Table Top Matrix Games
Historical Miniatures

Players and Umpires Notes

by Paul Evans

These games are a different way to play wargames. It is more akin to free Kriegspiel than the formula -based games often played today. To aid Players of these games, further notes explanations and options are set out below.

Movement

Changes made to a Unit’s position during the movement phase are essentially proposed rather than actual. Think of it as something between orders and movement in a more conventional wargame. These proposals might work, or we might have them altered in some way by the enemy or ourselves during the Argument phase.

The Critical Distance is somewhat arbitrary and represents stages in the approach to engagement or disengagement rather than some time over distance calculation. The rules provide convenient points of interruption to movement where interaction between Units might occur.

Arguing to move opponent’s units may sound strange, but great commanders could use the momentum and propensity of the other side to his own advantage. Think of Napoleon on Pratzen Heights. The Umpire needs to look at how a Player's order fits with the state of mind of the historical commander, what the last set of orders were and “normal” behaviour of forces in that position.

Example: In the early part of the English civil War, Royalist Cavalry was prone to making precipitate charges against their opposite numbers. It is as valid for the Parliamentary Player to argue that this is what is going to happen early in the battle as it is for the Royalist.

Hidden units

Because units are on the table, we can still make sure everybody behaves as if they were invisible by moving and making Arguments as if they are hidden. If a Player consistently makes movements and Arguments as if the Units are visible, then his opponent will be able to make strong Arguments to have the enemy Units repositioned.

Example: It is possible for the American to have his aircraft carriers just north of Midway in plain view and still cause the Japanese to work to their original plan as if they were not there. Essentially, the American Player would argue for the Japanese forces to move in accordance with their plan. Until the American carriers are actually spotted by Japanese forces, then American Arguments for Japanese forces to continue to concentrate on attacking Midway according to orders would be strong. Whether they succeed would still depend on the dice, however.

The Japanese Player would have to make plausible efforts to send search planes out to look for the possible carriers (as they actually did) and then argue for finding and identifying the carriers correctly before their fleet could safely react accordingly.

Time

Turns do not represent specific periods of time. In many games, movement and fighting rates are based around the arbitrary division of time into bounds. We say that a bound is one minute so that the infantry line moves 60 paces or fires two volleys and so on. In the Matrix Game, time is treated in the opposite way. We look at what has happened and argue that so much time must have passed as a result. In the same game, some Rounds may effectively represent a couple of hours while others represent a couple of minutes. It depends on the pace of events.

Example: We might say that since a ship is now many nautical miles from where it started the game a significant amount of time must have lapsed say, from 2pm to late afternoon. The Umpire would rate this Argument along with any other. It is not certain because of speed and course variations, but a reasonable Argument. How accurately is time recorded in real battles!

Lapse of time is critical when it comes to the end of a day or changes in weather or light or perhaps exhaustion of forces. It will be for the Player in whose interest these changes might occur to argue for them.

Multiple Arguments

In order to speed up events in scenarios involving rapidly developing situations, Umpires may allow Players TWO Arguments each Turn instead of one. A Player should not be allowed to propose Arguments that contradict one another or that are somehow interdependent. Each Argument is rated and diced for separately.

Example: A Player could not propose as follows: Argument 1: Ship A explodes because of fire reaching its magazine. Argument 2: The rest of the fleet turns and retires because ship A has exploded. Argument 2 is proposed on the basis of Argument 1 succeeding making both arguments interdependent.

However, it would be legal to make these Arguments independent. Argument 1: All ships retire owing to the increasing number of enemy hits. Argument 2: Ship A explodes because an earlier fire has now reached its magazines. This is not contradictory because, logically, the fleet could retire while ship A explodes.

If the first Argument above referred only to ship A, then there would be a problem with it both retiring and exploding, it can only really do one of them.

This introduces a lot of potential complexity. It is recommended that this is limited to games with at most two Players per side.

Greater averaging

Where Umpire and Players agree, you can play with greater averaging and less opportunity for extreme arguments to succeed by using two dice for a throw and scoring to succeed as follows:

    Absurd 13
    Very weak 12
    Weak 10 to 12
    Average 8 to 12
    Strong 6 to 12
    Very Strong 4 to 12

Game management tools

The efficient organisation of a game such as this requires some bits and pieces in addition to the fighting Units and terrain. Have one die per Player, preferably of different colour so that Arguments can be diced for quickly. Having a counter with the required score on it for each Player may be useful in a multi-player game. Have a stick or wire made up to the critical distance for each Player. Mark the halfway point.

The Umpire should also have a ruler to measure scale distances in more detail. As mentioned above, something convenient and distinctive is needed for a baton.

Events roster

A roster is used to record changes in status of the forces and the environment from the conditions set out in the Briefing. This can be an A4 pad or a flip chart and is kept by the Umpire. He should note the results of succeeding Arguments, ruling off after each Round. Players may keep their own notes as to status changes, but the Umpire's notes are the authoritative version in the case of dispute.

Example: An Umpire's recording pad may note as follows.
“ROUND 1:
LIGHT RAIN starts
Side A 3rd Division, 2nd Brigade is DISORDERED
ROUND 4:
Side B Cavalry brigade RETIRING SHAKEN
Side A 15th Artillery Regiment has LOW AMMUNITION
ROUND 5:
LIGHT RAIN ceases
River N is SWOLLEN

The roster should be open to all Players at all times. They may use it to check the status of things before they make Arguments.

Markers and counters

In order to keep a track of what units have been doing, use counters to mark recent events. A simple mechanism can be used for Formations and maybe individual Units where this is deemed necessary.

Put a marker on the table every Round the Unit or Formation moves more than half the Critical Distance. Remove a marker when it does not move. Every Round the Formation is involved in a Conflict Argument; add a (different coloured) marker to the table next to the Formation. Each Round that the unit is not involved in a Conflict remove a marker.

This gives a rough impression of just how much moving and/or fighting the Formation has done. It may help with arguments about time. If all Players are content to rely on theirs and the Umpire’s memory, then that is fine.

To avoid confusion, Players should consider using small pieces of wood or card to indicate the names of Units and Formations on the tabletop. The extent to which these are necessary depends on the complexity of the game, they need only be used where it is helpful.

These are optional and if all Players and the Umpire are happy relying on memory, then that is fine.

More Table Top Matrix Games: Historical Miniatures

Back to Table of Contents -- Matrix Gamer #30
To Matrix Gamer List of Issues
To MagWeb Master Magazine List
© Copyright 2002 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