Well, I'll spare you a list of resolutions and jump straight into it. My main resolution (if one is expected) is to just play more with my toys, as my boy is now old enough to join in and is super interested.
Micro vs Macro
Or: should you be able to make this decision?
Just been thinking about this a bit lately, as there a few PC games I WANT to like but they allow (and encourage) the player to unnecessarily micro. Nebulous is amazing in theory - like the Expanse TV show. Like a more tactical Homeworld. EW. Missiles. Inertia. CIWS. Quasi hard sci if. But you are controlling quite a few spaceships and microing every decision on those ships. So instead of being a task force commander, you are acting as 4-6 individual captains at the same time. As well as making decisions that weapons and radar operators on those ships should be able to make individually. To make it worse you have to fight the AI.
Similar - the Call to Arms/Men of War series RTS has you controlling multiple squads and vehicles. It should be a grittier, realistic Company of Heroes but when you move individual soldiers and you are telling individuals to throw grenades, reload or even to lie down when fired at... it's just needless micro. It's a decision you shouldn't need to make. It's like a platoon or company commander telling each and every grunt under their command where to throw a grenade, when to reload - even if they should take cover or not. Madness.
In both games you are clicking madly, excessively interacting with the game/with a needless mental load, doing a job/making needless decisions. The UI would have to be very slick to enable this (narrator: it was not.)
Another PC game I often enjoy - Steel Division - treads a fine line here. You may control a dozen tanks, a dozen infantry squads, and a handful of artillery or aircraft - but at least it's possible to order groups and have the AI sort them out, or issue broad orders. It's less optimal than microing things yourself, but the micro isn't forced on you.
OK, how does this apply to wargames?
Choose the right focus to start with:
For example, aerial wargames seem to always have this issue. Most have you plotting each yank on the stick and throttle - precisely controlling up to a handful of aircraft simultaneously like a hivemind. It's unfeasible (game wise) and unrealistic.
Choose the right mechanics & rules:
Sometimes the game mechanics are to blame. For example 40K started out as a quasi-skirmish game and turned into a sort of mass battle game. The game mechanics kinda evolved over time too, but it was a 'micro' game forced to a macro scale. Mechanics like "coherency" (you know the one, the 'everyone in a squad must be within 2" of each other') are aimed at this; turning 40-50 individual minis into maybe 4-5 "units" or groups.
Finally, choose an accessible/slick UI. aka Unobtrusive rules.
In the case of a PC game, it's the options, the interfacing with the game. Another game I want to like (X4) has an amazing premise (be anything from a space pirate to a galactic emperor, trading, mining, building star bases and fleets... a limitless sandbox) but a hideous interface. 120+ keybinds! Windows within windows.
In the case of a wargame, that interface is the mechanics and the rulebook. They both need to be slick, consistent, intuitive, easily memorised. Unobtrusive.
A good set of rules should offer minimal resistance between having the idea (tactic) and executing it.
This "resistance" could take the form of excessive complexity (needing to consult charts or rulebooks) or merely. It could be merely making unnecessary rolls, modifiers or math in a combat sequence.
I use the word resistance in a sense like electricity. A game with low resistance flows. A game with high resistance has may obstructions/interruptions in the flow.
In Nebulous and X4, the clunky UI means a lot of friction in trying to implement ideas. In Steel Division, you are still trying to control too many troops/variables but at there is an attempt to reduce friction by "smart" AI orders. In F-Zero, there is a deliberate attempt to minimize clicking and make orders as intuitive as possible.
For wargame examples, Skirmish Sangin had so many % and modifiers to simply shoot a gun. That's not intuitive - there is a lot to do between saying "I shoot at that guy" and executing the shot. That's obtrusive rules.
Blood Red Skies reduces friction by abstacting away individual fighter pilot micromanagement and exact heights and speed in favour of "he has more energy/better position than the other guy." I'm not a fan, but the mechanics are also really simple and easy - just roll x amount of dice and count 6s.
Killwager used its own 'special' terminology, renaming ordinary wargaming terms into 'measures' and 'flow' when the rules had unusual concepts to start with - it created needless friction.
While I like Battlefleet Gothic (and am painting a fleet as soon as I get another pot of gold Retributor Armour) having a chart to consult for weapons batteries adds needless interaction with the rules. Simply saying something like "Roll a dice - 5 or 6 hits - for each weapon battery" would remove the need to have a chart. Decrease the resistance.
Anyway, this has been a recent train of thought. It's not new - I think I touched on it here - but the two thoughts:
#1: is this game forcing needless micromanaging, and
#2 - is the UI bad/aka do the rules have needless friction
...have been on my mind; hopefully this posts shows my thought process and how I think they're linked.
-----------------------------------------
I thought I wouldn't do a 2025 "resolution" list, but on reflection I will, as it may inform my next few posts (also: I have just finished my last LoTR batch and am in need of direction...)
1. Build my own DIY terrain mat from a paint drop sheet, build terrain with my daughter
2. Create the original 5 Mordhiem warbands (+Vermintide-esque co op homebrew rules) and play with my kids
3. Finalize a 2025 version of my post-apocalyptic tank wargame and play with my son (who thinks warbands of pirates, WW2-era tanks and mutants are cool)
4. Collect the final few notable missing ME:SBG (eagles, wringwraith, Rohirrim heroes) to my 1500+ collection and go back and tidy up some paint jobs and basing; play games with my kids/visitors; allow myself to expand on one other game system (cowboys, pirates?)
5. Paint my Battlefleet Gothic fleets, play with my kids
6. Do a 2025 update and playtest of all my ongoing homebrew rules (aeronef, supercavitating submarine fighters, EvE+Lost Fleet space, FAC/PT-boat space, jets, not-Mordhiem, modern pulp, sci fi horror)
7. Paint 3 of my 15 unpainted projects - samurai/Greeks/modern SF/ECW/40K/Weird War II/15mm Lawrence of Arabia/Infinity/Confrontation 3/Quar/vikings vs zombies/40K(!) skirmish/Heavy Gear/Dropfleet/Deep Rock Galactic before starting anything new
8. Find wargaming projects for my kids - daughter has Necromunda warband/likes anything with female warriors (Sisters of Sigmar?) son likes medieval/fantasy mass battle (box of Perry plastics?)
9. Allow myself one new system - Trench Crusade(?)
10. Start a new homebrew system (Vikings vs ice zombies, Hellgate, STALKER, racing cars, Vermintide)
There's a pretty common theme here - and that's to get minis on the table, and involve my children more. Despite the huge amount of unfinished projects (~800 minis?), I'm actually powering through my lead mountain - I've painted 1200+ in the last 3 years with about 300 incoming.
....I reckon by 2029 I'll have a clean workbench....
