I’ve been playing tactical skirmish wargames lately, likely a reflection of the tactical skirmishes in which I find myself at work. ;-) Some days it’s like playing calendar warfare…

Anyway, I wanted to mention that One-Hour Skirmish Wargames is a really fun wargaming system reference book, and the system is easy to learn. I played through a game last night and I’m excited to do so again, and again, using different settings and scenarios. You can read the author’s blog post about his book and purchase it through popular online book stores. I’ve no relation to the author, just a happy customer.

One unique aspect of this game is that it uses playing cards for calculation rather than dice. At first I thought this would be a pain, but it’s actually very intuitive (easy to figure out; easy to remember) and logical. It’s easy to see how you could abstract these rules into a general simulation, even non-combat.

I was feeling lazy, so instead of playing with miniatures I set up my own playing area and “figures” (colored squares) using LibreOffice Draw.

Yep, playing against myself. Under some circumstances I would hesitate to include that little bit out of embarrassment, but doing so here might encourage my INTJ audience to pretend to be something they’re not. Winky-winky

Here’s a screenshot:

In this screenshot you can see that the Blue Team player at upper left just charged into close-quarters combat with the final Red Team player and finished him off. Which was pretty exciting during gameplay and the game managed to give it a low-technical-overhead, cinematic feel. And of course the poor guy was defending against this random surprise attack on his vehicle depot anyway, so there was a certain tension in the air that emotionally biased me toward the defenders.

The Blue Team won, though the Reds were outnumbered 2:1 and had no additional advantage via skills management. You can see the dead characters on the right side of the image. Sadly, the Blue guy sitting on top of the vehicle just lost his buddy, though he did use the body for cover! The light blue bars you can see on the map are movement rulers.

The game adds some randomization to turn configuration, so it’s possible for one player to get more turns than the other via luck of the draw. Also, if a player draws a joker card at any time, their turn is instantly over! This is a fascinating element and added a bit more “who knows how it will turn out” character to the game.

I enjoyed discovering that not only does the game cover historic settings like Napoleonic battle, it also goes right up into future settings with all kinds of cool gadgets. In addition, there’s a skill system by which you can design an elite “dead shot” sniper or a naturally athletic soldier who runs faster than others, among the various possibilities. Crew-served weapons and tanks are also designed right in. In retrospect, it’s easy to see how a couple of my Blue Team players could have at least fired up the crew-served HMG on top of the vehicle, and possibly even run over one or both of the Red Team infiltrators, from an unassailable defensive position.

I could have also given the Red team rockets and had them yell WOLVERINES or something.

…and heck, I could have thrown in Doctor Who and the TARDIS for some interdimensional fun.

Well.

Next time. Dammit.

Anyway, if you like this kind of thing, definitely take a look. My simple play-through was intense and enjoyable. Next I’m thinking of going straight from a modern setting into fictional-feudal Japan. A powerful castle concealing a dying warlord, attacked by a desperate invader with a deadly secret of their own…

Other Stuff

I’ve also made a deep dive into investing and have already shared some of my learning outcomes with clients; they’ll probably have preferential access to this information for now as I work out additional client benefits to send their way. (Suffice it to say, active coaching clients are getting lots of good stuff. If you want to be a coaching client, or just want to try it out, fill out the form at www.marccarsoncoaching.com and we’ll get you set up.)

For kicks and giggles, as I was studying others’ investing models, I started developing a psychological investing model of my own in parallel. It lacks some parts for its heat-seeking warhead, so to speak, but I believe the payload is solid. We’ll see how that sensor suite turns out.

If you’re like me and you hate being excluded from things due to publisher fiat, and always want the full informational deal, pitch me on any ideas you have for publishing this stuff without necessitating you being a coaching client. I’ll listen.

I’ve also been researching the Japanese Aum Shinrikyo cult / religious group as it has been really interesting for me. One of my favorite books on the topic is Religious Violence in Contemporary Japan, by Ian Reader.

You can see one of my favorite interviews with Aum cult leader Shoko Asahara here. I believe he was an INFJ, and you can see a fascinating aspect of this in his positive engagement with the male co-host, Takeshi (ESTP). These opposite-type attractions are always interesting to watch. In this particular case the culmination is probably around 11 minutes in where INFJ Asahara pays the highest compliment possible in telling Takeshi that he could even be a cult leader himself! Rewind a bit to learn more about the high esteem in which a cult leader places the ability to communicate with charisma.

Speaking of charisma and ESTPs, take a look at Sri Gary Olsen (YouTube clip) for an example of a religion / group started by an ESTP (MasterPath). And I feel I should mention—I can’t give any kind of recommendation here, just sharing info!

Heading closer to our cognitive home as INTJs, the Mormon church is currently headed up by a member of our opposite type: The ESFP, Russell Nelson. You can hear him discuss his strong, and more effeminate, Feeler-type aspirations right at this point in a recent address. Another example of a charismatic leader. “Take your vitamin pills” was his first uttered hint of an agenda which has been rather chaotic and full of changes to the traditionally ISTJ-natured modern Mormon church. I say “modern” because the long-deceased founder of the religion itself was another charismatic ESFP, Joseph Smith. Backing up his charisma was a remarkably hyperbolic interpretation of what was called “second sight,” “spiritual eyes,”—in Jungian terms, the opposite of ESFP Se: Introverted Intuition, or Ni, the dominant function of the INTJ. We INTJs know Ni very well (and probably have a firmer, less hyperbolic grasp on it), but that charisma…

Well, bummer as it is, charisma is not generally a big selling point of the INTJ type, though individual INTJs can often develop it to some degree. Instead we mostly fantasize that we have the ability to pull apart cults of personality like they are the most basic of knots. ;-)

I do have a friend who lights up my INTJ-meter and who is a pastor, and you can listen to one of his sermons if you’re interested. Again, I’m not affiliated and can’t recommend it for anything but curiosity reasons here, though Pastor Chris is a good guy. The charismatic vocal characteristics are present, though somewhat less notable than is the appearance of extraverted sensing (Se) values through the use of a small physical object lesson, a Lego.

“Of course an INTJ pastor would bring a Lego to teach a lesson.” Right? Curiously he also uses the “what’s wrong with this picture” approach, which I use all the time in lessons in front of people. The thing that surprises them, tricks them (ESFP); throws them off. We do like that stuff.

Just a bit more on analyzing religious groups

If you’re new to the experience of examining and analyzing religious groups, let me share one important secret with you: The religious person is attempting to communicate a given set of psychological values. Using this viewpoint, you can make the process of analysis somewhat less personal and avoid getting your feelings tangled into it.

In Jungian psychology, psychological values can be broadly divided into two groups: Perception and Judgment. How does the group see things—what kind of information do they pay attention to, and what do they think should be done about it? In what way do they think others see or perceive incorrectly, and in what way do they think others act or judge incorrectly? These are really powerful lines of inquiry.

Filed in: Books /10/ | Therapeutic Practice /144/ | Rest /21/ | Interests /111/ | Energy /120/