Consider the average wargame. My troops are set up on one side of the table, my opponent's troops on the other side. We see everything and know exactly where to attack. There is no need for scouting, no possibility for ambush. It is all CHARGE! and no "Wait a minute." Battle is uncertain. You never know exactly who is out there. But how to do this on a table top without going mad. (For my money, using maps to plot hidden movement or worse having two identical tables, is madness!) I always liked hidden movement markers. They can be placed on the board so people have an idea about what is there but not know for certain. If lots of dummy markers are used, players can make use ploys and gambits. Scouting becomes vital which of course means Cossacks are useful (for the first time!!!) The trouble then shifts to spotting rules. Much madness lies in spotting rules. On the one hand, one can see a human at a thousand yards, but it isn't easy! On the other hand, I once was not seen by people coming to pick me up at an airport until they were ten feet away from me (even though they knew which gate I was at, that I was there, and that I was sitting right out in the open)! So when do people see the enerny? That is when the battle begins. MATRIX GAME ARGUMENTS I've been designing rules lately frorn a different perspective. I start with the idea that every action in a game can be viewed as an MG argument. So spotting enemy soldiers Would be something like "I see the most easily seen enemy troops." If the argument happens, then the enemy are placed on the table. As scouting goes on, or the enerny chooses to open fire, the whole table of troops may be revealed. Why does this help? The truly maddening part of spotting rules is just who is seen when a successful roll is made. If everyone is seen oil the first roll then you might as well just set up a table top with the guys that far apart and play a normal game from there. It will effectively be that anyway. But how to stay sane if it doesn't work this way. Another thing, wouldn't making the same spotting argument each turn get real boring? YES!!! Which means that it can be reduced to a table just like old combat results tables. Players say, "I look for the enemy" and roll to see ifthey see anything. Since the argument says they see the most easily seen enemy first - the referee need only tell them the roll for that easily spotted enemy. If the roll succeeds then only that unit is placed on the board. The roll can be automatic at the start ofthe turn. And since it only allows players to see one group of enemy a turn it still leaves open the option for gambits and ploys. HIDDEN MOVEMENTMARKERS AND SPOTTING ROLLS The players have a certain number of hidden movement markers. 'The way I've been experimenting is that one can have as many figures in a hidden group as possible. When that marker is spotted, all the troops are placed on the board. If the marker holds only one stand then only that stand is placed on the board. So clouds of hidden markers holding skirmish stands can effectively screen the main force from sight until battle is very close. Also since empty hidden movement markers might have someone in them they can be moved around with purpose - to deceive one's foe. Spotting rolls are based on range, so close-in markers are more easily seen than distant ones. Empty ones obviously can get closer since there actually is nothing to see, but still look threatening (maybe its a single stand unit!). Consider the following table. Roll 1d6 per side to see what they see. Situation Short Medium Long Single Stand 6 6 6 Night 5-6 6 6 Cover 5-6 5-6 6 Prone 4-6 5-6 6 Open 3-6 4-6 5-6 Moving 2-6 3-6 4-6 This allows single stands to infiltrate very close before being seen. Which makes raiding and skirmish games possible. Night moves for groups are possible. During daylight, large units may not be seen immediately and units in cover may not be seen until it is too late! Actually having more distant units moving - and thus grabbing the attention of the spotters (they have a better chance of seeing them than closer hidden units) is a way of helping an ambush succeed. Thus one can actually use Sun Tzu's maxim "When you are strong appear to be weak. When weak, appear strong. When close appear far away. When far away appear close." EXAMPLE: GOING OUT ON AMBUSH IN THE MEKONG DELTA A squad of US Marines goes out on a night patrol. They set up all ambush by a bridge. They send out a few scouts to play hide and seek with the VC but largely they wait. Both sides are playing cat and mouse with their hidden movement markers. Men are seen (but since this is a Matrix Game where players get to make one unexpected event argument a turn) only to go out of sight again (a successful argument!) The VC eventually feel they have sounded out the enemy sufficiently to bring up their main force (a resupply column). As they move forward, both sides roll to spot. The column nears the ambush and then begins to pass it. Should they be very lucky they will slip by without being seen. But no! They are spotted. In a movie it would look like this... Charlie Sheen looks up and sees a figure emerge from the darkness twenty feet away from him. Then he sees others. The LT. opens fire and everyone else joins in! The battle is done and then silence. The game is not done. "The game is not done" is a critical point here. Standard games have to end when the shooting stops because they are only about shooting and morale checks. They are not about spotting the enemy and gathering intelligence. Since the battle blows the hidden marker for the ambushers, they must use their "unexpected event" argument to reacquire that status and then move to a new ambush point. Likely the rest of the night will be more cat and mouse but you never know what the referee has in mind! Back to MWAN #111 Table of Contents Back to MWAN List of Issues Back to MagWeb Magazine List © Copyright 2001 Hal Thinglum 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