WHAT WILL MY KING DO NOW??? When the forces of Silla entered Kum, I had a very definite strategy in mind. Here is what it was (Note: IT FAILED MISERABLE!!!) In war one can work to weaken an enemy or strengthen your own troops. In Kum I sought to combine the two. By attacking the Paekche army I hoped for a minor victory which would strengthen my men's morale. Meanwhile I hoped to damage the Paekche infrastructure (burning the cities) which would weaken Pauls ability to mobilize resources. Then I planned on pulling out. What this approach would do is hopefully make Paul spend time rebuilding his towns and army while I could focus on the next enemy. Since I burned the towns but did not win the battle - the strategy really didn't work. It provided Paul with an instant rallying cry while I failed to reduce his army. Hwa Rang may look good on the parade ground but it did not prove itself on the battle field! All I really succeeded in doing was bring the whole world down on my. But I love all that negative attention! Being bad is soooo much fun. Which leads to the next lesson on war. IMPETUOUS ACTION USUALLY LEADS TO FAILURE Even if I had won my battle, being aggressive brought me to everyone's attention. You will note that I have ONE argument but that my enemies now have FOUR arguments. In the long run I am doomed as long as this coalition holds. Diplomacy would be in order. A DIPLOMATIC APPEAL TO REASON – AND SELF INTEREST! Dear Sons of Heaven I know we have our differences. That is to be expected amongst neighbors. I believe we can work them out amongst ourselves. But instead we have involved foreigners in our business. We all agree that Korea should be unified. But under who? Well naturally one of us!!! Let me point out the math as to why that will now not happen. The combined Korean armies = 6 The combined Foreign armies = 5 Subtract the Silla armies = Total Koreans = 3 5 to 3: YOU ARE OUT NUMBERED!!! If they can divide you from me, then can they divide you from one another? Think twice before allowing foreigners into your wars. Also a short note on the Japanese. As you recall we drove them out. Why? Because they were more aggressive and warlike than even I, Mayol Wang, am!!! Andy why are they sending two armies to regain a province the Chinese have promised to hand over to them? Could they want just a little bit more? And why do the Chinese send THREE armies rather than rely on you (their allies) to gain the bulk of the honor? I think you are setting us all up by attacking me. I purpose that we make the strongest kingdom Kogyuro, the High King and join forces to drive these foreign devils out!!! NEGOTIATION IN MATRIX GAMES In Matrix Games players can negotiation at any time. What I'm attempting here is the diplomacy I mentioned in the last lesson. I'm trying to convince the other Korea players that they need to back off me and work together or the balance of power will shift to strongly against them. The problem is that I've shown myself to be aggressive and likely untrustworthy. Reputation is ALL IMPORTANT in games and in the real world. If they think I am too big a liability - then the logic of my argument will fail. If it succeeds then it will be like WWII, Britain, the USA and the USSR in an alliance. We all hate and distrust one another! But we worked together and won. Well...er...I guess it did lead directly to the cold war and a nuclear arms race...but at least we got the Nazis! While the talking is going on the Chinese and Japanese invade Silla. The Koreas are bottled up in their two walled cities. My king could sit and wait to be attacked or take the aggressive path. Naturally he decides to attack!!! AN ACTIVE DEFENSE Okay! It's time to repel the invaders! The Hwa Rang Do army falls upon the Chinese force defending Ulsan and drives them into the sea. The Chinese are now cut off from their supply lines and their fleet has no base and must withdraw to Japan. Why does it work? 1. We are defending our home ground now. 2. Ulsan is NOT a fortified position. We can attack it straight up. 3. The rest of the Chinese and Japanese forces are occupied in siege work. WHY ATTACK WHERE I ATTACK? Marcus has made the wise move of setting up a supply and naval base in Silla. By doing this he has made a strong preparation against starvation and morale arguments. He has guarded his fleet against bad weather arguments and created a nucleus political center to begin terrorizing (oops! I meant "influencing") the peasants from. Of course I want to destroy it! Things that give advantage (like a base etc.) become targets to be attacked. So our actions show the way to our defeat. My fortified cites have done this for other players, now the Chinese base does it for me. Why? Because an advantage destroyed hurts the enemy in many ways. 1. It weakens them. 2. It shows that you can defeat them - which makes you stronger. 3. I hurts their prestige by depriving them of their treasures. If I succeed in destroying the Chinese base then the rest of the army may have to pull back from Kyongju. If not all of it then maybe part. The next part I will attack! ADVICE TO THE ATTACKER A wall keep the enemy out of my city. Wise attackers build walls around their own troops to protect them from relief forces. Circumventalation, its called. It would stop my sneaky little rear attacks cold! SO YOU THINK YOU CAN GET RID OF ME? By announcing my attack publicly, other players can pile on top of me. If I had made my argument in secret the other players would have had to anticipate my move. This certainly could have been done but would require players not only to have a vision about what they want to do but also make guesses about what my vision is. Not easy. Will the Japanese be able to intercept my attacking force? That is the question. Their argument says they did it. But they have made no preparations to do so. For instance: They know I am in the province but there was no argument to send out scouts to locate me. The referee will have to consider this when ruling on the arguments. The Japanese are also trying to coordinate their actions with the Chinese. But they have set up no liason/communications system. These people's are culturally very different, speak different languages and to this point in history have no history of working together. So close coordination may prove difficult. Again this is for the referee to consider in ruling on arguments. So what if the Hwa Rang Do army is destroyed? In a standard war game that would be the end of the war for Silla. But in the real world, defeated kings are never quite defeated until they are dead. And even then they sometimes live on as martyrs! It is time for the attackers to consider what will happen after they defeat the army of Silla. Given their forces, they will win. It is just a matter of time. So, what then? Defeating an army is not the same as defeating a people. How many men will have to stay behind to guard a province that is always on the verge of rebellion? Or do you take on a policy of genocide. It has often been tried - but in the long run frequently creates stronger enemies. (I cite the example of Rome's genocide of Germanic tribes - eventually leading to stronger barbarians). So you see, war is politics by other means. The two are the same - so killing me may not be enough. By the way, you guys are doing great in carrying out a military campaign! You are moving forces and setting up battle plans. Keep up the good work. The noose tightens and both the Chinese and the Japanese try to get me out of my hole by trickery. The Japanese set an ambush. MY TROUBLE ARGUMENT TO AVOID FALLING INTO THE TRAP The garrison of Kimhae are no fools. They may send a small force out to probe the enemy but the main force stays inside the city. Safe and sound. The result: The Japanese kill only a few men with their feeble ploy. I succeeded! My men live to see another day! SIEGE WARFARE The Chinese outside of Kyongju were faced with a single defense barrier surrounding a weak garrison. They could have opted to attack in one turn. If they had then by Matrix Game rules, they would have had to have won two conflicts. The first to see if they crossed the barrier and the second to defeat the garrison. Instead, the Chinese have wisely argued to destroy the barrier. The referee decided that the Chinese argument to destroy the wall of Kyongju was not a conflict. That is the referee's prerogative. He could have also made it a conflict so that the Chinese would have had to have won a second argument to succeed in the plan. This would have given the Silla defenders a chance to say how they used their defenses. It likely would not have helped since the wall is undoubtedly weak and the enemy outside undoubtedly strong. Still, conflict arguments add drama to the game. The Chinese want the Koreans to surrender. I chose not to do this because I want the people of Korea to see the Chinese killing Korean nobles. Its good for future Korean recruiting. "REMEMBER KYONGJU!" But is the Kyongju dead? Not at all. The Koreans could argue to build another wall. They could try to sneak out. They could argue to come out fighting. Lord! They could even kill themselves (ala Masada). We will have to see what happened. THE REFEREE'S CHOICES: WHAT THEY DO IN GAMES In many games referees have large amounts of power. Matrix Game referee's do not. They have to go with the arguments that are turned in to them. But within this limit the referee has a lot of power over which arguments happen. Rule an argument weak or very weak and it will likely not happen. Put two arguments in competition and you assure that one of them will happen. Make an argument cause a conflict and you not only increase the drama of the game (by increasing uncertainty) but also give the side that stands to lose the most a chance to live. And then there is trouble. No one has succeeded in causing trouble yet. This allows the referee to decide who the trouble effects and what the consequence is if they fail to deal with it. So the referee, while no an active player, is very much a player in the game! It is important for the referee to have a vision about what kind of game is to be played. For instance, If the referee wants a replay of history, he can have Japanese argument to invade be weak - since this did not happen. Or Chinese naval arguments be weak since the Chinese of the 7th Century were not noted sailors. If the referee was a martial arts fan, he could rule the Hwa Rang Do attacks strong. And the list goes on. In short, a Matrix Game referee IS NOT NEUTRAL. By definition, he must have opinions on how strong arguments are (in effect which arguments fit his vision the best). But it is best to not be blatantly partisan. I try to err on the side of increased drama in a game. Dramatic tension/uncertainty keeps people's interest. They wonder what will happen next. They keep coming back to find out. If the referee is too openly biased then players will feel they can not win and will quit playing. LESSONS LEARNED FROM MY WIFE My wife, Terri, is the toughest Matrix Game player I've ever met. She is demanding. A game must hook her in the first two turns (fifteen minutes) or she loses interest and shows it vocally. She has not patience for poorly run games. She is hard. But I have to admit that she is fair. With military campaign, on the one hand we want something that is some what realistic. But in the end, realism can be deadly dull. Frequently games need more of what Paul Hayes is calling "Chinese Opera". Fantasy, yes. Unreal, yes. But fun? OH YES. CHINESE TRICKERY THAT SUCCEEDS! The Chinese after being driven off in a direct assault succeed in turning my craven nobles against me! A palace coup happens. I am faced with the trouble of surviving. Does Mayol Wang survive the coup attempt? Wang did not live long enough to ascend to the throne of Silla for nothing. He has an excellent danger sense. So when he sees the ax on its way he does the following. 1. Wang declares publicly that Pojang Wang, King of Kogyuro, is the heir to the throne and lands of Silla! (Take that you nasty usurper!) 2. Mayol Wang goes into hiding. This creates a defense barrier (in the Matrix Game rules called an anonymity barrier) that prevents the killers from finding him to kill. The regicides will have to first argue to "cross" the anonymity barrier (ie find Mayol) before they can kill him! Why does it happen? 1. No dog of a courtier has easy access to the king. 2. Mayol may be aggressive but he knows a dog when he sees them. 3. Don't all those old palaces have half a hundred secret passages and hide away holes? It works! My king lives but is in greatly reduced circumstances. TURNING YOUR MISFORTUNE INTO OPPORTUNITIES So the dogs think they can kill me in a palace coup. Well, I question why they would turn on me so quickly (that will come back to haunt them - count on it Macbeth!) I may still live by pulling out yet another kind of defense barrier - The anonymity barrier. When someone does not want to be found, he can create a barrier around himself to keep people out. Disguises, hide outs, hiding in the shadows etc all count as anonymity barriers. In spy games I frequently start the game with everyone having an anonymity barrier - literal anonymity! What an anonymity barrier does is prevent the people in an area from moving on top of you during free movement. They have to use an argument to get you. And when they do it causes a conflict because you are trying to cross a barrier. This kind of barrier generally comes to play in spy and intrigue games. Which is just where this game is headed. APPOINTING AN HEIR Congratulations Josep! If I win, you are the heir to all of Silla. All you have to do is take it from the Chinese and Japanese! Oh, and be sure to kill all those disloyal dogs of courtiers! ANOTHER LESSON OF WAR IN MATRIX GAMES Marcus asks who I will be playing if Mayol Wang dies. A good question. First off, remember that Matrix Games are not role play games. I am running a faction of Silla political thought rather than just a man. Kill the man and the political thought remains. Sometimes even stronger than before! So I will not be out of the game - my faction will have just been pushed underground. So no player can be pushed out of a Matrix Game. One can lose everything and command nothing more than a few peasants! But one can not be kicked out. The net effect of this is to remove a lot of the win lose mentality of games. The object is to play, not to crush one's enemy. Since no matter how hard you try, the little gnat remains! Many troops start moving around Korea. It's time to learn about maps. A GEOGRAPHY LESSON Wargames are all about taking ground and building or destroying things on that ground. They handle this by dividing the world up into areas/hexes and moving "troops" around on them to set up battles to destroy enemy troops. Matrix Games use a similar geography but with a small twist. Standard wargames are wretched at considering the psychological factors of war. At best they abstract them into a blanket term "morale". Morale is operationalized as a die roll to see if troops will stand and fight. If they stay then all is well. There is not attempt to look deeper into the psychi of the soldiers because this is viewed as unfathomable, too time consuming or just plain a waste of time! What Matrix Games allow is an easy, interesting and, speaking as a psychotherapist, fairly accurate method for understanding the mental/emotional factors at work in war. THE UNIFYING IDEA IS BARRIERS! If a game has to devise twenty different systems to handle the vital elements of the world the it will not work! The majority of players will not tolerate such complexity. If they have one simple system that they can aply again and again - they can cope. Which brings us back to geography. Right now you all know that Matrix Game worlds are divided into areas. Each game has a map that shows the areas and what towns are inside the areas. The arguments for Silla to build walls around towns introduced you to "defense barriers" that effectively subdivide areas into smaller separate areas. This last argument the King of Silla argued to go into hiding - thus creating an "anonymity barrier" around himself. Subdividing the area yet again. this time around a single man. What we have not got to yet is that the skin of each person is another "barrier" that protects and separates them from the outside world. Each person's barrier - I call it a "Mental Barrier" since it is the information the person knows rather than their body that is important - is still not the smallest subdivision of the world. Within each person's mind their may be more mental barriers that keep certain secrets safe (possibly even from the person's own awareness). So one rule concept covers everything from moving armies to exploring the inner workings of the human mind! People can not "cross" barriers in free movement. They must use an argument to "get in". Trying to get in can cause a conflict - handled just like a battle. Again, the same rule applying no matter what the scale of the action is. Within people, units or even whole countries is information about them. This information is called a "status" in Matrix Games. So far in the Korean game, Silla has lost every battle it has fought. This does not mean that they will lose the next one (I hope!) but it does paint a picture of weakness and vulnerability. This "status" will begin to influence the referee of the game to rule Silla's arguments weaker and weaker. So that eventually Silla will have to abandon aggressive arguments because they are all "very weak"! Status' are used in other war games. Role play games have used "character statistics" for years. But other rules require information to be a number for it to MEAN anything. By meaning, I mean "being able to effect the world". If it isn't a number it doesn't effect the world...so why bother doing it?!? Matrix Games use words to describe statuses so ANYTHING that is said effects the world. It may not do much with one argument but multiple arguments show trends that literally change the world. After a while trends become irreversible. This irreversibility is the true aim of all wars. So you see how the geography of barriers leads to the geography of the mind (where information is stored). And how arguments change the information of the world in such a way that people can or can't do certain actions. Learn the way barriers, conflict and trouble work on one level and you will be able to run any kind of Matrix Game you can think of! From a psychological thriller (focusing on mental barriers) to spy intrigues (focused on anonymity barriers) to war (that deals with defense and area barriers). THEY GOT ME ON THE RUN I'm not done yet in Korea but it is correct my hiding is a MAJOR political weakness. But I'm not dead!!! Expect trouble. The obvious move would be to have barbarians attack the great wall. Someone else may do that but not me. (Or am I lying!!!) I want to be more personally active. We will have to see. The beauty of the underdog position in MGs is not having to worry about defending anything. In effect one becomes the forces of "Amorphous Evil". Your task now is to hold your army together in the face of an onslaught of trouble and consolidate your gains. For instance protect that King of yours from assassination. Watch out for those turn coat Koreans. Defend your army with a wall. Stockpile some food so that cutting you sea supply route will not crush you. Keep the Japanese happy. And begin to win over the peasants. Sound complicated? Well that's the price of victory!!! Meanwhile the rogue King of Silla plots his return... WHEN DOWN – USE NATURE TO DO THE WORK FOR YOU The combined Chinese and Japanese armies find that the Naktong province is incapable of supporting five large foreign armies (as well as four small Korea armies). The Foreigner are all face SUPPLY TROUBLE. (Hint - a trouble argument for the Chinese and Japanese) or their men will begin to starve! Why should this happen? 1. Large armies eat a lot. One province can not supply them all. 2. The peasants hide everything so they will have hard going foraging. 3. The Korean armies have supply bases closer to home. Soon after this argument went through disease and famine struck my kingdom hard. The players are looking and learning my lessons – TO MY DETRIMENT! USING NATURE AS A WEAPON The Chinese and Japanese are many and strong. I need to attack them but rather than do it directly I will allow nature to do it for me. If Naktong province goes into famine then no more reinforcements can be sent in unless they invaders don't mind losing men to starvation! Supply trouble does not directly kill people. What it does is weaken then so that when the fight comes, Korean's will have the advantage! In Matrix Game terms this is a preparation argument. WAR LESSON: WAR IS A SERIES OF ACCIDENTS Whenever five to ten people get together, they inevitably have different visions about what they want to happen. As they make these visions happen (in Matrix Games by arguing) the picture of what is going on becomes muddled. It can all look like random occurrences because the different trains of events sit next to one another. This is an illusion, of course, but appearances do count for something. How to make sense of it all? Napoleon is alleged to have said that war is a series of accidents. By this I understand that one never knew what would happen next. But the general had to make do with what did happen. Good generals capitalized on chance occurrences (or seemingly chance occurrences). Poor generals miss such targets of opportunity. So it is not enough to have a vision about what one wants to happen, one's vision must always be open to revision to include "random" but useful events. The Chinese and Japanese are doing very well. I use this to convince my fellow Koreans to break the alliance. TURNING THE ENEMIES ACTIONS TO SERVE YOUR PURPOSE The strongest visions are the ones most open to including outside input. If I, ME, THE BIG ME ONLY!!! am the only one who gets to call the shots (or the plan fails), then the plan WILL fail. A vision that provides only an outline of a direction and a goal to work towards, can include many actions in it. If another player's argument contributes - great! By giving up power and the central position - my vision becomes stronger. So who do you do it? In standard games it is hard to do. A player is either adding to your "combat factor" or not. Matrix Games use verbal statuses that have much wider meaning. So an action that "help" you enemy may also inadvertently "help" you. It is all how you put the pieces together. So create a vision that is like a jigsaw puzzle - add a new piece and the picture becomes clearer. Putting a puzzle together requires one to look at a lot of information at a glance to spot patterns. Numerical games can only see relationships as mathematical formulas. Matrix Games allow players to look/read the information and see it as a whole (a gestalt). Not a static matrix (like a picture) but one that can change dramatically by the slightest alterations. So as the game is being played, watch what happens and look for patterns. You will see them if you look for them! Ah but we humans are frail. None of us see every pattern. We see what we are looking for and that very vision blinds us to other possibilities. So one can inadvertently aid an enemy by one's own actions! When I look at a game I think about the "flow of history". Sometimes it is slow and steady. Nothing big happens. Then a small event changes everything and the water crashes down, unstoppable, in a given direction. The victory seems inevitable in hindsight but before the change happens it is not. Once the alliance is broken and my kingdom is beset by disaster, the action of the game shifts to the north. Kogyuro becomes the next battle ground! Matrix Games and the Flow of History Back to Table of Contents -- Matrix Gamer #18 To Matrix Gamer List of Issues To MagWeb Master Magazine List © Copyright 2000 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