In four years of college and one year of graduate work in history I learned that any historical subject can be effectively researched using a single, basic approach. However, this point was not truly brought home to me until I was well into my career at SPI. About three years ago, I can vividly recall sitting in an R&D meeting at our old 23rd Street office, bantering with fellow workers over the latest innane feedback proposal being contemplated or the latest escapades of our regular Friday night playtesting crew. Amid these drolleries, R&D manager Terry Hardy was anxiously poring over a list of the latest games on our schedules, seeking assignments. I cast an ominous glance out of the corner of my eye at him, subconsciously noting that his facial expression seemed to resemble George Steinbrenner's when the N.Y. Yankee owner sits down in the off-season to decide which man will play which position (and who will not play at all). There were a number of titles on that list that I was decidedly not interested in. Slowly, my mind drifted back to English History 150 as a freshman in college... The professor, rubbing his hands together with a smirk on his face like a drill sergeant's, said "Each one of you must write a 20 page paper on your assigned project by April 1st. Mr. Balkoski, you will write yours on Gerard Winstanley and the Diggers' contribution to the socialist ideal in Great Britain." This sentence was uttered with such an air of finality and authority that it took the last reserve of my strength to utter a word. "But I thought I could write mine on the British Army's evacuation from Dunkirk." My voice seemed to have a Woody Allen pleading tone. "What? Dunkirk? But that's military history!" said the professor, changing his authoritative tone for one of incredulity. "No. Stick to Gerard Winstanley and I'm sure you'll enjoy it." I left the class with a feeling of foreboding. How could I write a paper about Gerard Winstanley if I never even heard of him? How could I even begin to research the topic! As I drifted back to reality, Terry was handing out his game assignments. "Frank, you can do First World War Module. Brad, you'll have Drive on Stalingrad, Joe, I'm going to give you Upscope... " I must have blanched. The only thing I knew about submarines was what I had learned playing the old Avalon Hill [U- Boat game. This was worse than Gerard Winstanley! At least thousands of people didn't have to read the paper I had written ahout him. To make matters worse, people were going to have to shell out money to buy this game! As I pondered this sad state of affairs over the next few weeks l began to realize that, as with Gerard Winstanley, my goal was to go from a novice to an expert on the subject of submarines in the space of one month. How is such a task performed? To be perfectly honest, ther'ecan he no definite plan of action. Recounting some of my experiences with Upscope, all I can hope to do is to suggest a rough outline of an "instant learning program" as it applies to researching historical simulations: (A) The first step is to read like hell. When I began my research on Upscope, I got out every book I could get my hands on concerning subs from every library I could get into. Don't panic, though -- you'll see that 90 percent of the books you begin reading have no relevance to simulation design whatsoever. However, the increasing familiarity you will soon gain with your subject's terminology will be well worth all the effort. If you're lucky, you may find a single book which will launch you into your game system single-handedly. (B) The next step is to be a reporter -- that is, talk to people who art more familiar with your topic than you are. With Upscope, this involved long conversations with David Isby, submarine sonar operators, WWII merchant seamen, Frank Davis, Jim Durnigan, and countless others. Again. you'll find that most of your talks will not be directly useful, but if you get one idea from 100 hours of talk, it was all worth it. (C) the third step (and the most important in my estimation) is the juxtapostion of the research gained in steps (A) and (B) with a game system. What elements of research will ultimately be incorporated into the game? Which will be ignored? Which will have to be "fudged?" Perform this step after A and B so that the game is born out of research. All in all, it is clear that good research is not a function of talent, but of perseverance. In general terms, simply looking for materialls, sifting the good from the bad, reading the good ones over and over again and incorporating what's imporant is what research is all about. Due to deadlines, thetask is often difficult, hectic, and frustrating--sometime wonder whether it is worth it. It is for me--at least I know everything there is to know about Gerald Winstanley. Back to Wargame Design Vol. 1 Nr. 3 Table of Contents Back to Wargame Design List of Issues Back to Master Magazine List © Copyright 1979 by Operational Studies Group. 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