The A Collection of Unusual Pedantry blog which the author references is an amazing introduction to this work of thinking (the challenges of military operations, and the forces that shape warfare and civilization). [1] If you're already familiar with ACoUP, or find Cataphracts fascinating, you might also enjoy Edward N. Luttwak's The Grand Strategy of the Byzantine Empire of which one review says (and which I find a quality summary):
"The Grand Strategy of the Byzantine Empire is written with a profound knowledge of the field, a thorough mastery of the sources and secondary literature, and a lively and engaging style that both specialists and general readers will appreciate." —Peter B. Golden, Rutgers University
Tangential comment but only after reading your post I realised that acoup is an acronym for the blog's full name. All this time I thought it was "a coup" (like a coup d'état) and that "A Collection of Unusual Pedantry" was the blog's tagline.
He writes about games from time to time. You can sense the friendly frustration. I wish he’d take a sabbatical from Professor-ing and, like, Creative Assembly could hire him to consult on a total war game.
Sounds like a really interesting and delightfully frustrating game. Bit busy to join at the moment but it’s going on my list for the future.
The comments about the loyalty of the sub-commanders being very strong due to the extremely restrictive information environment reminded me of opposite within the history book Nemesis by Max Hastings.
He covers the end of the Second World War in the pacific. One veteran commented that it seemed that the different commanders and services within the US armed forces were more at conflict with each other than with the Japanese, all trying to get the resources and credit for the successes. (Especially MacArthur in the Philippines).
The radio and news reels of the days could both provide fast information about what is/was happening and also ensure fame and fortune in the domestic environment if your narrative could prevail
>One veteran commented that it seemed that the different commanders and services within the US armed forces were more at conflict with each other than with the Japanese
MacArthur and Patton were both massive egomaniacs, weren't they? I guess well-adjusted people don't end up as wartime generals.
But the Japanese army and navy hated each other so much that some Admirals and Generals were walking around with bullets in them from unsuccessful assassination attempts from the other service. Not a great way to run a war.
I loved this theme in Patton! I wonder if the gov't fostered this or simply allowed it to manifest because, for the most part, it gave extra motivation to the generals to succeed and succeed well.
> there are a lot of games about strategy [..] and innumerable games about tactics [..], but very few about operations. Almost no games, as far as I’m aware, are interested in, say, the logistics of feeding an army, or communication structures between commanders in the field.
Allow me to whine about Ubisoft buying out Settlers, which was initially about (peace time) logistics, and somehow thinking they bought a RTS.
Same with Knights & Merchants, which was a city builder but you had to feed your peasants and army every day (I forgot how time worked in that game though), which involved a peasant going to the inn to eat for X amount of time, then going to the storehouse to pick up a bread or sausage and bringing it to a soldier. Times every peasant, times every soldier. I don't know if I remember that accurately though.
Lots of games that are billed as “strategy” are really more operations (or even tactics!) than strategy, right? I mean it is often the case in a strategy game that you just start out at war with everybody else, taking away the most important strategic decision.
Or, there are games like Civilization or Total war where, really, c’mon, you know it is just a matter of when, not if, you go to war.
And while that one doesn't shy away from the material and financial cost of war, it greatly simplified traveling, allowing for shortcuts like jump drives allowing for instant teleportation of armies.
Not sure how to do it, but a history of the campaign from the different viewpoints would be an interesting read.
Perhaps a journalist piecing together the information, 6 months to a year after the events. Once the ripples have settled, more or less.
I might be biased as I have been reading 3 part history of the American Civil War, which also suffered from the fog of war and very slow information propagation.
Of course, history is always written by the victors after their glorious triumph has been consolidated and the losers comprehensively defeated.
This sounds a lot like the game played by the International Kriegsspiel Society (https://kriegsspiel.org/), which I think is worth noting in terms of other implementations of the same idea.
(Why do I not just say "This sounds a lot like Kriegsspiel?" Because there's so many different varieties of Kriegsspiel, not all of which work like this, so I'm pointing to a particular one that does.)
Way back in the day I downloaded this game called "The CRISIS Strategic Wargaming System". It was mostly a tactical thing, but it included a much more prominent role for supply lines and logistics than any other game I can recall. Unfortunately it was a "beta" version and apparently was never completed. I had looked for it a few times but seeing this spurred me to look again and I was able to find the old site on Internet Archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20060923152338/http://museum.sys... . I can still download the EXE so maybe I'll give it a try and see if it's similar to what I remember.
Was totally interested until I read its play-by-post and he keeps track of all the troop movements and results. Not exactly what I had pictured in my head before I clicked the link. I don’t understand how people have the time to play things by mail in realtime. I want an evening escape, not a lifetime achievement.
> I don’t understand how people have the time to play things by mail in realtime
It's not via mail, it's via discord; there are more details in the submission:
"I set up a channel on a reasonably-popular RPG discord server I’m on, then each commander gets their own thread, using discord’s thread feature. Each commander then gets a little doc with their character writeup and a sheet with their army numbers. They write messages to me, I reply and notify them as events occur, and I keep track of everything on a big spreadsheet and a running Photoshop map file. (...)"
---
Also note that in early wargames writing down orders was part of the game, e.g.:
"Players do not speak to each other. Instead, they communicate with their teammates and the umpire through written messages. This is so that the enemy team cannot hear their plans. This is also so that the umpire can delay or block messages if he feels the circumstances on the battlefield warrant it. In the early 19th century, officers in the field communicated over long distances through messengers. There was no radio in those days. Messengers needed time to reach the recipient, and could be delayed or intercepted by the enemy. The umpire can simulate this problem by holding on to a player's message for a round or two before giving it to the recipient, never giving it, or even give it to the enemy."
I actually got excited thinking it was play by mail but it was not. I was picturing weathered wax sealed letters arriving to your mailbox, written in an old school font, detailing outcomes of your decisions and how you wanted to proceed.
The article alludes to the fact of few games covering strategic, operational and tactical play. I recently got into (and heartily recommend) a grand strategy game called Terra Invicta, where you play as a global Illuminati-style faction trying to influence the result of an alien invasion of the solar system.
It involves strategic decision-making (control and priorities of Earth nations), operational decisions (spaceships and armies take weeks or months to reach their destinations), and a very deep tactical element of 3D space battles (consisting of spaceships having extremely asynchronous capabilities). Logistics and extended-term planning are absolutely key to success in this game
It's been an extremely fun, satisfying experience so far, albeit with a high learning curve.
Directly reminds me of Subterfuge which is a fog of war and realtime submarine war game of conquering outposts. It has absolutely 0% loyalty though which makes it hard to play.
There was this simple game where you were supposed to conquer all planets on the 2d map. You started with one planet that gradually built up ships over time. Then you could send some to any other planets but travel took time. Neutral planets had some fixed number of ships on them. If your fleet had more you captured the planet and it started building ships for you.
To make the game fair maps were symmetrical and your opponent started with the same planet on the opposite side.
There was a Google game ai competition in 2010 where you could submit your program and it was ran against programs submitted by other players. At every time step your program was deciding how many ships to send from where to where and the opponent was doing the same.
Was that operations game?
It was called Planet Wars.
Dude who won did it in Haskell and wrote a nice post mortem. The winner of the second place wrote one too. Links here:
I have more experience with the discrete version - e.g., Konquest[0].
I think it's not very operational, as getting your ships to battle is as simple as saying go from A to B. Your operational choices boil down to whether you want to pass through planet C, to trade time for flexibility.
While it has perfect information over your own ships, I think the core idea can be easily adapted to have separate players controlling separate planets, with delayed communication, both for people playing this game and for an AI competition.
Sounds very cool. I wish I had the patience for this kind of real-time game. I did a real time Kerbal mission to Mun once and that was about at my limit. It sounds like this wargame requires much more.
GolfPopper|8 months ago
marc_abonce|8 months ago
Tangential comment but only after reading your post I realised that acoup is an acronym for the blog's full name. All this time I thought it was "a coup" (like a coup d'état) and that "A Collection of Unusual Pedantry" was the blog's tagline.
mrec|8 months ago
bee_rider|8 months ago
stoneman24|8 months ago
The comments about the loyalty of the sub-commanders being very strong due to the extremely restrictive information environment reminded me of opposite within the history book Nemesis by Max Hastings.
He covers the end of the Second World War in the pacific. One veteran commented that it seemed that the different commanders and services within the US armed forces were more at conflict with each other than with the Japanese, all trying to get the resources and credit for the successes. (Especially MacArthur in the Philippines).
The radio and news reels of the days could both provide fast information about what is/was happening and also ensure fame and fortune in the domestic environment if your narrative could prevail
hermitcrab|8 months ago
MacArthur and Patton were both massive egomaniacs, weren't they? I guess well-adjusted people don't end up as wartime generals.
But the Japanese army and navy hated each other so much that some Admirals and Generals were walking around with bullets in them from unsuccessful assassination attempts from the other service. Not a great way to run a war.
lubujackson|8 months ago
nottorp|8 months ago
Allow me to whine about Ubisoft buying out Settlers, which was initially about (peace time) logistics, and somehow thinking they bought a RTS.
Cthulhu_|8 months ago
yomismoaqui|8 months ago
Operational wargames are a thing (at least on boardgames)
https://boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/181039/favorite-operation...
mr_toad|8 months ago
bee_rider|8 months ago
Or, there are games like Civilization or Total war where, really, c’mon, you know it is just a matter of when, not if, you go to war.
hermitcrab|8 months ago
Kinrany|8 months ago
largbae|8 months ago
Cthulhu_|8 months ago
stoneman24|8 months ago
Perhaps a journalist piecing together the information, 6 months to a year after the events. Once the ripples have settled, more or less.
I might be biased as I have been reading 3 part history of the American Civil War, which also suffered from the fog of war and very slow information propagation.
Of course, history is always written by the victors after their glorious triumph has been consolidated and the losers comprehensively defeated.
Sniffnoy|8 months ago
(Why do I not just say "This sounds a lot like Kriegsspiel?" Because there's so many different varieties of Kriegsspiel, not all of which work like this, so I'm pointing to a particular one that does.)
BrenBarn|8 months ago
reactordev|8 months ago
thih9|8 months ago
It's not via mail, it's via discord; there are more details in the submission:
"I set up a channel on a reasonably-popular RPG discord server I’m on, then each commander gets their own thread, using discord’s thread feature. Each commander then gets a little doc with their character writeup and a sheet with their army numbers. They write messages to me, I reply and notify them as events occur, and I keep track of everything on a big spreadsheet and a running Photoshop map file. (...)"
---
Also note that in early wargames writing down orders was part of the game, e.g.:
"Players do not speak to each other. Instead, they communicate with their teammates and the umpire through written messages. This is so that the enemy team cannot hear their plans. This is also so that the umpire can delay or block messages if he feels the circumstances on the battlefield warrant it. In the early 19th century, officers in the field communicated over long distances through messengers. There was no radio in those days. Messengers needed time to reach the recipient, and could be delayed or intercepted by the enemy. The umpire can simulate this problem by holding on to a player's message for a round or two before giving it to the recipient, never giving it, or even give it to the enemy."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kriegsspiel
lupusreal|8 months ago
nottorp|8 months ago
That would be giving orders for one turn. Why the rush?
> not a lifetime achievement.
That would be those free to play clickers.
Xelbair|8 months ago
deadbabe|8 months ago
IncreasePosts|8 months ago
ropable|8 months ago
It involves strategic decision-making (control and priorities of Earth nations), operational decisions (spaceships and armies take weeks or months to reach their destinations), and a very deep tactical element of 3D space battles (consisting of spaceships having extremely asynchronous capabilities). Logistics and extended-term planning are absolutely key to success in this game
It's been an extremely fun, satisfying experience so far, albeit with a high learning curve.
oezi|8 months ago
para_parolu|8 months ago
scotty79|8 months ago
To make the game fair maps were symmetrical and your opponent started with the same planet on the opposite side.
There was a Google game ai competition in 2010 where you could submit your program and it was ran against programs submitted by other players. At every time step your program was deciding how many ships to send from where to where and the opponent was doing the same.
Was that operations game?
It was called Planet Wars.
Dude who won did it in Haskell and wrote a nice post mortem. The winner of the second place wrote one too. Links here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/ef40x/google_a...
Apparently there are some modern incarnations: https://cog2025.inesc-id.pt/planet-wars-ai-challenge/
ashdnazg|8 months ago
I have more experience with the discrete version - e.g., Konquest[0].
I think it's not very operational, as getting your ships to battle is as simple as saying go from A to B. Your operational choices boil down to whether you want to pass through planet C, to trade time for flexibility.
While it has perfect information over your own ships, I think the core idea can be easily adapted to have separate players controlling separate planets, with delayed communication, both for people playing this game and for an AI competition.
[0] https://apps.kde.org/en-gb/konquest/
lupusreal|8 months ago
lazylizard|8 months ago
i dont imagine most people can wait 2 weeks for a command to execute...haha
lovegrenoble|8 months ago
shariandrew|8 months ago
[deleted]
curtisszmania|8 months ago
[deleted]