In the previous series of InsideGMT articles for Solitaire TacOps: Ortona, I shared some of the inspiration for the design, discussed the role scale, effectiveness and maneuver play in the game, the structure of play from turn to turn, and what differentiates it as a hex and counter game. This article introduces the next series which aims to provide insights on what it feels like to play the game at both scales, as facilitated by the campaign system. The design goal was quite simple – players should feel like they are making impactful command decisions, over the course of a full campaign.

Players begin the campaign in command of the Canadian First Infantry Division whose mission is. Historically it took the division 23 days to push the allied line, on the Adriatic coast of Italy, from south of the Moro River to the sea town of Ortona. The open campaign challenges players to achieve this objective in 25 days or less.

The campaign explores how essential operational management is to success. Two frameworks which have had a heavy influence on how the game orients players for the campaign, are roguelike videogames and the OODA loop. Roguelike games have an operational framework that contextualizes the tactical play. OODA loops are situated tactically to sustain operational effectiveness. They do not perfectly define the TacOps experience but what they share parallels what it feels like to play the system.

Procedurally Generated Levels, Resource Management, Permadeath, Oh My!

I am far from an expert on roguelikes. I never even played Rogue and couldn’t tell you the difference between roguelikes and rogue-lites, with a Berlin interpretation. Yet, the influence they have had on the TacOps campaign system is pretty heavy. It may seem strange to associate a genre of videogames with a hex and counter board wargame, but their framings take similar approaches.

Through the roguelike lens, Major General Christopher Vokes, commander of the Canadian First Infantry Division, is the main player character of the campaign. The division is Vokes’ health and resources and health. Managing it is central to player progress, but, at any moment, completing a single map, with a single company, is the primary focus.

Similar to the adventure roots of the roguelike genre, the TacOps maps connect in ways that let players chart their own journey to the Ortona objective. Each tactical map presents its own historically unique challenge. The maps themselves are fixed, but the opposition is generated in a procedural way which is impacted by the operational gamestate. How the player clears each map impacts their play on future maps. Resources are limited, so players must manage them in a way that sustains combat effectiveness for the 5km journey to and through Ortona. Should too many units suffer high casualty rates, the division could lose too much of its combat effectiveness, game over, permadeath. Start over from the beginning and try again.

In some roguelikes you turn east and walk off a cliff and die. Start over from the beginning and try again. Further along in another run, going north gets you mauled. Start over from the beginning and try again, but at least now you know where the key is. You will die. That is part of playing the game. Progress is about carrying over the experience that comes with each death. This is at both the operational and tactical scales, because whole formations can be rendered ineffective on a single map.

The first choice the campaign player has to make is where to attempt crossings for the Moro River. These are essential for bringing up the armor and firepower to support the infantry. The Royal Canadian Engineers can be sent to build or repair bridges capable of sustaining the weight of the division’s armor brigade. The engineers however, are a limited resource. Deploying can  potentially expose them to the same artillery shelling that took out the bridges in the first place. Another option is to take the enemy by surprise, launching coordinated assaults on the hamlets across the river, forcing the enemy back before bringing up the armor. With either option there is still the question of where. There are three maps for the Moro. The player chooses which forces to send where, with what objective. They could walk off of a cliff.

Walking off a cliff is sending a single platoon to a heavily fortified German position with no support. The odds of achieving the objective are slim to none and the casualties they take in the process could break the platoon. A broken platoon is no longer usable until they are able to rest and recuperate their losses, or be redistributed to other platoons, or companies. The division feels every loss taken. On top of this the objective still needs to be achieved, so another formation may have to put itself at risk. If the German defenses hold out long enough it could cost the player the whole campaign. Start over from the beginning and try again, maybe choosing to repair a crossing near Villa Rogatti instead.

Division command passes the order down to the brigade commander. They select Princess Patricia’s Light Infantry Regiment, quartered across the Moro from the hamlet. From this location the commander of the Patricians chooses companies to deploy, with the company commanders choosing which platoons to send. As the player makes each of these decisions they are transitioned down in scale from Vokes to the platoon commanders. At this tactical scale Vokes’ rationale no longer matters, it’s all about the units being placed on the map doing what they must to achieve their objective.

The historical scenarios break missions down into three objectives to complete a map. When playing the more open campaign however, the objectives are loose to fit into the player’s operational narrative. The player is not expected to clear maps in one go. Some of the maps were fought over for days, with multiple formations rotating in and out. At the operational level completing the objective may be better achieved with a fresher formation, that will benefit from the progress achieved by the failure of their predecessors. As in roguelike games, players must be willing to accept tactical defeat to achieve greater operational success.

The Core Loop

The majority of play happens on the tactical maps, as such building tactical skills is very important. This is where the work of Air Force Colonel John Boyd comes in. Boyd introduced the OODA Loop as a systemic approach to problem solving that works iteratively through a decision making cycle – observe, orient, decide, act. Effective actions in TacOps require tactical muscles trained around that loop.

Observe begins with setup. The maps should be carefully studied. There will be between three and six megahex rows per a map. Players must think of how their control needs to extend from where their units enter the map, all the way to their objective. They choose key points to place or direct firepower, assessing what it will take to get into controlling positions.

It is important to have a broad plan, but flexibility is critical. The opposition will have their say. For each action the player has to orient themselves to the current situation. Because of the way turns are structured the player will always have to consider how much they can do before the Germans respond and what to prioritize. Processing those into a decision pushes them towards the action. The results of that action however, are not deterministic. Players give the order but the units must attempt to execute. Sometimes it will go exactly as planned. Other times players will have to pay the cost for failure. Every action loops back around to observing the results and reorienting to the map before deciding the next best course of action and acting.

Sometimes you only get one action, sometimes you can chain them together. Slowly you start to build a tactical language. There is no overwatch action in TacOps, instead you must learn the combination of actions you need to take to perform an overwatch maneuver. There are no combined arms mechanics, you must combine arms functionally and utilize them in ways that optimize their effectiveness.

All of this gives the TacOps system a unique feel. The separation of scales makes the places where their considerations overlap pivotal. When you see your units taking casualties on the tactical map you cannot just push them to the last man to achieve the objective. You have to know when to replace the line, and when you are forming that newline you have to do so aiming to exploit the tactical advantage because you know what it costs to make it.

Hopefully this has given some indication of the campaign  framing and game play loops in TacOps. The best way to understand however is by example. So for the next few articles in this series I will provide an example playthrough that shows how players complete the tactical maps in the campaign context.

---

Previous Solitaire TacOps: Ortona InsideGMT Articles