side can be 'automated' reacting to your moves and even making aggressive moves of its own I have made out tables to play this solo and had it all ready to start--but then I moved (house) and lost all my notes and have consequently had to start again.

Another favourite of mine is the Indian Mutiny. I find this an enjoyable period on the whole as the uniforms are colourful, the tactics fairly simple, and the available figures excellent (mine are mainly Wargames Foundry with some Dixon Miniatures). A solo idea I had for this was a British relief column marching to a besieged town with random cards drawn each move, showing what events had happened. And cards that allowed the besieger a chance to assault the town and to play out the assault on the table to give an extra dimension to the game, with the solo player attempting to do his heroic Victorian officer bit against hordes of screaming mutineers. Included on the cards could be events such as running out of water (find a well possibly heavily guarded), attacked by local landowners or a local polce's armed forces.

As well as historical gaming, I am also a Science Fiction and Fantasy gamer. I have a great love for this period as the various different creatures thereof are a great change from using human forces. The Science Fiction side is very interesting as it is basically ultra moderns with flying tanks and lasers. I have started drawing up a campaign for a Sci-fi setting where a planet has been captured by alien forces with the pretence of luring human forces down into an ambush and there destroyed. The forces involved are a joy to make up with all the exotic troops that one could hope for.

Speaking of the modern period, I find World War II games enjoyable but hard to play solo except for attack / defence games. My main interest is the Eastern Front The massed tank battles are not easy to play solo without bias, because of the fast moving nature of the war. A campaign that I think might be playable is the Kasserine Pass in Tunisia where the U S. forces either fight or flee and reinforcements just plough straight into the fight, making it easier to control the U.S forces through dice rolls and charts. The soloist would play the Germans.

Moving to the other end of the spectrum, the War of the Roses offers the opportunities of using characters and personalities to the full The battles perhaps being easier to play than other periods, as the armies of the War of the Roses tended to form up and fight in three divisions. One problem I have found with this is that the political alliances and allegiances can get very complicated and complex (and it does my head in).

Well that's about it These are the ideas I have had and some are just that. In the future I hope to get round to sorting out one or two of them if I get the time to do so.

I must admit to being a bit of "Wargames Butterfly" mysell; once, just flittering from period to period but I am putting some real time in with the Samurai and thorougly enjoying it. I wonder just how many members can relate to your letter. Kenn

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