Re: Suggestions and Advice Solicited!

On Tue, 02 Jan 2001 21:39:04 EST, Glenn M Wilson <triphibious@juno.com>
wrote:

>Playing 'people wise' (or 'ship wise' for the naval types) seems to not
>be a positively reinforced value in war games/war game circles. 

I liked what you were saying about your historical games. I often play
to a
"people wise" method. I know that after we play our scenarios we sit
back and
analyse who REALLY won. Often it's, "Well, you didn't make the scenario
objectives. But I think you probably did the right thing preserving your
force." or something like that. 

I had a very interesting game with a friend who is writing a novel. It's
an
alternate American Civil War novel, where the war takes place 10 years
earlier. We ran a scenario from his book, using the GDW "Soldier's
Companion"
rules and stats from about the time of the Mexican-American War. We
didn't
play competitively, but co-operatively. We both played both sides. We
discussed general strategies, and then discussed what each side would do
per
turn for what was best for them. No surprises, of course, but it was for
a
novel. (The funniest part was when a main character in the novel had his
figure wounded. My friend looked at me and said, "I wanted him wounded
in the
battle! I guess this is where it happens...") There are a number of
co-operative board games out now. It seems to be a trend. I have yet to
play a
co-operative SG2 or FT game (not sure FT would work with it, but SG2
could). 

Allan Goodall		       awg@sympatico.ca
Goodall's Grotto:  http://www.vex.net/~agoodall

"Surprisingly, when you throw two naked women with sex
toys into a living room full of drunken men, things 
always go bad." - Kyle Baker, "You Are Here"