Re: Card initiative

In a message dated 8/28/02 11:33:20 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
gamers@ameritech.net writes:

> There is a major problem in using cards to activate units. With lets
say 
> 8 units (cards) total and
> highly experienced players (1 - 2 minutes per unit) a turn could be 
> completed 8 to 16 minutes
> with average of 12 minutes. Thus your local game would show cards to 
> work out extremely
> well.
> 
> Now go to a convention with six people per side (12 units - cards) and

> people with
> various experiences (1 to 5 minutes per unit) and a turn could take
from 
> 12 to 60 minutes
> with average of 30 minutes. The problem is that for 90% of that time 
> most of the people
> are sitting around doing nothing. Nothing makes a game die faster then

> doing nothing.
> 
> The record waste of time game I've been to was after waiting 30
minutes 
> I went out and
> ate lunch came back after 45 minutes and still had to wait to move.
> 
> 

I think this is a fact of life with the majority of con games with lots
of 
participants. Your choices are:
A. Divide everyone into two armies and alternate sides having a complete
go 
ala 40K.
B. if you still want to alternate units you can appoint a leader for
each 
side who designates when units activate or
C, use card initiative.

Let's rule out A as it does not yield the kind of game most mature
gamers 
enjoy (40K fans please forward your flames to /dev/null)

B can leave you not only with the boredom of long spaces between when
you 
activate, but the tyranny of the acting army leader telling you what to
do 
all the time. You get to be a glorified lead pusher. Now sometimes it is

appropriate for the leader to tell you what to do, but I have been in
con 
games where you are always told what to do. It sucks.

Choice C can lead to boredom between activations, but at least you
usually 
get to keep your freedom of choice. It also works really well in games
with 
more than two factions.

I think both B and C can suffer from poor con game design. Often what
was a 
swell game when you worked it out with one of your friends, or several
of 
your regular gaming buddies, doesn't work out between a larger group of 
strangers. many con game designers overreach.

I have participated in con games under all three methods and have had
good 
and bad experiences in all methods. It all depends on how well the
scenario 
was designed and how compatible you are with that particular set of con
goers.

My all time biggest disaster was playing a game of Star Wars macrotures
at 
one of the Dexcons. Dozens of beautiful ship models, some four feet
long. The 
game started around 10 or 11pm. By 2:30am I had made one 12" move and my
next 
turn was no where in site. It was card driven. 

On the other hand, I played in a game of Blood and Swash at ColdWars and
that 
was card driven and the action was nonstop. I had a blast! 

It all reverts to good con game design: select the right rules/mechanics
to 
allow everyone an opportunity to participate by playing the game.
Sitting for 
long periods of time doing nothing or putting someone in a position
where 
there moves are dictated for them is counter to the objective.

Martin