Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site osiris.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!mhuxn!mhuxr!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!umcp-cs!aplvax!osiris!ken
From: ken@osiris.UUCP (Ken Harkness)
Newsgroups: net.games.board
Subject: Re: Opening Discussion
Message-ID: <514@osiris.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 5-Sep-85 17:43:16 EDT
Article-I.D.: osiris.514
Posted: Thu Sep  5 17:43:16 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 11-Sep-85 04:19:50 EDT
References: <394@brl-sem.ARPA>
Distribution: net
Organization: Johns Hopkins Hospital
Lines: 61

> 1)  What are the relative merits of political interaction games
> vs. conventional war games?
> 
I, like you, find political interaction games much more interesting
and creative.  I basically was never interested in conventional
war games, but instead like playing games such as Illuminati, Junta,
Cosmic Encounters (which doesn't really fit in, but is fun, and fast),
Kingmaker, and Diplomacy.  Forming and breaking alliances and making 
deals, etc, allows for greatest interaction.  One does have to 
remember, however, (in these types of games), not to let "real and 
personal feelings" enter into the game. Likewise, gaming results should
not affect your personal feelings about someone(s).
> 
> 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?

I think that if they are card players (I am an avid bridge player),
that they will find some board games very challenging and interesting.
I've never played Nuclear War.  You have to judge by the person --
some people are just not interested in gaming (I think everyone 
should try it once just to see what they think.  I have one friend
who dislikes political action games because he dislikes the idea of
any kind of backstabbing, etc, which is necessary).  A good first
step is to invite them over for a game of Risk -- see how many 
people get into it!
> 
> 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?

Well, I think it is a matter that some people aren't interested in 
the "human interaction"... witness all of the gamblers who sit at 
slot machines -- or blackjack -- there are other motivating factors...
Just the challenge or goal or search for the unknown is enough
for most people.  I find that I like to play computer games in
my spare time while waiting for "backups" etc... and when rogue and
hack came out, I played for about 2 weeks before the inevitable..
Computer games get boring after a while... either you crack the system,
or it becomes run-of-the-mill (I think that a multi-user game like
empire would be much more interesting, but I have never played one.

Addendum:  If you haven't played it.. try junta.. it's lots of fun.
(It takes place in the little south american area known as the 
"banana republic" and is basically a game of diplomacy with a bit of
dice.)

ken harkness...
ken!osiris!aplvax!umcp-cs....