[Consim-l] Introductory games (was Re: Smithsonian Midway)

[Dave Kohr]

> > On 8/1/06, Mike  NotSpecified <blockhead at bresnan.net> wrote:
> >> It also does one other thing every introductory game should do, namely it
> >> does serve as a nice springboard to more complex games.

> On Tue, 1 Aug 2006 18:29:35 -0700
>  "Dave Kohr" <davekohr at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Why do you think every introductory game should do that?

On 8/1/06, Mike  NotSpecified <blockhead at bresnan.net> wrote:
> Well, isn't that the purpose of introductory?  To introduce people into the
> hobby?

This implies that, for one to be "in the hobby", one must play more
complex games. I take issue with this point.

I think there are plenty of low-complexity wargames that are
worthwhile to play in their own right, whether or not you use them as
a stepping-stone to more complex games. In fact, I would argue that
many of the best low-complexity games actually aren't very good
stepping-stones, because their mechanics are substantially different
from most higher-complexity games. Some examples are Bonaparte at
Marengo, the simpler of the Columbia block games, the simpler of the
card-driven games (such as We the People), and the Command and Colors
series (Battle Cry, Memoir '44, and C&C: Ancients).

Dave