Dien Bien Phu

[bcgames]

DIEN BIEN PHU

Hey! This section is about Future Ideas! No promises implied...but...I do like this battle.

Over on Boardgamegeek, I saw that Kim Kanger is working on the 2nd Edition of his Dien Bien Phu board game. I think his game is the best representation of this battle and I am totally on-board with his 2nd edition improvements. Want it!

After the BK Stalingrad engine is in place, I'm looking forward to creating a couple scenarios that take advantage of the engine's capabilities.

There's a New Book on the topic just arrived at the homestead via stage coach from Kansas City:

Valley of the Shadow: The Siege of Dien Bien Phu

From the librarian with a LARGE collection of Dien Bien Phu scholarship, I have to say this book is--THE BOOK--on the topic. Tons of data on all things to include orders of battle. Worth the $$ if you are interested in the topic.

Onwards!

[Okayrun3254]

I downloaded this book a few days ago, and cant put it down. I have always been interested in this battle, and this book really does a nice job of setting up the events leading to the battle, and the preparations.

[bcgames]

I just recently received my 2nd edition version of Kim Kanger's Dien Bien Phu: The Final Gamble. All the changes in the 2nd Edition make the 1st Edition weak in comparison. This is the best Dien Bien Phu game ever. It is a smart game. It is a competitive game. It is a fun game. I like this game forever. Kim Kanger has found the best solution to experiencing the important parts of this battle. A+

https://www.legionwargames.com/legion_DBP.html

[bcgames]

ORIGINAL: Okayrun3254
I am curious about Dien Bien Phu. It would seem to me that this one would have to be at the company, platoon scale to work. There would also seem to be a need for special rules for this one.

This one is a mental challenge problem to see what the engine can do. It assumes the capabilities found in Stalingrad (airfields, air transport, campaign-connected scenarios, and a multi-scaled gaming environment). Imagine an area of operations comprising Tonkin and northern Laos...a little bit of China at maybe 5 miles/8 kilometers per hex AND the valley of Dien Bien Phu at 200-250 meters per hex. You fight the operational battle on the 5-miles per hex map and the tactical battle on the 200-250 meters per hex map. Time scale for operational map is maybe 1 turn = 1 week. Time scale for tactical map is ~three turns per day (2 day/1 night). You "time warp" thru the tactical battle via the operational campaign-connected scenarios...results of one scenario are carried over to the next--operationally and tactically. Short connected scenarios...you're not playing every day, every hour of the siege--just the highlight periods. In essence both players are fighting/committing resources throughout the area of operation--Tonkin/Laos...not just Dien Bien Phu. From Operation Castor to Operation Condor and all points in between. Still thinking about how it would be done...

What do you think? How would you approach it?

[Okayrun3254]

ORIGINAL: bcgames

ORIGINAL: Okayrun3254
I am curious about Dien Bien Phu. It would seem to me that this one would have to be at the company, platoon scale to work. There would also seem to be a need for special rules for this one.

This one is a mental challenge problem to see what the engine can do. It assumes the capabilities found in Stalingrad (airfields, air transport, campaign-connected scenarios, and a multi-scaled gaming environment). Imagine an area of operations comprising Tonkin and northern Laos...a little bit of China at maybe 5 miles/8 kilometers per hex AND the valley of Dien Bien Phu at 200-250 meters per hex. You fight the operational battle on the 5-miles per hex map and the tactical battle on the 200-250 meters per hex map. Time scale for operational map is maybe 1 turn = 1 week. Time scale for tactical map is ~three turns per day (2 day/1 night). You "time warp" thru the tactical battle via the operational campaign-connected scenarios...results of one scenario are carried over to the next--operationally and tactically. Short connected scenarios...you're not playing every day, every hour of the siege--just the highlight periods. In essence both players are fighting/committing resources throughout the area of operation--Tonkin/Laos...not just Dien Bien Phu. From Operation Castor to Operation Condor and all points in between. Still thinking about how it would be done...

What do you think? How would you approach it?

You lost me after the "time warp" part. Do you mean two separate scenarios, tactical and operation, or do you mean some sort of integration of the two game scales into one scenario? Is that what you mean by "multi-scaled gaming environment"?

Very excited about the thought of campaign connected scenarios!

[Deathtreader]

ORIGINAL: bcgames

ORIGINAL: Okayrun3254
I am curious about Dien Bien Phu. It would seem to me that this one would have to be at the company, platoon scale to work. There would also seem to be a need for special rules for this one.

This one is a mental challenge problem to see what the engine can do. It assumes the capabilities found in Stalingrad (airfields, air transport, campaign-connected scenarios, and a multi-scaled gaming environment). Imagine an area of operations comprising Tonkin and northern Laos...a little bit of China at maybe 5 miles/8 kilometers per hex AND the valley of Dien Bien Phu at 200-250 meters per hex. You fight the operational battle on the 5-miles per hex map and the tactical battle on the 200-250 meters per hex map. Time scale for operational map is maybe 1 turn = 1 week. Time scale for tactical map is ~three turns per day (2 day/1 night). You "time warp" thru the tactical battle via the operational campaign-connected scenarios...results of one scenario are carried over to the next--operationally and tactically. Short connected scenarios...you're not playing every day, every hour of the siege--just the highlight periods. In essence both players are fighting/committing resources throughout the area of operation--Tonkin/Laos...not just Dien Bien Phu. From Operation Castor to Operation Condor and all points in between. Still thinking about how it would be done...

What do you think? How would you approach it?

If you can pull this off you'll make computer wargaming history!! I really hope you can!

At the moment I can't think of a different way to simulate this, but will mull it over.

Will be tough on the AI opponent though to process and integrate strategies at two different levels of play I would think.

Maybe the operational aspect could be abstracted in some fashion so as to justify the predetermined tactical scenarios presented to the player. If I do something completely different at the op level then the tactical scenarios to time warp thru may not make any sense based on the actual op situation. Limited player choices and scripting would need to occur at the op level to prevent the 2 levels of play from diverging from each other.

You're right though.... there is a LOT to think about here.

Rob.

[bcgames]

ORIGINAL: Okayrun3254

You lost me after the "time warp" part. Do you mean two separate scenarios, tactical and operation, or do you mean some sort of integration of the two game scales into one scenario? Is that what you mean by "multi-scaled gaming environment"?

I'm not sure what I mean by "time warp"; I'm still thinking through the potential uses of the campaign game tools that Brian has produced. Imagine an operational narrative (week-by-week) that occasionally sticks a toe in the day-by-day of a tactical narrative. So as the French Union Forces player, you are moving/attacking/defending your forces around Tonkin/Northern Laos week-by-week...then occasionally taking a dip into the Valley of Dien Bien Phu for a significant historical event (day-by-day). In the end, you are playing out the situation between November 1953 and May 1954 week-by-week...but at the tactical level...at Dien Bien Phu--you only "touch in" during the historically significant periods--you don't play three turns per day from November 53 to May 54. The tactical level narrative is influenced by the operational level game play.

Does this make any sense?

[bcgames]

Hey Rob,

ORIGINAL: Deathtreader

At the moment I can't think of a different way to simulate this, but will mull it over.

If you can think of a way, I would implement it. I have a significant library on this topic and would love to see this campaign brought to the computer gaming environment in a meaningful way. Kim Kanger has the best interpretation of this battle and I proudly own all of his competitor's board game approaches. Kanger's operational level is beautifully abstracted...but I'd like to eliminate the abstraction and make the operational level the central driver of the tactical at Dien Bien Phu.

ORIGINAL: Deathtreader
Will be tough on the AI opponent though to process and integrate strategies at two different levels of play I would think.

You are right about that. It may not work out but it would be fun to try.

ORIGINAL: Deathtreader
Maybe the operational aspect could be abstracted in some fashion so as to justify the predetermined tactical scenarios presented to the player. If I do something completely different at the op level then the tactical scenarios to time warp thru may not make any sense based on the actual op situation. Limited player choices and scripting would need to occur at the op level to prevent the 2 levels of play from diverging from each other.

Useful thoughts. We now have the capability in the Stalingrad engine to design a linear campaign and a branch campaign. A linear campaign is essentially a campaign of linked scenarios that propel the player along an historical timeline. A branch campaign determines the narrative based on the results of the player in any given scenario...win? Take this narrative branch. Lose? Take this narrative branch. Needless to say, the branch campaign adds a counterfactual component to game play...prolly fun because of that.[/quote]

ORIGINAL: Deathtreader
You're right though.... there is a LOT to think about here.

Maybe something good can come of it. Dunno.

[Deathtreader]

ORIGINAL: bcgames

Hey Rob,

ORIGINAL: Deathtreader

At the moment I can't think of a different way to simulate this, but will mull it over.

If you can think of a way, I would implement it. I have a significant library on this topic and would love to see this campaign brought to the computer gaming environment in a meaningful way. Kim Kanger has the best interpretation of this battle and I proudly own all of his competitor's board game approaches. Kanger's operational level is beautifully abstracted...but I'd like to eliminate the abstraction and make the operational level the central driver of the tactical at Dien Bien Phu.

ORIGINAL: Deathtreader
Will be tough on the AI opponent though to process and integrate strategies at two different levels of play I would think.

You are right about that. It may not work out but it would be fun to try.

ORIGINAL: Deathtreader
Maybe the operational aspect could be abstracted in some fashion so as to justify the predetermined tactical scenarios presented to the player. If I do something completely different at the op level then the tactical scenarios to time warp thru may not make any sense based on the actual op situation. Limited player choices and scripting would need to occur at the op level to prevent the 2 levels of play from diverging from each other.

Useful thoughts. We now have the capability in the Stalingrad engine to design a linear campaign and a branch campaign. A linear campaign is essentially a campaign of linked scenarios that propel the player along an historical timeline. A branch campaign determines the narrative based on the results of the player in any given scenario...win? Take this narrative branch. Lose? Take this narrative branch. Needless to say, the branch campaign adds a counterfactual component to game play...prolly fun because of that.

ORIGINAL: Deathtreader
You're right though.... there is a LOT to think about here.

Maybe something good can come of it. Dunno.

[/quote]

Hi,

Some thoughts on how this might be achieved:

Take the OP level map and divide it into several operational zones that are invisible to the players. Zones can contain just a few hexes or be much larger. Ensure that each zone contains at least one VP location and in the case of larger zones 2 or more VP locations. Use timed VP mechanics so that not all VPs are always active for the entire game. i.e.. VP1 is active until time x and VP2 is active from time y to time z etc. This is to guide players in planning their operational level strategies and limit totally ahistorical activities. When enemy units are encountered near a VP location give players the option to go to a tactical battle based on a pre-prepared tactical map and counters etc. based on the VP location and battle area. The zones and VP locations then serve as a mechanic to lessen the need to create tactical level mini scenarios for virtually the entire OP level map. If everything is VP location driven both OP level and tactical AIs should be in synch because its the same VP location -- just at 2 levels of display. The OP level counters can be broken down using a mechanic similar to that described for Stalingrad. When the tactical battle is over the counters recombine the same way. No unit at the tactical level is ever 100% destroyed but becomes a cadre with all strengths at zero. Hopefully this will prevent game issues with the program trying to recombine units that no longer exist.

Pretty barebones I know.... and more than a little half-baked but its the best I can come up with.

Rob.

[bcgames]

When you say "Op level map" is this the valley of Dien Bien Phu? Or Tonkin/Northern Laos?

[Deathtreader]

ORIGINAL: bcgames

When you say "Op level map" is this the valley of Dien Bien Phu? Or Tonkin/Northern Laos?

Hi,

In this instance it could be either. You could have Tonkin/Northern Laos as the OP level scenario with the valley of DBP as your tactical sub-scenario although I suspect that would be a very large map.

Or you could have the valley of DBP as your OP level scenario with key locations as your tactical sub-scenarios.

Up to the designer I guess...…..[&o]


Rob.

[bcgames]

Ah-so. I like large maps. Don't you?

[Deathtreader]

ORIGINAL: bcgames

Ah-so. I like large maps. Don't you?

Sure do!
AS long as I'm no the one who has to create it...……[:D]

Rob.

[bcgames]

ORIGINAL: Deathtreader

ORIGINAL: bcgames

Ah-so. I like large maps. Don't you?

Sure do!
AS long as I'm no the one who has to create it...……[:D]

Rob.

That's the ticket.

[Deathtreader]

Hi,

I notice you have scrupulously avoided comment on my barebones suggestion..... is it really that bad? Be honest! I'll support your endeavors/products regardless.
I'm fully committed to WEGO and/or pausable real-time engines.

Rob.[:)]

[NavalNewZ]

.

[bcgames]

ORIGINAL: Deathtreader

Hi,

I notice you have scrupulously avoided comment on my barebones suggestion..... is it really that bad? Be honest! I'll support your endeavors/products regardless.
I'm fully committed to WEGO and/or pausable real-time engines.

Rob.[:)]

Sorry. Going through one of life's inevitables at the moment.

I like your idea and it has true merit. I can't comment beyond that at this time. Soon.

[jmlima]

ORIGINAL: bcgames

ORIGINAL: Okayrun3254
I am curious about Dien Bien Phu. It would seem to me that this one would have to be at the company, platoon scale to work. There would also seem to be a need for special rules for this one.

This one is a mental challenge problem to see what the engine can do. It assumes the capabilities found in Stalingrad (airfields, air transport, campaign-connected scenarios, and a multi-scaled gaming environment). Imagine an area of operations comprising Tonkin and northern Laos...a little bit of China at maybe 5 miles/8 kilometers per hex AND the valley of Dien Bien Phu at 200-250 meters per hex. You fight the operational battle on the 5-miles per hex map and the tactical battle on the 200-250 meters per hex map. Time scale for operational map is maybe 1 turn = 1 week. Time scale for tactical map is ~three turns per day (2 day/1 night). You "time warp" thru the tactical battle via the operational campaign-connected scenarios...results of one scenario are carried over to the next--operationally and tactically. Short connected scenarios...you're not playing every day, every hour of the siege--just the highlight periods. In essence both players are fighting/committing resources throughout the area of operation--Tonkin/Laos...not just Dien Bien Phu. From Operation Castor to Operation Condor and all points in between. Still thinking about how it would be done...

What do you think? How would you approach it?

Just my two cents (I have about a decade of research invested into the first indo war), if you give me the entire tonkin, I wouldn't go close to DBP with a long pole. If you give DBP, then might just as well leave the tonkin out since it stops playing any role in the game. DBP virtually exhausted operational resources for both sides, so once you're committed to it, you're not going to do anything in the tonkin.

[bcgames]

ORIGINAL: jmlima
Just my two cents (I have about a decade of research invested into the first indo war), if you give me the entire tonkin, I wouldn't go close to DBP with a long pole. If you give DBP, then might just as well leave the tonkin out since it stops playing any role in the game. DBP virtually exhausted operational resources for both sides, so once you're committed to it, you're not going to do anything in the tonkin.

Interesting thoughts. Like trying to simulate Midway.

[Okayrun3254]

ORIGINAL: bcgames

DIEN BIEN PHU

Hey! This section is about Future Ideas! No promises implied...but...I do like this battle.

Over on Boardgamegeek, I saw that Kim Kanger is working on the 2nd Edition of his Dien Bien Phu board game. I think his game is the best representation of this battle and I am totally on-board with his 2nd edition improvements. Want it!

After the BK Stalingrad engine is in place, I'm looking forward to creating a couple scenarios that take advantage of the engine's capabilities.

There's a New Book on the topic just arrived at the homestead via stage coach from Kansas City:

Valley of the Shadow: The Siege of Dien Bien Phu

From the librarian with a LARGE collection of Dien Bien Phu scholarship, I have to say this book is--THE BOOK--on the topic. Tons of data on all things to include orders of battle. Worth the $$ if you are interested in the topic.

Onwards!

I bought this book, and I am about half the way through it. I have been interested in this battle for a long time because of how the Viet Minh forces were able to move their artillery into place around the valley. I also bought The Last Valley because of the nice maps and glossary. I am finding out things about the battle that I did not know, such as the large amount of French colonial forces involved. It is also interesting to me reading about the different tactics that evolved during the battle for both sides. Very good book. I could see the game system for this battle. The Viet Minh forces attacking, the French counterattacking. There is even some armor involved. I think the key must be how the artillery is modeled for both sides.

Yesterday I was thinking how this game system would work well for the Battle of the Bulge (Battalion scale). A campaign for the Bulge would work well because of the duration of the battle. I could see why it would be difficult to do a campaign for the Desert War because it lasted for multiple years, but the Bulge was a duration of months. Individual scenarios are always good too.