It's all rather BASIC

In one of those wonderfully examples of Kant's synchronicity (see my recent blog post about wargame design being an art and/or a science), last weekend I happened to find a copy of the very first wargaming 'publication' I ever produced. It was entitled COMPUTER ASSISTED WARGAMES ...

... and I wrote and sold it not long after the Sinclair Spectrum 48K came onto the market in April 1982.

The booklet was A4 in size, only ten pages long, and was split up into four sections:

1. Introduction ... in which I explained why I thought that computer assisted wargames (or CAWs) had a role to play in wargaming.
2. BASIC ... in which I listed all the main BASIC (Beginners All-purpose Symbolic Instruction Code) commands used to write programs for the Sinclair Spectrum. (BASIC came in a variety of 'dialects' for different computers [e.g. the Commodore 64 and the BBC computers] that were mostly the same but which had some slight differences.
3. Writing a Computer Assisted Wargame ... in which I identified three stages in the process of writing a CAW:
1. The Program Specification.
2. The Program Layout and Game Mechanisms.
3. Writing the Program.
4. An example of a CAW – the writing of IRONCLAD! ... in which I listed the entire code used to write a CAW for a naval wargame that covered the period from 1875 to 1890.

From what I can remember, I demonstrated the program at at least one wargame show (probably SALUTE) using my Sinclair Spectrum, a cassette tape player (on which the program was stored!), a small black & white portable TV (my computer monitor!), and a number of model ships. I seem to remember that it all went rather well, and I sold out of my booklet.

The game mechanisms are rather interesting, and comprise six different calculations, some of which are done pre-game (the first three) and some of which (the second three) took place during the game. They are:

1. Flotation Factor Calculation ... which is ((2 x (Thickness of the iron Belt Armour in inches + Thickness of the iron Deck Armour in inches)) + (Standard Displacement in Tons/500)).
2. Manoeuvrability Factor Calculation ... which is (Length in feet/Beam in feet).
3. Ram Effect Calculation ... which is ((Standard Displacement in Tons/1000) x (Speed in knots/15)).
4. Number of Hits by Gunfire ... which is (a random number x (number of guns firing x rate of fire) +1).
5. Number of Hits by Torpedo ... which is (a random number x (number of torpedoes fired +1)).
6. Effects of a Ramming ... which is (a random number x (Ramming Ships Ram Effect) +1.

The tape on which the program was stored is now long gone, although I do still have my Sinclair Spectrum 48K ... and I wonder if it would still work today? It certainly generated some interest in CAWs at the time, mainly because the use of computers in hobby wargaming was still rather new.

Have I painted (and based) myself into a corner?

I recently received an email from a wargamer who was using one of the versions of THE PORTABLE WARGAME asking me why I hadn’t stuck to single-figure or multi-figure basing throughout. In truth, I didn’t really have a definitive answer for them, and this set me wondering that if by opting for multi-figure bases, I might have painted (and based) myself into a metaphorical corner.

I have opted for multi-figure bases for my 15mm Belle Époque project and my 25/28mm Napoleonic collection, and single-figure bases for my 15mm Dammallia/Mankanika/Marizibar and 20mm World War II collections … and now I’m beginning to wonder if I’ve made the right decisions or not.

From an aesthetic point-of-view, there isn’t a great deal to choose between the two systems of basing … but single-based figures do have a bit more flexibility. After all, I can use sabot bases if I want to group single-based figures into units, but I cannot strip figures off the multi-figure bases.

I don’t think that there is a definitive answer to this conundrum, but I’d be interested to read comments from my regular blog readers.

Finally, I was able to test-run my HO9 model locomotives

Over the weekend I was able to set up an oval of model railway track using my recently acquired Kato N-gauge model railway track pack and was able to test-run my 'stable' of HO9 model locomotives. The results were a mixture of good and bad.

Whilst my Egger-Bahn/Jouef HO9 0-4-0 locomotive ran quite well pulling its three coaches ...

... as did my Liliput HO9 0-6-2 locomotives, ...

... my two ROCO 0-6-0 locomotives just would not move. I have no idea why, and it may be that their contacts need a good clean and their bearings need some lubrication before they will run at all.

The Kato track was a doddle to set up and take down afterwards, and I will probably look at disposing of my current collection of PECO N-gauge track and replacing it with more Kato track.

Is wargame design an art … or a science … or both?

Yesterday Tradgardmastare used a word in his most recent blog post that I’d not come across before … gesamkunstwerk. It is a German compound word that has been ‘borrowed’ into the English language and can be translated as meaning 'total artwork', 'total work of art', 'ideal work of art', 'universal artwork', 'synthesis of the arts', 'comprehensive artwork', or 'all-embracing art form'.

It sparked off an interesting online discussion and reminded me of a previous discussion I had taken part in some time ago at Connections UK. I’m a great believer that wargame design is not just art, but also – in its broadest sense – a science. An American professional wargamer took a somewhat different view and argued that a scientific approach was far and away more important, and that like a science experiment, a wargame should be repeatable and produce similar results each time it is played. Only then could its mechanisms and overall design be regarded as tested and proven. The arts approach was rather too woolly for him, and whilst it might be acceptable in a hobby wargame, it wasn’t in one aimed at use by professionals.

So, is wargaming (and particularly wargame design) an art, a science, or some sort of combination of the two?

After some considerable thought, I have come to the conclusion that it is the latter … and this started me wondering if my thinking was affected by my educational background and experience.

The American I had discussed wargame design with at Connections UK came from a scientific background whilst mine is a mixture. When I had done my O-levels, I chose to do A-levels in History, Economics, and Mathematics … a combination that did not fit easily into my school’s subject timetable. My secondary school was very traditional, even by the standards of the late 1960s, and felt that pupils should follow courses in the arts or the sciences. My combination crossed the boundaries between the two, and I and the other pupils who chose this non-traditional course combination were required to attend half the lessons in one or more of our A-levels. As a result, I only attended 50% of my A-level Mathematics classes and I ended up with the the lowest pass grade I could achieve. I did – however – study statistics and probability, and over the years this has been of great help to me as a designer of wargames.

On leaving school, I went into banking, and thence into teaching. As a teacher I began teaching a range of subjects at secondary school level, but after a couple of years I specialised in History, with some Geography thrown in for good measure. When the need arose, I took on teaching Social Economics and Business Studies, and eventually moved into the area of Information Technology.

On reflection, learning how to write computer programs in BASIC – an essential skill at the time for teaching Information Technology – taught me lessons that I was able to carry over into my wargame designs. Programs usually comprise an number of sub-routines, each of which needs to be designed and tested repeatedly ... which is very akin to what my American colleague was proposing as a scientific approach to wargame design. Once the sub-routines work, they can then be combined together within what is sometimes referred to as the program's architecture to produce a final, workable program.

Looked at from the wargame design perspective, if you regard each of the mechanisms I use as a sub-routine and the turn sequence of the rules as its architecture, then any wargame rules I write are a sort of analogue of a computer program. This – to me – is the science of wargame design.

So, where does the art come in?

It comes in in many different ways. It is there in the aesthetic of the painted toy soldiers and the modelled terrain or even the counters and map board used in a board wargame. It is also there in the study of history that is central to an enjoyment of wargaming ... and which also informs the way one designs the sub-routines or mechanisms incorporated into the rules. They must 'work' in the chosen historical framework one is working within, otherwise – in my opinion – they have no validity.

Getting the two side of wargame design – the art and the science – to work together has been referred to as a 'dark art', and in many ways, it is ... and herein lies the answer to my original question, 'Is wargame design and art, or a science, or both?'

To me it is a 'dark art' that combines elements of both art and science, and as long as it remains true to both of these ways of looking at the world, the resultant design will work ... and should work well.

So, to return to the German word that Tradgardmastare used, perhaps it should really have been gesamtkunstwerkundwissenschaft?

This madeup compound word means 'total work of art and science' ... and I think that it sums up my view of wargame design rather well.

Nugget 352

Our printer – Macaulay Scott Printing Company of Welling, Kent – did a magnificent job of printing, collating, folding, and stapling the latest issue of THE NUGGET in a matter of a few days, and whilst I was out yesterday, I was able to collect it from them. As a result, I will be able to post it out to members later today or early tomorrow. In the meantime, members can read this issue online.

IMPORTANT: Please note that this is the seventh issue of THE NUGGET to be published for the 2022-2023 subscription year. If you have not yet re-subscribed, a reminder was sent to you some time ago. If you wish to re-subscribe using the PayPal option on the relevant page of the website, you can use the existing buttons as the subscription cost has not changed.

Today I will be mostly ...

... trying to keep warm!

This morning's view across London from my toy/wargame room.

Overnight it began to snow, and as it approaches 9.00am, it still is. The part of London where I live seems to be very quiet as the local council has – as usual – not bothered to grit or salt any of the less important roads, including the one that we live on. As a result, the local bus service – which is the only way to go anywhere in weather like this if one hasn't got a car – seems to have stopped running as the buses cannot get up the steepest part of the hill.

On a day like this I would normally just stay indoors and wait for the thaw to start, but unfortunately, I have to go out. Yesterday I broke my dentures and had to take them to a dental technician to be repaired. I am supposed to collect them this morning, and until I do, eating is going to be a bit problematic. As I no longer have any lower front teeth (they were loosened very badly over the years thanks to getting smacked in the face in one too many rugby games and eventually had to be removed), I can chew alright ... I just cannot bite.

I have a choice. Stay inside and keep warm ... or go out so that when I get back, I can at least eat something properly.

Now where did I put my fur hat and warm boots?

Nugget 352

The editor of THE NUGGET sent me the latest issue yesterday and I will be sending it to the printer later this morning. I hope that it will be ready to be posted out to members by the end of the week so that they will be able to read it over the weekend.

IMPORTANT: Please note that this is the seventh issue of THE NUGGET to be published for the 2022-2023 subscription year. If you have not yet re-subscribed, a reminder was sent to you some time ago. If you wish to re-subscribe using the PayPal option on the relevant page of the website, you can use the existing buttons as the subscription cost has not changed.

The Second Portable Wargame Compendium: Another short progress report

Thanks to some excellent work done by Arthur Harman, who has been proofreading and correcting articles for the COMPENDIUM after I have done the initial layout, its contents page currently looks like this:

There are still quite a few articles that are going to be added, and it look as if the finished book is going to be well over one hundred and twenty pages long. (The first one was one hundred and twelve pages long including end and title pages.)

UNO card game

One of the articles that will be included in the next PORTABLE WARGAME COMPENDIUM uses cards from the UNO game for a card-driven unit activation mechanism, and as I’ve never played the game, I bought a copy.

The deck includes 112 cards, and looks like this:

As you can see, it has twenty-five cards in each of four colour suits (red, yellow, green, and blue). Each suit consisting of one zero, two each of one to nine, and two each of the action cards 'Skip', 'Draw Two', and 'Reverse'. The deck also includes four 'Wild Cards', four 'Wild Draw Four' cards, one 'Wild Shuffle Hand' card, and three 'Wild Customizable' cards.

The cards used in the mechanism included the following ones:

The cards used included those numbered from one to nine in each of the four colours, the Draw Two card (shown on the bottom row with '+2' on it), and the Wild Card (shown on the right-hand side of the bottom row).

I have been to … the French Hospital and Huguenot Museum, Rochester, Kent

Sue’s genealogical research suggest that back in the late eighteenth century one of her forbears married a silversmith who was a Huguenot. They got married in Soho, which is one of the areas of London that was settled by Huguenot refugees, and many of the refugees were either silk weavers or silversmiths. As the Huguenot Museum is situated in Rochester (which is about a forty-minute drive from where we live) we decided to visit it last Tuesday.

We parked in the centre of Rochester and made our way along the High Street to the museum. Along the way we passed the French Hospital, which is nowadays a group of almshouses that were built to provide homes for the descendants of the Huguenot refugees.

The original hospital was situated in London and was established in 1718 to give care and support to those Huguenots who had fallen ill or were destitute. It moved to Rochester in 1959, and now provides sheltered homes for fifty-five residents.

The museum is situated on the second floor of the tourist information centre, and entry cost us £4.50 each fora ticket that is valid for a year. On the day we visited, it was staffed by two ladies who were residents of the French Hospital. They were very welcoming and helped Sue to make contact with the volunteer researchers who work in the museum. Unfortunately, they were not there on the day we visited, but we hope to go back when they are.

The museum is quite small, but as the photographs show, it is well laid out and there is lots to see. I’d certainly recommend anyone who thinks they might be of Huguenot descent to pay it a visit if you are in the area.

---

Whilst we were in Rochester, I was able to visit Baggins Bookshop, where I bought a copy of Edward M Nevins’ FORCES OF THE BRITISH EMPIRE 1914. This was published by Vandamere Press in 1992 and is illustrated with photographs of painted 54mm figures (ISBN 1 918339 18 9). It also has an introduction penned by David Chandler.