Our Small Island of Gamers

As February slouches by, several interesting events have occurred in our small community. Rumors have reached some of our overseas Associations about potential money trouble in GR/D. I believe I dealt with that item in my last column, but to restate the otherwise known, we progress, we survive, and we will prevail. So nerts to the naysayers.

The gaming industry, that is to say, the wargaming industry, has the same composition as any industry with good, bad, and ugly folks. Some of all kinds always exist at any given time in this hobby. The hobby survives them because the people that buy and play the games are numerous and smart. When confronted by one of the bad or ugly companies there is always heat and smoke, talk, controversy, speculation, gossip, and lots of rumors about this person and/or that product. It means nothing and is almost 100% El-Toro-Ca-Ca.

You are the final arbitrator of what works and what doesn't.

A simple proof of that was demonstrated with (get ready, I'm going to use the "S" word here) Supermarina. For several years we received requests for a naval system, tactical in nature, usable for the rest of Europa. Well, we tried it with Supermarina. And we got some really valuable feedback: too long, too complex, too cumbersome to work with the ground game. In other words, not very much fun to play. Now, not everyone thought of it this way, but about 90% of you did.

We went through an alpha and beta test of Supermarina and some work continues towards refining this project which we will offer to those of you who want it. But it will never be "the naval system" for Europa.

In fact, Europa might not end up with a unified naval system at all due to the variable nature of naval action that takes place around the theater. And, when compared to the ground and supporting air campaigns, naval activities remain a side show. In any event, we are continuing to search for that thin edge which will both enhance fun and demonstrate the effect and capabilities of the naval war (including some brand new concepts). Just stay tuned.

This gets me back to what I was talking about: the good, the bad, and the ugly.

The majority of companies try to fill the needs of their customers by providing games that people want. They then go the additional step by having some means of customer support, namely, they fix broken games, send new parts to replace damaged or missing ones, and so on. All the products you buy from them have an implicit warranty. We have taken it one step further, we have an explicit warranty printed on the first page of our rules.

Unfortunately, some companies produce games with only profit in mind. Worse, some companies seek profit while simultaneously looking to enhance their position within the hobby at the expense of the other companies by using negative advertising and outright prevarication.

We recently had such an example faxed to us by one of our distributors. When I replied to the offending company, I stated that companies within our small hobby generally tend to help each other, since none of us are a GM or IBM. I got no answer back, but then, I didn't expect one. So be it.

I am sorry to see such activities on the part of any company. As the executive director of GAMA I'm involved in disputes or misunderstandings between companies on an occasional basis. To date we have never had a war break out between companies because we were always able to arrive at a reasonable compromise that satisfied all parties.

There have been situations in the past where some companies chose not to cooperate and, in those few situations, the company soon disappeared from the scene because their negative attitude towards, and the resulting response from all segments of our hobby solved the problem-they were disowned. This supports a belief that I have: most wounds are self-inflicted.

However, any turmoil distracts from the primary objectiveimproving the hobby. I ignore most of the ca-ca because the objective takes most of my time and energy. In the past we have been questioned as to our motives, agenda, capabilities, and all the rest. Well, my attitude is to consider all such comments as thoroughly as possible.

When someone states a point of view, such as that expressed in Mr. Tonks's letter from Down Under (TEM #17), I respond so that everybody has a chance to see the situation from both perspectives. When the comments or suggestions are obviously nuts, well, go fish.

I read every letter. I may not write back that same day and if someone has a project they want done, or offers to help, they may need to give me a gentle kick-in-the-butt reminder to get my attention. Generally I will try to respond, but I do not claim to be perfect in this regard.

GRD STAVKA REPORT

As I write this column, John Astell, Rick Gayler, Arthur Goodwin, Victor Hauser, and yours truly are preparing to meet in Dallas during the last weekend in February. The purpose of our conference is to determine how best to direct Europa's course. I will give you a full report of the results in my next column. 'Til then. . .

"Operation Groza" Erratum:

The first sentence of Rule 6 should read: "The Soviet player receives several special benefits during his Jul I 41 player turn (only) as follows:" [Not "Jul II 41 player turn" as written.]

Next Issue

A Polish First to Fight Defense-in-Depth scenario from John Astell.
Detailed Designer's Notes on the Polish Armed Forces of September 1939.
A more refined treatment of Scorched Earth partisan rule 40.
A Second Front progress report.
A Europa East Front article focusing on the Soviet defense of Odessa.
Feedback from John Astell on a number of recent Europa topics.
And the usual array of regular columns, plus much more...