Demo game? Participation game? Hybrid game?

In issue 399 of Miniature Wargames with Battlegames (which, BTW, has been added to the growing index of all wargaming articles ever published ;-)), there's an article by Nick Hughes discussing the type of games we see at conventions.

Roughly speaking, at the European convention scene, there are two types of games:

• Demo games: a gaming group demonstrates a specific game setup, a period, a ruleset, ... The intention is not participation by convention visitors, but the game is rather a starting point for explaining visitors what the game, rules, etc. are all about.
• Participation games: the game is set up with the purpose of visitors participating, and might vary in length between let's say 15 minutes of fast fun and a few hours.

When games are run well, no matter the type, there are distinct advantages, and are a good addition to any convention. But there are also disadvantages. Demo games take up space, and interaction with the public is not always a success due to various reasons. Participation games might take too long and hence fail to attract participants. The times when visitors would spend an entire day at a convention - and hence could devote several hours playing a single game - are long gone.

So, the article proposes a hybrid: the visual spectacle of a demo game, but with the intention of letting visitors taking control of the game for a few turns.

This reminded me very much of the type of games we have run with our gaming group Schild & Vriend during various conventions - mostly CRISIS in Antwerp - over the past 10 years. We have designed our games around the idea of micro-participation - i.e. allow visitors to take part in the game for only a few minutes. The game would run all day, and the flow of the game is the result of a sequence of turns taken by many players over the course of an entire day.

Arnhem 2005

The first game of this type we ran was our Arnhem game in 2005. The design was based on Free Kriegsspiel. A gamesmaster would run the game all day long, and when a visitor passed by, he would be offered a decision to make: "These platoons have been hiding in these woods. Do you think they should shoot at the enemy, or move forwards?" Once the player hade made a choice, a few dice were rolled (e.g. determining movement distance, or outcome of the fight, ...). The player could stick around for a few more moves, or could move on.

Attack on Fort Stanley 2008

In 2008, we tried a different approach. Set in Darkest Africa, a fort was under siege. The besiegers were controlled by the umpire, but the besieged were under control of whatever visitor was present at the table. The system was run using cards. A5-size cards - displayed prominently - outlined the actions a player could take, including requested dice rolls and chances for success. The only thing a player had to do was pick a card, move the figures, throw a dice. When the action was complete, a new card was drawn. Again, this allowed for a few minutes of quick fun.

Red vs Blue 2013

Our largest experiment in this style was Red vs Blue, in 2013. We had printed over 1500 custom playing cards, which we dealt out in the entire convention hall: at stands, at the entrance, at the bar, ... At the gaming table, there was a real-time clock, indicating what side (red or blue) was "on". When you came to the table with one of the cards, you could participate immediately, following the actions on the card. The cards came in many different variations: movement actions, artillery bombardments, reinforcements, etc. At then end of the day, we logged over 250 participants.

So, yes, it is possible to design games around the idea of micro-participation. It takes some thinking and some preparation. But, it also is very exhausting, especially of you want to run the game all day long. Red vs Blue ran for 6 hours, in real time, non-stop.

Will we repeat such mass-participation wargames again? Perhaps, although I do not have plans for the immediate future. I feel that with Red vs Blue we reached the limit of what this genre could do - unless a lot more people get involved in the running and participation. After all, we usually did this with 2 or 3 people on the organizing team ;-)

More Crisis games added

In the process of making available most of our gaming materials from our past Crisis games, I have added pages for:

• Arnhem 2005
• Red vs Blue 2013
• Poltava 2010

Poltava picture:

Red vs Blue in MWBG 380

Our mass participation wargame, Red vs Blue, that we ran during CRISIS 2013 with over 250 participants, will appear in issue #380 of Miniature Wargames with Batlegames.

Red vs Blue: The cards

Update: a full account of this convention game has been published in Miniature Wargames with Battlegames, issue 380.

Listed below are all possible cards we will hand out during CRISIS. As explained in the previous post, try to collect one at the convention and participate in the Red vs Blue war. Alternatively, print out a few of these cards and bring them to the gaming table!

We omitted a few of the more rare cards, with very special abilities ... so go hunting for them! ;-)

Red vs Blue: Real-time, Mass-participation Wargame at CRISIS 2013

Update: a full account of this convention game has been published  in Miniature Wargames with Battlegames, issue 380.

After an uninterrupted 16 years of presenting participation games at CRISIS, we decided for our 17th game to try something new: a mass participation wargame, run in real-time. Our goal is to have as many players as possible to participate in the game, each with a limited micro-order. The accumulation of all these micro-orders will result (hopefully) in a full game, resolved by 17.00.

The design philosophy of this game will be kept for a future blogpost. This post will explain the playing principles, such that players can prepare themselves to participate in this experiment.

The game features a modern land war between Red and Blue.

The cards

We have printed roughly 1200 (twelve-hundred) playing cards, each containing a single gaming action for either Red or Blue. These cards will be dealt out en masse in the convention hall, with the explicit task to go to the game at any time during the day. So, spot a Schild&Vriend club member wandering the convention hall and get a card!

Cards come in different variations: movement and attack orders, reinforcements, airstrikes, etc. Some uncommon cards specify weather effects. Some cards allow you to play interrupts during the other side's turn. Some ultra-rare cards allow you to play nuclear strikes.

The clock

When you arrive at the gaming table, take a look at the real-time clock (prototype shown below). When the minute hand is in a red sector - colored sectors last for 10 minutes - cards for Red can be played. The more players show up for Red, the more cards can be played, and the more orders Red can execute. During this phase, orders are only planned and represented visually on the table - but are not yet executed. Execution follows when the minute hand enters a black sector. No more orders for Red can be played at this time. After 5 minutes of execution time, the cycle is repeated for Blue.

Planning

Below is an example  of what the planning phase might look like. The example is rather small and limited, since the gaming table will be several times larger than what is shown in the photographs. The scale of the game is more akin operation Barbarossa rather than a skirmish fight.

A situation at the start of Reds's cycle is shown below. Blue defends one of its cities. Imagine each hex being 10km across and each tank represents a division. The game is played at a strategic scale!

It is Red's planning turn, and the first player plans some movement orders. These are indicated by arrows. One arrow moves one division one hex. Keep in mind that no movement is yet executed.

More players for Red show up, playing additional movement orders. A movement order into an enemy-occupied hex counts as an attack.

Another player plans an airstrike just in front of Blue's city. Planned airstrikes are indicated by explosion markers.

... and even some more movement/attack orders are laid down. During executuon, units will start using up movement orders, and will keep moving as far as they can. That's why it is important to have as many players as possible supporting Red at the table as possible. Players supporting Blue will be able to play interrupt cards with weather effects such as rain, clouds, fog etc.
 

A rare card has shown up! A nuclear strike is planned! In the distance, some other weather effects such as a rain storm are also visible.

Execution

When the minute hand enters a black sector on the clock, time's up and now is the time for execution! Red's units start "eating up" movement orders, one order for one unit that moves one hex. The situation below shows the executed movements just before the attacks are rolled for (simple D6 mechanisms). The actual rules governing combat are literally only 10 lines long, and will be explained by the game controller at the table when necessary.

... and this might be the situation after combat resolution. Attacks that succeeded result in Red units occupying previously enemy-held hexes.

 

Of course, the game will see many more players participating over the entire breadth, width and depth of the playing field. The idea is that visually, one sees a big planning map that should give you the feeling of planning a war in a situation room. When the clock hits a black sector, one of the game controllers will resolve all actions, the visual planning markers are removed, and the other side takes a turn.

The game starts at 10.00, and will play continuously till approximately 17.00.

Will Red be able to conquer the Blue homelands? Come and find out at CRISIS 2013!!!

Note: Hex terrain from Kallistra, explosion and weather markers from Litko, cards printed by The Game Crafter.