A close run thing or a sure thing?

What type of gamer are you?

I often wonder! What do you think?

So often I find myself cheering on the side I’m playing as a finely tuned scenario draws out to the end the final dramatic conclusion. Will your side prevail against your worthy opponent? Will that 6 or 11 or 1 rolled make all the difference in the last action of the last impulse of the last turn?

As always there are many different types of gamers and styles in our little corner of the gaming world.

My Setup vTom.

The thrill of a close game is in the main a good thing. These scenario designs, particularly down at the tactical level may often sacrifice historical accuracy for game play thrills and play balance. Yes even your ASL historical module scenarios are tuned for good if not great play. One of the masters of scenario design in the modules for Lock n Load was Mark Walker. He somehow managed to constantly make the game play thrilling and engaging in nearly every scenario he designed.

At the Operational scale it is often a more challenging exercise to allow the history to be represented honestly while still providing the game play entertainment that you might hope. Many times I’ve seen excellent players come to grips with the system mechanics and rules nuances quickly and use that along with good tactics to steam roll to the win in a fashion that belies the historical underpinnings of the game. But that is a topic for another post.The point here is they can potentially turn a scenario on its head and make it a sure thing.

The closeness built into an unbalanced situation can often ‘make’ a game feel more balanced than it was historically, as perhaps you strive to beat the historical result, time table or some other metric.

I think there are a few basic different types of player.

  1. The smart system player
  2. The historical hindsight player
  3. The strategist

There are likely more types but these are the ones I see most often. That pesky guy who regardless of the history, the period, the mechanics just dives into the system and identifies the most deadly efficient way to stomp out the victory using what he has on hand and how the rules work! He wants to understand what makes the system tick and get after it! In these cases I find the learning experience fascinating and will always take away lessons to be reapplied elsewhere.

The second profile is the dude/dudette that knows the specifics of the battle, or operation and understands where things went wrong and can mitigate those errors to their advantage. It clearly pays to be a student.

Of course a very formidable foe is one who can do both!

Grand Tactical Wellington’s Victory

The third category the strategist, is the person who looks at the Victory Conditions, assesses the forces, builds a plan and attempts to use the time in game to their best understanding of the system in order to create a winning strategy.

Much of my game play and the effort invested to apply strategy and tactics from my learning and reading over the past 24-36 months on The Operational Art of War and concepts around OODA loops etc they have really helped develop or mature personal game play.

I’m typically the least knowledgeable about the system  and the history, though I try to read as much as possible on the topic we play opposed, as well as trying as well to be reasonable solid on the system.

All of you buggers are too experienced and well read by half!

It is often the last category that can win almost any game in any circumstances. Often thwarting smart scenario design, historical realities, and design for effect rules and mechanisms. It is often this player who can pull that victory out on the last turn, move, combat or die roll!

What type of player are you?

Who do you like to play against?