I think they would if it became an existential conflict. You can interpret the game's ending at 0 National Will to represent a nuclear attack by the defeated power.
If WMD were included, there should be a significant National Will cost to the side employing them, as well as a boost to the side they're used against.
Or, perhaps, you cannot use nuclear weapons unless your National Will reaches a particular threshold due to calamitous events or somesuch. But yes, a thorough rules set would integrate with the NW mechanic.
There should be realistic consequences to WMD use. Another idea would be that each time you use them, there's a chance that neutral countries will throw in on your opponent's side, since they now see you as a monster.
One cool way to model WMDs would be to declare situations where a side would use them or get the option to use them, with certain bonuses or penalties. Then the other side would get the option to escalate or not, with certain bonuses or penalties.
Example:
If enemy has 50 more Will, you can choose to eliminate 1 map hex of units (nuke), or decrease enemy mobilization by 1 (cyber), or permanently decrease their income by 4 (bio.) Gain 20 Will.
The enemy can then respond in kind. If they do not, they lose 30 Will. If they do, they gain 20 Will but the enemy gets to pick 1 neutral to join their side due to international outrage. And then the enemy gets this same choice. Repeat till 1 side decides to 'bank' the ability to respond with a WMD, which can then be used in future turns during the WMD phase.
Choosing to use WMD is its own phase, and there is no limit to the amount of tit-for-tat that can happen in a single phase.
This adds some brinksmanship like the game Diplomacy, or Republic of Rome by Avalon Hill. The latter game always ended with the barbarians winning due to vindictive players, when people didn't just throw the table over and tell everyone to F off.
Each time WMD is chosen, a point is added to the Doomsday Clock. At the end of every turn in which the Clock was advanced, roll 3d10 and add 3. If that number is less than the Doomsday Clock, Armageddon happens. Note that it is possible for a side to win earlier in a turn, then at the end of the turn Armageddon happens and they get to rule the ashes. They still lose the game, but at least they have bragging rights.
If Armageddon happens, the winners are the Amish and Sentinelese.
That reminds me of a tabletop strategy game I played years ago. Can't remember what it was called but it was basically a Cold War era game with conventional air, ground, and naval assets, orbital defences, nukes, and a stock market. If anyone used nukes everyone automatically lost. Needless to say, that happened every time.
As another aside have you consider doing another piece just on casualty rates, and good starting point would be Dupuy's *Attrition: Forecasting Battle Casualties and Equipment Losses in Modern War*
If you don't want the book here is a link that provides and overview.
I have a collection of Dupuy's books! They indirectly informed my game design in their estimate of rates of loss. I hadn't thought about doing a WWN piece on casualty rates, that's an interesting idea.
Very interesting, I have recently being considering make a large scale strategic wargame using square or box counters similar to Hearts of Iron 3 to represent units on the board so you can get truly massive/ granular scaling.
With that said I was wondering if you'd be able to take a quick look at the two posts I've made on my own account. About 2 min or less read.
Nothing really to discuss but any words of advice and maybe a share, Im intending to simplify down some large concepts that certain people I have followed now, and in the past, have uttered but are too 'word-ie' for it to get any appeal.
Hey Woe, love your work. Wanted to ask you some technical questions about game design, specifically a game I "developed" a while back. Can I reach out to you? I totally understand if you're too busy. Thanks for all your writing. While I was already getting sufficient woe, my gainz since subscribing have been phenomenal!
Righteous! I read your Devil's Incarnate post and had to sign up. I've been pondering the problem of evil for a while now. Can't wait to see where you go with it.
The National Will aspect is novel and potentially very insightful. It could almost certainly be expanded upon in interesting ways to give a complete 4GW model that fully encompasses the moral dimension.
For example, psywar campaigns could attempt to attack the National Will directly. Defending against these might also carry a risk of depleting NW: censorship tends to annoy people, especially in America.
Another aspect that could be included are guerrilla forces. Both China and the US have local malcontent populations, eg Uyghurs and Tibetans in China, and BLM and red staters in the US. The two sides could attempt to fund these forces to destabilize the other, with impacts on NW, mobilization, and infrastructure.
Great thoughts. National Will could be fleshed into a comprehensive game system.
One idea I had was that guerilla war, cyberwar, and info war could be handled with cards. For a particular amount of game dollars, you'd purchase cards, subject to some maximum permitted by your nation's investment into that area, and then you could deploy the cards to achieve various effects, tied into production, combat segments, and national will.
The problem with modeling national will, is that it's hard to predict how it plays out in advance, e.g., will losses lead to demoralization or strengthen the resolve to fight?
Here is another game you can play: World War 3 Draft Simulator
The rules are simple. Identify a segment of the population and then use the 3 rules to predict how they will be treated. Bonus points for predicting the second-order effects.
The 3 rules, in priority order, are:
1. Get as much manpower as possible
2. Adhere to woke ideology
3. Avoid draft riots
A few examples...
Women
Woke ideology constrains the options. Women will be drafted. However, the pregnancy exemption remains. The US experiences the biggest spike in birth rates since WW2.
College Students
Vietnam era college deferments, despite loud protests by the colleges, are not brought back. See below for other ways to protect the rich and well-connected.
Parents
Parents not deferred but single parents still get an exemption, especially since women become eligible. During Vietnam this led to a lot of marriages, a single parent exemption will lead to a lot of divorces.
Foreign Nationals
Offer of US citizenship if you sign up. If illegal, choice of deportation or signing up. The latter will lead to more business raids to fill draft quotas.
Workers
The Covid lock-down "essential vs non-essential" distinction comes back. Workers designated as "essential" are exempt. This will be one way the well-connected get out of the draft. Will be highly, highly politicized.
Rich and Well Connected
Many will escape via the "essential" designation. Those who do not will finagle rear area jobs, safely behind the lines. Expect tone-deaf Vogue photo-shoots of famous people in uniform--all well out of harm's way.
Reminds me of college when I spent too much time wargaming and not enough time studying. Looks well thought out and a pretty good simulation.
You really don't think either side would use WMD?
I think they would if it became an existential conflict. You can interpret the game's ending at 0 National Will to represent a nuclear attack by the defeated power.
If WMD were included, there should be a significant National Will cost to the side employing them, as well as a boost to the side they're used against.
Or, perhaps, you cannot use nuclear weapons unless your National Will reaches a particular threshold due to calamitous events or somesuch. But yes, a thorough rules set would integrate with the NW mechanic.
There should be realistic consequences to WMD use. Another idea would be that each time you use them, there's a chance that neutral countries will throw in on your opponent's side, since they now see you as a monster.
One cool way to model WMDs would be to declare situations where a side would use them or get the option to use them, with certain bonuses or penalties. Then the other side would get the option to escalate or not, with certain bonuses or penalties.
Example:
If enemy has 50 more Will, you can choose to eliminate 1 map hex of units (nuke), or decrease enemy mobilization by 1 (cyber), or permanently decrease their income by 4 (bio.) Gain 20 Will.
The enemy can then respond in kind. If they do not, they lose 30 Will. If they do, they gain 20 Will but the enemy gets to pick 1 neutral to join their side due to international outrage. And then the enemy gets this same choice. Repeat till 1 side decides to 'bank' the ability to respond with a WMD, which can then be used in future turns during the WMD phase.
Choosing to use WMD is its own phase, and there is no limit to the amount of tit-for-tat that can happen in a single phase.
This adds some brinksmanship like the game Diplomacy, or Republic of Rome by Avalon Hill. The latter game always ended with the barbarians winning due to vindictive players, when people didn't just throw the table over and tell everyone to F off.
Each time WMD is chosen, a point is added to the Doomsday Clock. At the end of every turn in which the Clock was advanced, roll 3d10 and add 3. If that number is less than the Doomsday Clock, Armageddon happens. Note that it is possible for a side to win earlier in a turn, then at the end of the turn Armageddon happens and they get to rule the ashes. They still lose the game, but at least they have bragging rights.
If Armageddon happens, the winners are the Amish and Sentinelese.
That's a great suggestion. If I ever do more with the game, this'll be somewhere in the design.
That reminds me of a tabletop strategy game I played years ago. Can't remember what it was called but it was basically a Cold War era game with conventional air, ground, and naval assets, orbital defences, nukes, and a stock market. If anyone used nukes everyone automatically lost. Needless to say, that happened every time.
Was it SUPREMACY?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supremacy_(board_game)
Yes! That was it.
As another aside have you consider doing another piece just on casualty rates, and good starting point would be Dupuy's *Attrition: Forecasting Battle Casualties and Equipment Losses in Modern War*
If you don't want the book here is a link that provides and overview.
https://groundedcuriosity.com/finding-maths-in-the-military/
May also be useful in deepening your wargame of The World War Next as well
I have a collection of Dupuy's books! They indirectly informed my game design in their estimate of rates of loss. I hadn't thought about doing a WWN piece on casualty rates, that's an interesting idea.
Very interesting, I have recently being considering make a large scale strategic wargame using square or box counters similar to Hearts of Iron 3 to represent units on the board so you can get truly massive/ granular scaling.
With that said I was wondering if you'd be able to take a quick look at the two posts I've made on my own account. About 2 min or less read.
Sure - what posts?
On my Substack. https://louis98.substack.com
I read the posts on your page, which ones did you want to discuss? I agreed with all of your sentiments!
Nothing really to discuss but any words of advice and maybe a share, Im intending to simplify down some large concepts that certain people I have followed now, and in the past, have uttered but are too 'word-ie' for it to get any appeal.
I'll respond on your page!
What is this... Fun + Recreation? Such an Abomination!
Where is the Woe at? I'm here for my daily fix/supply of the Bright White Powder!
Hey Woe, love your work. Wanted to ask you some technical questions about game design, specifically a game I "developed" a while back. Can I reach out to you? I totally understand if you're too busy. Thanks for all your writing. While I was already getting sufficient woe, my gainz since subscribing have been phenomenal!
Sure! You can reach me by responding to any of the Substack emails I dispatch and it'll head straight to my inbox.
I saw you subscribed, saw this post, saw you were a fan of tabletop wargaming, and quickly counter-subscribed.
I think that means I've used up all my command points. Your turn. :)
Righteous! I read your Devil's Incarnate post and had to sign up. I've been pondering the problem of evil for a while now. Can't wait to see where you go with it.
The National Will aspect is novel and potentially very insightful. It could almost certainly be expanded upon in interesting ways to give a complete 4GW model that fully encompasses the moral dimension.
For example, psywar campaigns could attempt to attack the National Will directly. Defending against these might also carry a risk of depleting NW: censorship tends to annoy people, especially in America.
Another aspect that could be included are guerrilla forces. Both China and the US have local malcontent populations, eg Uyghurs and Tibetans in China, and BLM and red staters in the US. The two sides could attempt to fund these forces to destabilize the other, with impacts on NW, mobilization, and infrastructure.
Great thoughts. National Will could be fleshed into a comprehensive game system.
One idea I had was that guerilla war, cyberwar, and info war could be handled with cards. For a particular amount of game dollars, you'd purchase cards, subject to some maximum permitted by your nation's investment into that area, and then you could deploy the cards to achieve various effects, tied into production, combat segments, and national will.
I like it. Builds in an element of Illuminati! or maybe Magic the Gathering.
The problem with modeling national will, is that it's hard to predict how it plays out in advance, e.g., will losses lead to demoralization or strengthen the resolve to fight?
Here is another game you can play: World War 3 Draft Simulator
The rules are simple. Identify a segment of the population and then use the 3 rules to predict how they will be treated. Bonus points for predicting the second-order effects.
The 3 rules, in priority order, are:
1. Get as much manpower as possible
2. Adhere to woke ideology
3. Avoid draft riots
A few examples...
Women
Woke ideology constrains the options. Women will be drafted. However, the pregnancy exemption remains. The US experiences the biggest spike in birth rates since WW2.
College Students
Vietnam era college deferments, despite loud protests by the colleges, are not brought back. See below for other ways to protect the rich and well-connected.
Parents
Parents not deferred but single parents still get an exemption, especially since women become eligible. During Vietnam this led to a lot of marriages, a single parent exemption will lead to a lot of divorces.
Foreign Nationals
Offer of US citizenship if you sign up. If illegal, choice of deportation or signing up. The latter will lead to more business raids to fill draft quotas.
Workers
The Covid lock-down "essential vs non-essential" distinction comes back. Workers designated as "essential" are exempt. This will be one way the well-connected get out of the draft. Will be highly, highly politicized.
Rich and Well Connected
Many will escape via the "essential" designation. Those who do not will finagle rear area jobs, safely behind the lines. Expect tone-deaf Vogue photo-shoots of famous people in uniform--all well out of harm's way.