Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Solo and cooperative play have been big themes for wargames the last few years. I myself have tried my hand at them as well. Much of this is spurred on by the Pandemic, however there are other societal and cultural factors that are leading to the rise of Solo-gaming. These reasons go well beyond the scope of this blog, or this writer's ability and knowledge.

My hypothesis is that a good solo-wargame needs to do two fundamental things to be successful:

1. Create "Surprise"
2. Force the player to make decisions

All wargames need to force players to make decisions, to me that is the integral way to generate "fun" in a wargame. However, the unique element is that a solo-wargame must also generate "surprise" for a player. The game can not recreate what a human would do, but it can do the two things I outlined above.

You can read the full details on the blog:
http://bloodandspectacles.blogspot.com/2023/04/wargame-design-solo-wargaming-bad-guys.html

However, for the purposes of this discussion, what are some wargames that have done it really well? Where do boardgames and "dudes on a board" games do it better? How would you do it in your own games?

 Easy E wrote:


Solo and cooperative play have been big themes for wargames the last few years. I myself have tried my hand at them as well. Much of this is spurred on by the Pandemic, however there are other societal and cultural factors that are leading to the rise of Solo-gaming. These reasons go well beyond the scope of this blog, or this writer's ability and knowledge.

My hypothesis is that a good solo-wargame needs to do two fundamental things to be successful:

1. Create "Surprise"
2. Force the player to make decisions

All wargames need to force players to make decisions, to me that is the integral way to generate "fun" in a wargame. However, the unique element is that a solo-wargame must also generate "surprise" for a player. The game can not recreate what a human would do, but it can do the two things I outlined above.

You can read the full details on the blog:
http://bloodandspectacles.blogspot.com/2023/04/wargame-design-solo-wargaming-bad-guys.html

However, for the purposes of this discussion, what are some wargames that have done it really well? Where do boardgames and "dudes on a board" games do it better? How would you do it in your own games?

Back in the 80s, "Ambush" was a highly popular solitaire squad-level game. Another good design was "R.A.F" which simulated the Battle of Britain. I owned both, but sold "Ambush." I replayed "R.A.F." earlier this year and it holds up quite well.