The taxonomy of WW2 rules

In the field of information modeling and knowledge modeling, a taxonomy is a way to sort out a complex body of knowledge, by providing a structure of definitions and categories, to help you find your way quickly, and see which pieces of information belong together.

An easy example is the taxonomy of Carl Linnaeus, which was used to organize all the animals of the animal kingdom into like groups.  This gives us the concept of animal families, etc - mammals, canines, and so forth.

Carl Linnaeus' Taxonomy (example)

One of the things I would like to do, based on a series of games played in ODMS recently, is to come up with a taxonomy for WW2 micro armor rules.  So the first thing is to come up with some of the categories of concepts that apply to different rules.

Off hand, I can think of these:

• Scale (i.e. how many vehicles does a tabletop model represent)
• Turn Sequence
• Friction/Fog of War
• Command & Control/Morale
• Hit mechanism
• Kill mechanism
• Acquisition/Spotting rules 

I will have to come up with ways to divide and recognize the features in each of these areas, and then come up with a reasonable (but finite) categorization system for the WW2 rules we have played recently.

On Serious Wargaming

The US Department of Defense, under Deputy Secretary of Defense Robert Work, realized that professional wargaming had lagged over the few decades of us fighting in Southwest Asia, and in short, since the "end" of the cold war in 1991.

He proposed a re-invigoration of the art, and suggested a few ways in which this could be done.

One of those was something called the Wargaming Initiative Fund, which is a way for the Department of Defense to fund new and interesting wargaming activities within the multiple parts of the service.

Here is a recent article by the current overseer of the effort - COL Heath.  This is very interesting to me as I have been funded as a research scientist working on projects related to this for the past few years, and I hope that continues.

The article is here.

General d'Armee - first thoughts

Recently, we played a couple of games of General d'Armee at our regular ODMS game meetings.  These have been run by Sean (read about his gaming stuff over at Mad Mac's Attic), although I suspect that they have struck a chord with the group, and that we'll be playing more.

The rules are available from Too Fat Lardies, who sell the Reisswitz Press rules (that is the imprint of David Brown's current batch of rules).  These (GdA) are on a step up from General d'Brigade (GdB), and one of the chief differences is that now battalions and regiments are treated as somewhat generic in size, only differentiating by gross categories (large, regular, small, etc).  This is very similar to Black Powder, etc. and different from the earlier rules (GdB) - which had you using specific numbers of miniatures for different units, based on historical OB.  There are a ton of useful resources at David Brown's blog.

The turn sequence runs (roughly) like this -

1. Both sides dice for the number of Aides de Camp (ADC) available.
2. The ADCs are applied to units.
3. Each brigade is rolled for to see if it is Hesitant or not during that turn.
4. Both sides then roll 2d6 for initiative, subtracting 1 for each Hesitant brigade.
5. Winner chooses to go first or second.
6. First player orders and resolves Charges.
7. Second player orders and resolves Charges.
8. First player resolves moves.
9. Second player resolves moves.
10. First player resolves firing.
11. Second player resolves firing.
12. Melees (resulting from charges, or carried over) are resolved.

In all this is a pretty good sequence.

Firing is done (by regular formations and artillery) by the toss of two dice, and then modifiers are introduced.  The final result is consulted on a chart to see what the impact is (casualties, discipline test, etc).

Firing by skirmishers is done by granting the skirming formation a number of Casualty dice - roll them, and they cause a hit on 4,5,6.

Charges are handled first as a test, to see what the charge results are.  This may, or may not result in a melee or a volley being fired, as well as charging home, retiring, etc.

Melee's are resolved by each side having a number of casualty dice (as with skirmish fire), these are rolled and hits counted.  Then the winner of the melee is determined by  comparing these scored hits.

In all this is a good set of rules, with a lot of thought going into how the different formations, etc interact with each other.  Looking forward to playing some more of these, I may run a game or two myself in the near future.  Sean has published a Player's Guide over at his blog.

Here are some pictures from our most recent game, which was the battle of Maida 1806.