Sometime towards the end of last year, I started a journey to study the American Revolution since I had been assigned to review WDS’s new American Revolution game. I wanted to find out why they decided to make a whole new game when they had a game already in their catalog. So, I started my research. I decided to read some material for the interview. I read With Zeal and with Bayonets Only by Matthew Spring, The Glorious Cause: the American Revolution by Robert Middlekauff, the 1st volume of George Washington by Douglas Southall Freeman (no way I could finish the series on time, The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin, With Fire and Sword by James Nelson. And I watched Dr. Allen C. Guelzo ’s The American Revolution course from the Great Courses, who was a head professor at Gettysburg College, and he even got a Medal of Honor from the Daughters of the American Revolution.

I made sure my mind was ready to be immersed in the world of 1776- 1882. I wanted my mind on the Howe brothers, Henry Clinton, John Burgoyne, Cornwallis, Nathaniel Green, Henry Knox, and Daniel Morgan.  

I could have just been like other reviewers who just go off game play and mechanics, but I wanted to have a competent conversation on such a deep topic.

Rich Hamilton, one of the head guys of War Design Studio, put me in touch with their lead designer of the game, Mike Cox.  I could tell in our first few minutes of our interview that Mike’s mind was still stuck in 1776, obsessing over maps and thinking about which commander would do what. He has so much passion bursting out of him, I could tell he was happy to have a deep conversation with his obsession.

Interview With Mike Cox

Me: Hey Mike I hope you’re doing well, can you please tell me about your background in wargaming?

Mike: I’ve been playing Tiller games since the original HPS 1776 game. It’s amazing to me how much the system has grown.

I have always been attracted to games with a scenario design element like Steel Panthers, War Game Construction Kit,  Operational Art of War, and Age of Rifles, to name a few. I did a lot of tinkering with Age of Rifles. I love drawing maps; that’s one of my passions. Initially, I didn’t buy into John Tiller games because I wanted to play more scenarios than just Waterloo (for example), I wanted to get into a whole Campaign, or a variety of situations. Then 1776 came out. That was my wheelhouse. I have had a long interest in the American Revolution; the entire war was covered, and I love the tactical side. I enjoy analyzing terrain, dressing my lines, and keeping it all looking good.  Things all took off from there.

John Tiller had done several games before moving to HPS.  They were beautiful and included hand-painted maps.  They were very popular, and there were wargaming clubs where you could find opponents online. I got to know the system pretty well, even teaching newbies to the club how to play. Rich H. put on a scenario design contest, and I did an early version of Fort Washington. (1776 is equivalent to Company Level in ARW; Battalion Level is what is shipped with the game.  I may have time to revisit and do a company-level – or maybe some intrepid home designer will beat me to it!) HPS provided a designer with tools, and it was fun to get that done.

Me: Has any of this wargame stuff got mixed with your personal life?

Mike: No, I’m a winemaker, but I was able to travel to some wargaming conventions, which I was able to tie into work trips. Richard Berg would throw a convention every year (BROGFest) in Charleston, and HPS hosted TillerCon for a few years, so I would go to work, then I would go to the war gaming convention. Charleston, South Carolina have so much American Revolution stuff there: Fort Moultrie, Sullivan Island, Kings Mountain, Cowpens, to name a few. I have been to Cowpens many times. While traveling down the road, take a detour and see these spots. You get to walk the field and understand it, talk to the rangers, and browse the books in the book shop. Sadly, this was before good cell phone cameras! I still found it inspiring. 

Me: I did a lot of research before I did this interview. (I let him know about the books I mentioned in this introduction.)  What specifically made you so interested in the American Revolution?

Mike: I have a great ancestor, through my father’s side, who was a Lieutenant (Henry Merson) in the New Jersey militia during the American Revolution (Hunterdon County, sadly rated ‘E’s in-game). I was born in ’68, so I was 8 years old during the 200 celebrations. Everything was red, white, and blue with parades and celebrations. It clicked with me.  I visited Philadelphia with my parents for spring break of 77. Too cold for this California boy.  We barely got out of the car!  I can only imagine what winter at Whitemarsh or Valley Forge was like to endure.  I do like a good underdog story, and the American Revolution was so full of that. 

Me: What books did you read to prepare for the journey of this game? 

Mike: There is an extensive bibliography that will be in the designer’s notes, as well as a list of useful websites, and of course, board games to serve as inspiration.

Besides many of the books you mentioned, there are Michael Harris’ 3 volumes: Brandywine, Germantown, Fighting for Philadelphia. They have great maps, OOBs, and appendices, very militarily and tactically focused.

The Southern Strategy by David K Wilson.  Its focus is also on battles, with clear maps and solid OOBs for all the individual battles.  All are tied together into a bigger narrative. Infantry in Battle: 1733-1783, a book by Dr. Andrew Burns. It breaks down a lot of myths of linear warfare in the late 18th century. Light infantry (and others) operated in a more modern sense, for example, as independent companies which foreshadow Napoleonic skirmishers. British Light Infantry were trained to advance quickly, jogging and running; they weren’t opposed to using a building or hedge for cover. You will see this in the game. How some units are more flexible, while others have more rigid formations. There are many more books I can mention, but these ones really stood out.

Me: This is what I wanted to ask you, do you try to reflect the close formations of Howe in the early days, and open formations of Clinton’s 2 deep formations, and the reversal of that as the Revolutionaries became more professional?

Mike: To be clear, Howe was a proponent of the 2-rank line and an advocate of light infantry tactics in general.  Clinton was more conservative and pushed 3-rank traditional formations early on and expressed disdain at the ‘loose flimsy order’ for being too French.

One thing introduced specifically for this game is Open Order (OO).  Certain 2-rank units can use it.  It allows a unit to enter woods without disrupting (as a normal line would), and it also means that when the optional Line Disruption rule is on, they won’t.   It was needed to model the tactics of certain militia units and the British response to them.  And of course, the whole Southern Campaign would have been a challenge without the ability of certain units to operate in wooded terrain, at least somewhat effectively.  Open Order impacts frontages (greater obviously), melee (penalty), and losses from fire (slight advantage).

You will see 2 rank lines as the war progresses.  The British adopted it early on (after Bunker Hill), but it took forever for the rest of the army to fully implement it.  The Hessians were, in fact, forbidden to use 2 rank lines and open; Wilhelm von Knyphausen was asking the Landgrave of Hesse-Kassel for permission, but was denied. Frederick II thought his troops would be beaten if they were not in depth. So, basically, when I make games, I don’t want units to run around who shouldn’t be.  There is a lot under the hood, doubling of ranks (2-rank goes to 4-rank if too dense). weapon ranges, and the impacts of the column, which are all tied back to the specific situation being modeled. The storming of Savannah in 1779 is not the same stand-up fight at Brandywine or a fluid battle like Cowpens.

Me: How do you change the morale of Americans and the British? The British had better supplies in the beginning. But Americans may have better morale because they’re being invaded.

Mike: It depends.  On supply it is represented in the game in a few ways: the % chance that a unit will go Low Ammo (or Low 🡪 No Ammo), is different for each side (I believe the standard load out for a British trooper was 60 rounds, an American was lucky to go in with 25) and then Supply wagons are sparser for Americans (and to be honest, even for the British.  Many ARW battles petered out for want of ammunition/powder). As for morale, the Minutemen were different from the militia. They were younger guys ready to go, maybe more of a D/C rating. Militia are F, E, D (at best). There are adjustments all the time to this. Quality has to do with marching (and the likelihood of disorder in the presence of the enemy), firing, and melee (better troops perform better, poor troops are penalized), as well as rallying from Rout. Rallying is impacted by leaders, and so certain leaders may be rated high for their ability to rally troops, but they may not be as good at keeping their subordinates in command.  So, when this unit is in the marching forum, they are going to take a check. It gives a little bit of chaos. Some unexpected things are happening.   Some units may be bad at marching and not disordering, but some may have a melee bonus as they excelled in close-in combat. (Looking at you, Highlanders!) Leadership is a major factor, along with the quality of a unit. When a brigade or wing collapses, you will see a cascading effect.

You will see units improve over the course of the war. There is no hard and fast rule.  I got to go with my best judgment based on my own readings. I try to tone things down and not use A Morale (highest ranking) so much. When the British arrived, they were not at the top of their game.

Me: Ya, from my readings, the British were like Americans during the Korean war, they weren’t at the top of their game. They weren’t a bunch of Seven Year War veterans.

Mike: Howe had some units that had trained in Ireland and were well-trained in light infantry tactics. But this took a while for it to get through the rest of the army. 

When I first started, I originally was going to take the original game, rework the maps, update the OOBs, revise scenarios, and try to fill the gaps that I felt were left wanting.  Then WDS leadership decided we weren’t going to use the old Early American War engine, as it was a legacy program in need of modernization, and so moved to the Musket and Pike engine. So, I was now looking at doing a Battalion Level game, but to be honest, many of the engagements were too small to be at the level, and so the game now proudly boasts Company (40 m/Hex) and Battalion Level (100 m/hex). I think it offers some unique perspectives as we can play out certain situations at both levels.

Me: How was the map-making process? 

Mike: There was an old method of doing maps. I would do all the topography by hand. I had to do every measurement on all the hexes. So, the maps were smaller. Now, there is information online that we can import the topographical information and historical land use from. So, I would give the team coordinates. A week later, I would get a base map file and an overlay (usually an older topo map, ~early/mid-19th century. Then I would have to correct or fill in the details, but I must be careful, with urbanization and land forming or damming of rivers, for example.  I then looked at historic maps and had to do some detailing and corrections.  I made some huge maps (Charleston BL and CL, or New York BL and Long Island and Manhattan at CL, for example) as I wanted to put something in the game to inspire other designers. 

Me: How many hours a day do you spend on developing the game?

Mike: No comment.  For me, doing maps is like a puzzle; it relaxes me. I put a silly amount of hours mapping, and I don’t want to embarrass myself by revealing how many hours I spent on development.

Me: What are your favorite movies and fictional novels about the American Revolution? I really want my readers to be mentally ready before they play your game.

Mike: I really like the AMC show Turn, it’s about a small war based on a little village on Long Island, you got John Andre involved. It was fun and not cringeworthy. Sure, there were liberties taken, but I enjoyed it. There was an animated series called Liberty Kids. I enjoyed watching it with my kids. It’s still fun to watch even though the target audience is 10 -15-year-olds.

I also rewatched John Adams recently, and it was amazing. It is great with all the political mechanics going on in the background.

Me: I know people used to hate the Patriot back in the day for its inaccuracies. 

Mike: Everyone loves to hate the Patriot. They take the flavor but not the reality. But we can take what we can get when it comes to Hollywood.

Me: Doing my research, there were tons of bad dealings done on both sides among civilians.

Mike: Not sure you did much studying on the Southern Campaign, but there is so much bitter and bloody tit for tat, a civil war indeed.

Me: Ya, that part of the war reminds me of Bleeding Kansas in the Civil War. So many killings are going on from all sides of the war. Whether civilians, militia men, or loosely managed British Soldiers. 

Mike: Yeah, it’s hard to do a scenario on some of the things that went on because some of it was just a bunch of guys rolling up and slaughtering everyone.

Me: Have you read the Jeff Shaara American Revolution books? I’m such a fan boy of his dad’s book, ” The Killer Angels and I loved Gods and Generals. I figure he sets up the setting perfectly.

Mike: I wasn’t aware he had even done American Revolution books. 

Me: One recent book I enjoyed was Avellina Balestri’s book on the American Revolution called “All Ye Who Pass by”. Since you and I studied so much from the British perspective, you would understand the deep complexities of a British soldier during the American Revolution who is reluctant to obey orders. One thing I do in trying to understand the psychology at the time is see how they viewed their history back then. Since she takes from the perspective of a Catholic Soldier, they constantly bring the memory of the constant fighting and back-and-forth regime change between Catholic and Protestant Kings. This was a global phenomenon wherever Europeans planted themselves. Even when I read about Frederick the Great, many of his views were from the trauma of the 30 years war. So you can really see how these Global events really shaped the diverse views on life within the colonies. Whether from the British and Americans, or even from the Hessians who fought for King George’s German roots.  

Mike: There were mistrust issues with various factions, especially when Americans got into Canada and had to encounter French Catholics. You have these tensions that were the cause of historic antagonism. 

The Southern Strategy by David Wilson, you must check out. It puts out altogether why things broke out the way they did. The British thought people would rise up and get on board, and the failures of the Tories to get on board. He doesn’t look at one campaign, but he looks at the whole first half of the war. Michael Harris books are excellent, too. Battle for New York by Bernard Schechter is from the perspective of New York throughout the entire war. There is a great walking tour section in it. I did the Manhattan tour, went across the Brooklyn Bridge, and was able to see all the ground (including Flatbush Pass, Morris Mansion, Fort Washington). 

Me: Now, in the game, in my opinion, on understanding conventional and unconventional forces at the time, wouldn’t you get more points killing a conventional force over an unconventional force? Since Howe couldn’t commit using the full amount of his soldiers, they were hard to replace. I read that Kipling observed that it took way more money and time to gear up a British soldier compared to a lot of the weaker non-European Nations during their imperial wars. It cost nothing to replace the huge supply of unconventional military forces in some of the indigenous areas, and it was much harder for them to kill off British forces.  I know it’s not exactly the same, but it was a lot easier to replace a Revolutionary military man than a British soldier.

Mike: What I did was that the militia had fewer “points” compared to the Continental Army. A Continental Army soldier has the same amount of points as a line British soldier. 

Me: Ah, because they take longer to train and are more specialized. 

Mike: Militia are often more of a nuisance, like a speed bump. They are meant to take losses. What the engine allows you to do is rate the various units for a value.  I used 12 as my base, as it is what John did in 1776, militia might be an 8 or a 10, while light troops, grenadiers, and guards might be a 14-16 (to reflect training and prestige.  Cavalry is higher for the same reason (though militia mounted infantry, not so much). You can steamroll with light infantry, but you can lose so many points on losses.

Me: I think of this when I play games like Modern War. Where an American soldier is harder to kill, and politically more dramatic than an Afghan or Iraqi irregular.

Mike: And harder to replace… I did the Afghan War game and the Vietnam War squad battle game. I think we did different point values on different units and armor. We are trying to balance the game and try to weigh things. If you’re a commander who has 25 men to hold this point, and the enemy has a hundred guys. Well 1 guy out of 25 is going to hurt. You got human wave guys, and you can’t be racking up points at the same rate as 25 people in that scenario. 

Me: In one lecture I was watching, they mentioned the British had a hard time forcing the revolutionaries into a war of posts for most of the war, as they would in Europe, causing no identifiable things to conquer to force the revolutionaries into battle. With that knowledge in mind, how does this help or hinder you from making victory point areas? 

Mike: The difficulty for the British was more strategic than tactical (CL)/Grand Tactical (BL). Since the game is battle-focused, the assumption is that the Crown has brought the Americans to bear, for one reason or another. There are scenarios where there is an extraordinarily high value for an objective (say, Ticonderoga), but for the most part, I look at tactical objectives and then balance that against potential casualties.

Me: Have you ever thought about developing a scenario with Spain involved? I didn’t know they were even involved in the war until my recent studies.

Mike: It’s a sticky question. When the scope of the project was outlined, I was limited by the number of factions I could use. Maybe in the future, there is a Pensacola campaign and siege, and some smaller battles like actions on the Gulf Coast.  I did include one called the “Village” (near Mobile, Alabama). But I had to shoehorn them in with French flags; I just found it an interesting story. If this game is popular, we might be able to get more maps. I could keep going for the next 7 years. There are tons of values to this game. I could have made this into two games. A Company Level and a Battalion Level game. There are big, popular battles and plenty of unknown battles that most people don’t know much about. I hope I can release more content based on reception. WDS supports new content for designers to supplement existing games.  If you buy one of the WDS games, you will often see the game still getting tons of new stuff years later. 

Me: I didn’t get into board games at all. I never got into war games until Panzer Corps and Total War. Well, Civil War Generals 2 was my first war game in the 90s, but I didn’t play a game like that in the 2000s until Panzer Corps. I know Rich is trying to make improvements to WDS games, according to my demographic, like the new artwork and 3d which I thoroughly enjoy. 

Mike: I grew up with board games, and some guys like me want hex and counters. But when I do maps and look at them in 3D, it really looks amazing. The buildings now look very colonial American. 

Me: Do you personally script the AI in the game?

Mike: The AI makes a lot of its own decisions. There is a file called Main AI. Here are some parameters a designer can use to offer the AI guidelines. It’s in the manual.  Scripting is where AI needs help. Gotta let it know where to follow the objective. The AI’s offense can be quite good. There are some things that will surprise you. Some scenarios AI is better than with other scenarios. I continue to tinker with it. It’s an ongoing process.  I even watch AI fight AI. I try to get it to a draw. So, when I see something is stuck, I go in and try to tweak it out. The AI may pause because it tries not to take too many losses. It’s not perfect; sometimes it stacks too much or ignores things that are necessary.   It’s been scripted to put up a reasonable fight, but a skilled player will likely have no problem defeating it. 

Me: Well, before I wrap this up, I wanted to ask you, without getting too political, with all the studying you’ve been doing on the American Revolution. What wisdom can the Early American period give to newer generations? Especially now, with a very divided country we are in today. 

Mike: Ok, without getting too political, I don’t get too carried away with extremes. Everything was so polarized in the 1760s, which is where we had this rupture with the Crown. I think if we look at the Patriots at the time, many seemed like they were black and white. You saw the HBO show, John Adams? They were hardliners. Either my way or the highway. You can rupture things if you see the world as so black and white. In America today, we need to stop being so black and white. Look for the grey areas. America has some amazing ideas, like equality and freedom. Early Americans weren’t perfect then; we had slavery, which can’t be ignored, but the principles are great. We should get the Declaration of Independence out and read it regularly. We should also read Thomas Paine’s Common Sense. He wrote that on the road from New York to Trenton. It was a low point of his life (and for the Revolution). These times are challenging, but if we have a good vision, we should see our way through it. 

Me: Well, Mike, I appreciate your time. Have a nice evening.

Mike: You too.

Conclusion

Spending these months playing their delisted old 1776 game, and after this interview and researching this game, I am completely confident this new game is worth the price of a brand-new game. Expecting the old game to be updated to the quality of this new game today is like expecting Call of Duty Modern Warfare in 2007 to be an update for Call of Duty 1 from 2003. The mechanics are completely overhauled to reflect a more accurate reality of the American Revolution. The differences between the different types of formations in different battles, and of course, the gorgeous new graphics and the battles themselves, aren’t a copy-paste of the old games. Maps and all. 

One important note about my research, as retro gamers, we really want to focus on preserving old games. Some people have nostalgia for old John Tiller titles, and it may feel like a big letdown that they and their friends or family members can’t go back and purchase those old Early American war titles anymore. They have been delisted from their store. Imagine if there was no way to get access to Age of Rifles, the Great Naval Battles series, or even the Panzer Generals series. I hope one day they will reevaluate their catalogue decisions and at least release some of the old ones on GOG or Steam like Combat Mission did with their old titles.

I know reputation is important; they want to stand by their commitment to updating all their titles, but I think there should be another way to do it. Maybe calling the game a sequel to the old ones or some type of remastered version.

People put hours into the old games over the decades and made many maps for them. I’m sure those old fans would lament seeing one of their favorite games no longer exist. But I’m optimistic about their old titles making a comeback one day as much as I am optimistic about their new titles being of exceptional quality. We play these games for their dedication to history, and many of us older gamers feel the history of games is important, too. 

Support Strategy and Wargaming

I do what I do in Strategy and Wargaming because I love to do this, and I’m never going to stop. If you would like to support me with that, you can  buy me a coffee for a dollar  if you’re feeling generous.  If you can’t, no worries, Strategy and Wargaming will always be free, and I’d love to have you around!