Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-sem.ARPA Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!brl-tgr!brl-sem!jeffh From: jeffh@brl-sem.ARPA (the Shadow) Newsgroups: net.games.board Subject: Opening Discussion Message-ID: <394@brl-sem.ARPA> Date: Fri, 30-Aug-85 14:47:21 EDT Article-I.D.: brl-sem.394 Posted: Fri Aug 30 14:47:21 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 1-Sep-85 13:26:21 EDT Distribution: net Organization: only the Shadow knows Lines: 76 OH BOY !!!!! a pristine newsgroup just waiting for me jump in and dirty the waters! WHEEEEEE !! this is sort of like walking into a new house that was built just for you. all empty and ready to have the corners filled in with interesting stuff. ah well, enough celebrating. it's time for some serious game- oriented discussion. so i guess i'll start this off with a few open-ended discussion type questions: 1) What are the relative merits of political interaction games vs. conventional war games? I tend to prefer the political games because they usually pro- vide better opportunities for multi-player games. I almost in- variably prefer a 4-6 player game when I can find one. This is not always possible, of course, and that is when i really appre- ciate some of the better designed two-player games. They also seem to allow for more strategic flexibility (i.e. there is no definite opening strategy that will assure victory). Some of my favorites of this type are: Civilization (Avalon Hill): Long and moderately complex, but very playable once you get used to it. The game is played at several different levels: territory aquisition, trading, cultural growth. I highly recommend it. Illuminati (Steve Jackson Games): I reviewed this recently in net.games, so I'll just say that it is great for anyone with a slightly warped sense of humor and a cynical mind. Fast and playable. Diplomacy seems like it might be good game for that sort of thing, but I haven't played it yet. I will be starting one soon on the net, though. 2) How does one go about getting other people interested in "war games?" (using the term in its generic sense.) I have some friends who like cards (pinochle and spades, mostly) whom I would like to introduce to war gaming. I am going to try springing Nuclear War on them sometime soon. Then, if they like that, I might try a more conventional board game. Unfortunately, most of my games are somewhat unconventional. Does anybody have any suggestions for a good next step? 3) Not really a question at all: I have great difficulty understanding the current computer game craze. I don't just play games for the strategic challenge, but for the human interaction, as well. Some my gaming friends have been my best friends, on and off the board. I sometimes worry about a society that is so willing to abandon human society to interact with a computer. Anybody else feel this way? Anybody think I'm all wet? Oh well, that's enough philosophising for now. Nice to "see" you all here. Y'all come back now, hear? "Do not throw cigarette butts in the urinals ... ... for they are subtle and quick to anger" the Shadow ARPA: UUCP: {seismo,decvax,cbosgd}!brl!jeffh