This is a brief introduction to Solo wargaming. It is intended to allow those new to the solitaire aspect of the hobby to start playing solo games and to point out some possible approaches that may be of interest. Almost any type of wargame may be played solo. This includes wargames with miniatures, board games, naval games, air games and fantasy games. However, true role-playing games are difficult to play solo, as interaction with other people is essential. There are no correct or ideal mechanics for solo play. Each gamer will normally find methods of play that suit him or herself after experimentation. One of the beauties of solo play is that the gamer does not have to satisfy any other player. Experiments with the rules that would be impractical in a competitive environment are quite feasible. Some novice solo players find the lack of widely accepted rules or methods confusing. They are used to playing in clubs or in periods where there are widely accepted rules and players are not required to amend or invent rules. As a result, they feel lost when the familiar framework is absent. In solo play the gamer has to do far more than is necessary in multi-player games. This should be seen, not as a burden but as an opportunity. There are a number of mechanisms in use for solo gaming and some of them are described here. No complete rules are given, those must be supplied by the gamer, and instead suggestions and ideas are supplied to be built upon. Programmed Games Some solo games are played with one side completely pre-programmed. The gamer takes control of one side and does not need to decide the actions of the opposing side. Instead cards or books fix these. These provide the nearest thing to a face-to-face game that a solo player will encounter in that it is possible to win or lose. Prime examples of games such as these are those in CS. Grant's book of Programmed Wargames Scenarios. This provides scenarios with terrain forces and programmed instructions for one or both sides. Random factors in terrain and force selection allow each scenario to be played more than once and details are normally supplied for a range of periods. There are also a growing number of board games that include solitaire scenarios either as part of a two-player game or as the sole method of play. In general the games designed for use with more than one player have comparatively poor solo scenarios but the games designed purely for solo play are increasingly well designed. Most of these solo-only games that I have seen are for the modem or WW II periods or fantasy settings, but it is to be hoped that their sales will prompt wider developments. Naturally, computer games fall into the category of programmed games. These range from variations of simple video games through games based closely on conventional wargames rules to detailed simulations. The simulations owe more to the video games than to the games based on wargames rules as their presentations use graphics to advantage. The difference between these and video games is that they are (to a greater or lesser degree) based on real situations rather than an invented environment. The principal drawback of programmed games is that once they have been played a number of times, their tricks and tactics become known. The acuteness of this problem varies between games but they all eventually, become familiar. In addition, some of the boxed games and computer games can be quite expensive. It is possible to program one's own games. The drawback is that the possible tactics are known to the gamer. This drawback can be reduced by delaying the moment when tactics are selected or by deliberately simplifying the tactics and adding a random element. For example as a programmed WWII recce/advance game it is possible to select terrain randomly and then consider that each piece of cover may contain defenders. Their existence will only become known when troops approach within range and a dice is rolled and compared with planned tables. In this case there would be tables for different types of weapon including antitank weapons, machine guns and small arms. Terrain and Force Selection There are games where not so much of the game is fixed beforehand but most solo games have some element of programming. This may amount to the creation of a set of chance cards beforehand but, in whatever form, some planning is necessary. The first part of a conventional game lies in the selection of the terrain and forces involved. Both of these can be randomised to some degree. To select a random terrain, it is possible to just throw a number of terrain pieces on a table and dice for those to be removed. However, this will often produce meaningless or impossible configurations. A better method is to set up a large map and select a random point and orientation on the map. The map may be a real map, either a historical one or an ordnance survey map, or one created by the gamer. The important thing is that the map should contain a good range of possible battlefields. If it just contains flat plains with the odd bit of undergrowth then it will soon become boring. If it is densely packed with possible focal points for battle, such as bridges or farm houses, then the games using it will tend to become interesting. When selecting random terrain for a board game less choice may be possible due to the limitations of the boards available. In this case, try cutting out woods or other terrain shapes from thin card to place over the board. These can radically alter the shape of the terrain and give fresh life to a stale map. The selection of the forces involved can equally be randomised. First of all the size of each force should be selected. The terrain may dictate this. For example, if the terrain clearly indicates a holding action at a bridge then the defenders must be weaker than the attackers. Other cases may be less clear cut in which case just roll some dice within a pre-decided range, say 750 to 1500 points for an ancient army. Once the size is selected an interesting way of selecting forces is to list all the units available and their points cost and select units randomly until the desired points total is exceeded. There is no need to finish exactly on the correct total. If using army lists then try not including the compulsory units. After all, your opponent won’t complain. Such a randomly selected force may be anathema to the player with complex organisational tables or rigid hierarchies but it can be great fun to use. Having to fight without your favourite units can be very educational. Having selected the terrain and forces, it is necessary to decide deployment and tactics. These are normally linked and it is worthwhile deciding what sort of battle is desired first. The forces may influence this, for example a strong cavalry force against a weak infantry and artillery force might indicate an attempt to take an outlying strongpoint by surprise attack. If no strong indication is there then just decide between an attack/defence battle and an encounter battle. In general the more obscure encounters can be the most interesting. Deployment cannot be handed merely by random means. An attempt to do this tends to produce a force deployed absurdly, with gaping holes that even the worst general couldn’t miss. In some periods, with very conventional deployments, it may be possible to simply vary the number of units in each wing or division, but in general this is not sufficient. One approach is to place a number of units (say half) randomly and use the rest to fill in the gaps. This can be made to work but it is by no means perfect. The selection of tactics is even harder than the selection of initial positions. It is possible to consider the opposing side as a very badly led rabble and give them appropriately simple tactics. This may be acceptable at first but it soon becomes boring. After all, who wants to fight morons all the time? If opposing tactics are to be randomly selected, or simply stilted then it is only fair to choose a smaller force for oneself to redress the balance. It is normally better to select some overall tactics randomly (for example a set of cards with tactics from frontal assault through refused flanks to encircling movements could be produced and to select detailed tactics manually as the game proceeds. In this case it is important not to cheat but to let both sides use the best tactics possible at the time. An interesting modification of this invokes giving individual unit commanders and all generate a character of their own. This should include bravery, and boldness, and could include rivalries with other commanders. This character rating can then be used to decide their reactions to certain orders. By varying the tables used for each side a certain historical flavour can be given in some periods. One technique that was quite common in conventional wargames but appears to be dying out now is the use of chance cards. These are simply a pack of cards with various events, good bad or indifferent on them. At intervals a card may be taken (perhaps only if a six is rolled) and applied to one side or the other, or to randomly selected units. These chance cards provide an effective, and amusing way of simulating fate. Another option, which involves another player at a preparatory stage, is to select terrain, and forces, and then ask another player to fix one side's deployment and tactics in advance. This imposes a delay but is a good way of simulating an opponent when one is not available for actual play. This can be generalised to a two-way system where players swap deployments and tactics. The Society of Ancients has used this method for a postal Championship. Players were divided into trios and each player selected terrain and two forces and sent details of the terrain and one force to each of the other players. When the deployments and plans had been returned the first player played the game solo and reported back on the result to the other players. To make the games fair, they were repeated with the same terrain but with the forces reversed. It is of course quite impossible to select deployment and tactics without using random means. At various points in the game the gamer will have to take minor decisions for the opposing side and these must be done fairly. After all cheating at solitaire games is like cheating at patience, it fools nobody. If this is taken a step further then it is quite possible for the gamer to consider each side's position impartially and make detailed plans without being biased or using knowledge that each general would not have. Games played in this manner tend to lack the anomalies caused by random selection but they also contain fewer surprises. Rules Used and Scale of Battles The actual wargames rules to be used in solo play are irrelevant. Whatever rules are preferred can be used as the mechanisms for solo play normally fit on top of rules rather than being part of them. One of the benefits of solo play is that it allows gamers to vary the rules for experimental purposes without having to worry about an opponent's reaction. Even gamers who are content to use commercial rules should try questioning them and attempting improvements. Often these will fail but that is what experiment is all about. Similarly, solo games can be of any scale, from skirmish games with only a handful of men on each side to campaigns spanning whole continents or planets. If a campaign is being run, try keeping a campaign diary. This might be in the form of a newspaper or excerpts from the diaries of people involved in the battles. Some gamers find that the campaign dairy becomes of more interest than the gaming itself. In addition to the pleasure or writing such a dairy, it can prove to be an interesting reminder in years to come. Naval and Air Games The methods described so far have all been aimed principally at land warfare. However, naval and air games are just as suitable for solo play. The requirements boil down to the same questions of forces being used, deployment and tactics and very similar techniques can be used. Books of Interest Here are a few books solely concerned with solo wargaming but they may no longer in print, but should be obtainable through the public libraries. Stuart Asquith, Guide to Solo Wargaming published by Argus Books Limited in 1985. Donald Featherstone, Solo Wargaming C. B Grant, Programmed Wargames Scenarios published by Wargames Research Group, 1983 Back to Table of Contents -- Lone Warrior # 145 Back to Lone Warrior List of Issues Back to MagWeb Magazine List © Copyright 2004 by Solo Wargamers Association. This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web. Other articles from military history and related magazines are available at http://www.magweb.com