RPGnet <http://www.rpg.net> 	

<http://www.rpg.net/slib/ads/forward-ad.php?nextURL=http://www.skotos.net/games/marrach&imageURL=http://www.skotos.net/media/custom/parchment-cm-728x90.jpg>

	Reviews <http://www.rpg.net/reviews/> 	Forums <http://forum.rpg.net>

News & Press <http://www.rpg.net/news+reviews/press.phtml> 	Columns &

Info <http://www.rpg.net/columns/index.phtml> 	RPG Wiki

<http://wiki.rpg.net> 	RPG Shop <http://shop.rpg.net> 	

<http://www.rpg.net/members/>

      Elements

    Elements of Strategy

*by Brian Gleichman*

Feb 11,2003

  Elements of Strategy

I discussed in a previous article

<http://www.rpg.net/news+reviews/columns/elements01nov02.html> various

core concepts of game design that resulted in tactical play. Now I'd

like to cover the big sister of tactics, strategy.

Since there are a number of possible definitions for both tactics and

strategy it would be best to nail down the specifics of the discussion

before things become more confused than they should be. I'm not using

the common one found in military circles (tactical, operational,

strategic) since in game terms those concepts are basically contained in

the idea of scale. Instead I'll be using a definition that is much the

same as the one used in chess and other similar games.

Thus Tactical play is the immediate decisions made for material or

immediate positional advantage, or in terms of another previous article

<http://www.rpg.net/news+reviews/columns/elements11dec02.html>-

decisions and play that exists purely at the Game level. At its most

basic, tactics is playing the board for immediate effect.

Strategic play however takes place at the Near Game or even the

Meta-Game level (if not using the finer definitions from the Layers of

Design article, I'd simply say it takes place in the Meta-Game). Here

the focus isn't directly on immediate concrete concerns, but rather on

long-range goals and estimates of how one's opponent is going to move

and react. Strategy is not playing the board, but rather playing the

man. As an example, in chess one may decide as a matter of strategy to

launch your main attack on your opponent's kingside- either because

you're more skilled in that line of attack than you are with other

options, or because you know your opponent is weaker in that line of

defense.

Let's consider the primary elements of Strategy under this definition.

Although they are greatly interrelated, almost like dance partners, they

can be broken down as follows:

      Prediction:

    /"If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the

    result of a hundred battles."/ Sun Tzu, *The Art of War*.

This element covers predicting the decisions of your opponent and your

own performance. Some examples: Knowing that Joe tends to put his most

powerful units in the center or realizing that Sara loses effectiveness

in chess if her queen is exchanged. Knowing that your heavy fighters can

hold the line long enough to complete the flanking maneuver you have

planned. Etc.

      Deception:

    /"Hence, when able to attack, you must seem unable, when using your

    tools, you must seem inactive. When we are near, we must make the

    enemy believe we are far away, when far away, we must make him

    believe we are near."/ Sun Tzu, *The Art of War*.

This element represents the flipside of Prediction, the ability to

conceal your intentions and decisions from your opponent or even

convince him that you are following a different course from your actual

one. If he has positioned himself to protect from a strong center attack

at the moment your Cavalry hits him on the right flank- your chances for

victory is enhanced.

      Causality:

    /"In war everything is simple, but it's the simple things that are

    difficult."/ General Carl Von Clausewitz.

This is the causal chain required to implement strategic decisions. If

one decides to use your Calvary to flank your opponent on the left while

tying down his main body with your infantry- the causal chain is all the

steps (and time) needed to properly position your troops in order to

reach that objective.

A very important characteristic of the causal chain is its length- how

many actions are needed over how much time. If the chain is too short,

strategic decision itself will become trivial as the other elements

become irrelevant. On the other hand, as the chain lengthens the

difficulty and importance of the strategic decision increases.

Prediction must look further ahead into increasingly fuzzy ground while

deception must be prolonged. Failure on either point can result in

catastrophe.

As a result, the length of the causal chain is perhaps the most

important of the Elements of Strategy as it determines the impact of the

others. Many game designs seek to employ both Prediction and Deception,

but by resolving the end result immediately in a single roll or two they

reduce the Strategic nature of their design to something no more

interesting than rock-scissors-paper; an immediate guess followed by

immediate and final outcome. It is still a strategic game design, if a

very simple one suited only for those seeking the simplest of challenges.

Given these definitions and moving from theory to more practical (if

still abstract) concerns- what design concepts are important to consider

in creating or evaluating a game's strategic environment?

      Tactical Elements:

A strong tactical game will by nature normally produce a strong

strategic one.

Chess is again an excellent example of this case, as it needs nothing

but its tactical design to present strategic challenges worthy of

centuries of play. Between players of near equal tactical skill the

causal chain is long and complex enough that essentially limitless

Strategies become available and defeating your foe's perception of the

game is nearly as (if not more) important than mastering its reality (as

Deep Blue's defeat of World Champion Gary Kasparov showed).

So for strategic groundwork first look to the tactical elements:

Resource Management, Dissimilar Assets, Maneuver and Pace of Decision.

It will be these elements that define the causal chain and it will be

these elements that frame the strategic environment.

A game design however can increase its strategic depth beyond that

provide by its tactical environment in a number of ways. This can be

used to make a moderately tactical game into something considerably more

challenging- or turn an already demanding environment into any

commander's nightmare.

      Hidden Decisions:

By hiding decisions made by a player from his opponent(s), the need to

judge the intent of your foe and predict his actions is greatly

increased. Resources that are to be used against you are not in sight.

Where could they be? Where would your opponent likely place them?

Hidden Movement is perhaps the most common example of this method in

wargames and even in rpgs although the latter seldom emphasizes the

subject in the rules directly. D20 for example includes rules for sight

range under specific lightning conditions without much comment. My own

/Age of Heroes/ takes line of sight limits for granted- a matter for GM

judgment based upon the map. Adding this to any system is easily done to

great effect.

Beyond the simple fact of hidden movement are active measures taken to

hide (invisibility spells, smoke, etc.) or deceive (decoy troops

carrying the banners of important units, riders trailing branches to

raise dust, etc). All can be given to a player as a toolset to expand

his strategic options.

      Reconnaissance:

If some attempt to hide things, others will always develop methods of

investigation to reveal them.

Adding resources and methods to allow for such in a game adds yet

another layer to the strategic environment, especially if by their use

other resources are limited or spent. A classic example here are the

divination spells from D&D. Information about one's opponent can be had-

at the price of losing a spell slot that could have been used for combat

magic. Outside of magic, even the use of scouts in almost any system

means that resources (which could have been of use in a main force) are

diverted to a recon and/or harassment role.

Like the three elements of strategy above, Hidden Decisions and

Reconnaissance are each part of a dance- play benefiting from both

having their impact. When balanced to a fine degree, one may well

discover part of a foe's casual chain and thus act to interrupt it- but

interpreting scattered clues to determine the correct causal chain can

be left in large part to the Prediction skills of the player instead of

being given as simply stated fact.

I'd like to emphasize two factors touched on above due to their

potentially vast impact on strategy.

    /"So in war, the way is to avoid what is strong and to strike at

    what is weak. Water shapes its course according to the nature of the

    ground over which it flows; the soldier works out his victory in

    relation to the foe whom he is facing."/ Sun Tzu, *The Art of War*.

I've already covered Dissimilar Assets in the Elements of Tactics

article and noted it's impact on Strategy above. One should take effort

however to extend this concept. Not only can the assets within ones own

force be dissimilar- the type and nature of assets each force can draw

from may differ. Wargames such as /Warhammer/ use this to great effect

to increase the range of its tactical and strategic environment while

D&D gains the same effect from its vast range of creatures and races.

Terrain like ground-to-water shapes the very fundamental nature of a

conflict. Woods and hills to conceal one's movement. High ground to

provide a combat bonus or a good spotting location. Swamp to reduce and

channel movement. All impact the tactical and strategic environment as

the hammer impacts a nail. Leaving it out is like leaving chocolate out

your devil's food cake- sure you'll have a cake; just don't complain

when someone describes it as bland.

One of the easiest tests for good Strategic game design is to see if the

classic wisdoms of war apply to the end results. The quotes from Sun Tzu

and Clausewitz above for example. If characters in your game can make

use of such concepts, you've at least got a good start. If they can't

gain victory without using such concepts constantly, you've managed it.

Lastly a challenge to the readers. I've left out at least one important

concept in increasing a game's strategic complexity (due to the fact

that I wanted this article to be a reasonable length). Can you name it?

I'll give you a hint; the quote I would use for it is from Napoleon.

      What do you think? <http://trio.rpg.net/pf/list.php?f=101>

Go to forum! <http://www.rpg.net/pf/list.php?f=101>

RPGnet <http://www.rpg.net> 	

<http://www.rpg.net/slib/ads/forward-ad.php?nextURL=http://www.skotos.net/games/marrach&imageURL=http://www.skotos.net/media/custom/parchment-cm-728x90.jpg>

	Reviews <http://www.rpg.net/reviews/> 	Forums <http://forum.rpg.net>

News & Press <http://www.rpg.net/news+reviews/press.phtml> 	Columns &

Info <http://www.rpg.net/columns/index.phtml> 	RPG Wiki

<http://wiki.rpg.net> 	RPG Shop <http://shop.rpg.net> 	

<http://www.rpg.net/members/>

 Available Forums

* About the Industry <index.php?f=4>*

	  Forum Folder

     Topics relating to the industry, ranging from game creation through

    business.

* Columns <index.php?f=2>*

	  Forum Folder

     Individual discussions for the RPG columns

* Outside RPGnet <index.php?f=82>*

	  Forum Folder

     Forums for discussion of specific things outside RPGnet

* RPGnet <list.php?f=5>*

	  Posts: *118469*    Last Post: *02-01-2006 06:30*

     General discussion about the game industry and where it's going,

    and other topics RPGnet readers would enjoy discussing. 

* Tangency <list.php?f=61>*

	  Posts: *40163*    Last Post: *01-04-2002 19:24*

     Soapboxes, Personal stories, Rants and Dialogs. Keep it friendly,

    folks! 

* The RPGnet Awards <list.php?f=84>*

	  Posts: *235*    Last Post: *05-20-2004 18:07*

     Nomination forum for the RPGnet Awards

* Trouble Tickets <list.php?f=57>*

	  Posts: *741*    Last Post: *01-03-2002 19:00*

     Please let us know any problems with the site. Missing pages, bad

    code, tacky color schemes-- whatever you think is broken. We'll read

    this and fix things. Thanks!

------------------------------------------------------------------------

      Previous columns

    * Elements of Strategy </news+reviews/columns/elements11feb03.html>

      by Brian Gleichman, 11feb03

    * Rationales for Mechanics (or the Case for Designer's Notes)

      </news+reviews/columns/elements14jan03.html> by Brian Gleichman,

      14jan03

    * Layers of Design </news+reviews/columns/elements11dec02.html> by

      Brian Gleichman, 11dec02

    * Elements of Tactics </news+reviews/columns/elements01nov02.html>

      by Brian Gleichman, 01nov02

    * Elements of Complexity

      </news+reviews/columns/elements20sep02.html> by Brian Gleichman,

      20sep02

      Other columns </news+reviews/columns.html> at RPGnet

[ Read FAQ <http://forum.rpg.net/faq.php> | Subscribe to RSS

<http://www.rpg.net/rss.phtml> | Contact Us <mailto:www@rpg.net> |

Advertise with Us <http://www.rpg.net/ads/info.phtml> ]

Copyright © 1996-2006 RPGnet & individual authors, All Rights Reserved

RPGnet® is a registered trademark of Skotos Tech Inc., all rights reserved.