diff -r 3164c82ac16e -r bdef1afd1170 draft/elements11feb03.txt --- /dev/null Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000 +++ b/draft/elements11feb03.txt Wed Aug 30 21:32:44 2006 -0400 @@ -0,0 +1,309 @@ +RPGnet + + + + Reviews Forums +News & Press Columns & +Info RPG Wiki + RPG Shop + + + + Elements + + + Elements of Strategy + +*by Brian Gleichman* +Feb 11,2003 + + + + + Elements of Strategy + +I discussed in a previous article + 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 +- +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? + +Go to forum! +RPGnet + + + + Reviews Forums +News & Press Columns & +Info RPG Wiki + RPG Shop + + + Available Forums +* About the Industry * + Forum Folder + + Topics relating to the industry, ranging from game creation through + business. + +* Columns * + Forum Folder + + Individual discussions for the RPG columns + +* Outside RPGnet * + Forum Folder + + Forums for discussion of specific things outside RPGnet + +* RPGnet * + 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 * + Posts: *40163* Last Post: *01-04-2002 19:24* + + Soapboxes, Personal stories, Rants and Dialogs. Keep it friendly, + folks! + +* The RPGnet Awards * + Posts: *235* Last Post: *05-20-2004 18:07* + + Nomination forum for the RPGnet Awards + +* Trouble Tickets * + 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 + by Brian Gleichman, 11feb03 + * Rationales for Mechanics (or the Case for Designer's Notes) + by Brian Gleichman, + 14jan03 + * Layers of Design by + Brian Gleichman, 11dec02 + * Elements of Tactics + by Brian Gleichman, 01nov02 + * Elements of Complexity + by Brian Gleichman, + 20sep02 + + + Other columns at RPGnet + +[ Read FAQ | Subscribe to RSS + | Contact Us | +Advertise with Us ] + +Copyright © 1996-2006 RPGnet & individual authors, All Rights Reserved +RPGnet® is a registered trademark of Skotos Tech Inc., all rights reserved. +