An interesting little note crossed my desk the other day, and it served greatly to relieve the tedium of dealing with clients whose only question is to ask why they aren't being released after beating up seven elderly women in front of twenty-three witnesses and two police officers.

The note was brief and quite succinct, and it came from Howard Thompson at Metagaming. Paraphasing its contents (mostly because I filed it in the circular file), the note stated that no one was to use the term "Micro-Game" any more; Howard had ostensibly nailed that one up lock, stock, and barrel.

Exactly to what extent I couldn't use the term "micro-game" was not too clear; I assume it was in a manufacturing sense. If, in a review, I were to call The Longest Day Avalon Hill's newest micro-game, aside from the fact that my credibility rating - which is already fairly low with Eric Goldberg - would drop three notches below that of Baron Munchausen, I'm not too sure what poor old Howard could do to me, aside from venting his spleen in my direction.

Now, Gertrude Stein once said, "A rose is a rose is a rose . . ." But she hadn't invited Howard T. to her soiree that evening, so he was sadly misinformed as to this bit of naturalistic approach to legal matters. Not being a trademark specialist, I can't say whether Metagaming can actually trademark a term such as micro-game; obviously someone thinks they can because they've gone ahead and done it.

I now expect to see, in rapid succession, Stephen Cole grabbing off the phrase "mini-game"; OSG opting for "Nappy-game"; and finally SPI chiming in with Steve Patrick and a "letters patent" for "gonzo-game". (Unfortunately, there are some companies who have a common-law trademark for "turkey game", but that is a subject for other columns.)

The thrust of all this is not what is being done, but that it is being done at all, like Samuel Johnson's famousclogact-a phrase also reminiscent of some recent games. Litigation has come to the wargame industry, and few are the companies that are not embroiled in some sort of legal maneuvering, some of which is in dead earnest and most of which is remarkably silly.

I'd categorize Metagaming's paternal instinct for microgames within the latter category -- although I'm sure it's not so to them and, considering Howard Thompson's recent letter in the Game Designers' Guild Newsletter (which most of you readers mercifully do not have to read) in which he stated a distinct lack of affinity for men of the Bar, also somewhat ironical.

None of this even remotely affects the players - except that they have to be careful to whom they speak when they use the term microgame, or discuss the merits of who actually designed D&D, or how many roads there actually are to Washington. All of which brings us to the matter at hand, the actual content of these micro-minimum-get-capsule-dwarvish-munchkin like teenie-ween itty-bitty gamettes. Whatever you call them, they're sweeping the industry like a kitchen full of mothers-in-law.

Small Sized

It's hard to remember when the small-sized game first made an appearance. Years ago there was only one size of game, with a few minor variants. Most designers and publishers felt that there was a minimal (or maximal) surface on which you could play and design a historical simulation worth its salt. (Remember, the fewer the number of hexes the less the room for maneuver, interaction, and chance.)

SPI probably broke that mold with its Quad games, which were packaged individually in folders and zip-lock bags of a size somewhat larger than the present mini- stuff. You could probably say they were "macromicro" games. Yet it wasn't until Metagaming introduced Ogre, et al, several years back that the mini-size craze took shape.

Since then virtually everybody except, perhaps, for Avalon Hill - has taken a shot at producing mini-games. SPI pumps out their capsules by the fistful; OSG produces several every few months; Task Force relies on minis almost entirely; and even companies such as The Chaosium have used the format with success. Rather than a craze or a fad, micro-games (sorry Howard, I ran out of adjectives) seem to be a trend, or, even more, a specific marketing area. They are obviously here to stay.

A good microgame (I give up, I can't hold out any longer ... I have to say it) is a felicitous combination of sight, simulation, and size. The best ones not only provide nice graphics and interesting situations, but are also easy to set up and play, with finish times under three hours - which is rare these days for other games.

They also allow some publishers to experiment with some unusual subject matters without having to bite the big financial bullet that even a normal-sized game demands. (And the mark-up on these little ones is inversely proportional to their size, so no one's crying at the teller's window, either.)

Thus we've seen SPI/Greg Costikyan's monumental seller, The Creature That Ate Sheboygan, a subject and title that would have been laughed out of existence 3- 4 years ago, and even Robin Hood, OSG/Joe Biscio's interesting taptap-you're-it treatment of the old legend. The variety of minigames is almost as great as that of the normal segment of the hobby, and the fringe areas explored are even wider. Using four recent examples - Twentieth Maine, Prochorovka, Rommel's Panzers, and Panzer Pranks it can easily be seen how both standard and unusual fare is handled at this level of design.

The most visually striking example of what can be done with miniature games is that of OSG, which has rapidly become the most graphics-oriented company in the field.

It is my opinion that, even with their few rare overindulgences, OSG produces the best looking maps in the industry. And they do not draw the line with their smallersized games, such as 20th Maine, a company level simulation of the Little Round Top scenario at Gettysburg.

From the stunning cover-sheet down to the nice game-map, this is first- class artwork, the type of graphics that will and should - make Larry Catalano as well-known as both Redmond Simonsen (for whom he worked for many years) and Rich Banner. The game itself, is the design of David Martin and Leonard Millman - who seem to specialize in Little Round Top, a subject on which you will be seeing much more in the future in what will be one of the greatest orgies of overkill by one design team on one subject since they loosed Danny Parker on the Bulge.

Dr. Martin is a friend of mine, and he is an excellent Civil War scholar and enthusiast. Those of you familiar with my TSS-system games will recognize his name: he has done most of my unit and strength research on Bloody April and the not-so-quickly forthcoming Antietam, as redoing the OB's for TSS itself. The hard information in the game is thus excellent (albeit there not being too many units to worry about).

The system itself is second generation TSS, with some nice flourishes. The scale is 20 yards, 6 minutes, and ten men to the point; all very tactical. The problem with the simulation is that the TSS system is not a very tactical one in and of itself. It was meant to simulate a battle, not the tactics involved in that battle (although the flavoring is, by nature of the scale, tactical indeed). Granted, Martin and Millman have interjected several changes and extensions of the system, including an excellent command system that would be unworkable with any more counters than they presently have (about 15-20 companies per side) and a nice rule for fixing bayonets.

The game is still very much a direct relative of TSS, and that carries with it the pros and cons of that system, especially at a much reduced scale. My general feeling is that, because of the size of the game itself, the design choice was most felicitous, as the game moves quickly and flows smoothly, with the added benefit of playing a familiar system. That the game ultimately fails to simulate the tactics of storming a small hill held by a semi-entrenched force is unfortunate.

However, this does not take away from the fact that the game is fun to play and the overall view of the simulation - i.e., what happened and why, if not truly how - is pretty well done. The added touches, such as having leaders pay costs for what their companies do up to the extent of their leadership capabilities, and the use of rearward movement are also nice, and the overall impression is that the $4 you spend on this game is truly well-spent.

I point out again that 20th Maine costs $4, because that $4 is, I believe, just $1 more than what you pay for Metagaming's Rommel's Panzers (which arrived in the new, boxed version, and very nicely boxed it is). I am aware that, in terms of marketing, Metagaming pioneered the micro-field, to the point where they really do little else, having now unloaded "Space Gamer". They have kept their costs down on most of their micros to $3; but for that $3 you get an awfully chintzy physical product, especially when you compare it to what you can get for $4 from some companies.

The map for Rommel's Panzers is rescued from being black on white by the addition of several lines of red ink; in effect it is a two color map. Granted, the desert is not conductive to flights of graphic fantasy, but RP's map looks like any other Metagaming map dull and lifeless. The counters are still printed on thinboard, which bends when you breath on it, and the use of color in the counters is also quite Calvinistic. The rules booklet is neatly printed, but it's a bit small for my tastes - sort of like those religious pamphlets you get stuck with on the subway. And the new box, although certainly being a major improvement over the old zip-lock bag, is also devoid of color or panache (and not very eyecatching in terms of sales). It is also further ruined by an attack of cutes in the game notes on the back.

The game itself is not bad, being a rather simple simulation of desert warfare that still manages to maintain fairly good flavor. One of the nicer, simplydone rules concerns the fact that you have a table to see whether you actually hit the target before you go to the old 2-1 and roll-the-die for result stuff. The added fillip of target acquisition is nicely handled and well within the range of game simplicity. Movement rates are also high enough so that the player feels he is not just inching along and rolling dice, as is the main problem with AH's Tobruk.

Units are individual tanks, trucks, AT-guns, etc., and the sequence of play keeps everything flowing. The rules booklet does have one serious blunder, however, one which is sure to screw up many players. The unit example mixes up the Movement Factor with the Defense Factor (aside from the fact that the word "factor" is inappropriate and sure to bring down the wrath of both Edwin Newman and William Safire). I discovered that when I saw that my Matildas had less than 50% the defensive strength of Pzll's, although they could move the length of the board in a single gulp. It made for interesting - if somewhat weird - play for about 10 minutes.

Despite this - and despite the lack of flair in the production end - this is not a bad buy for an evening's entertainment. It's certainly a lot better than some of Metagaming's SF/Fantasy titles.

Task Force Games

Several years ago Stephen Cole was the enfant terrible of wargaming; the majority of his games were just terrible. He disappeared for a few years along with his magazine "Jagdpanther" - and he has now sufaced back in Texas with Allen Elldridge's Task Force Games. In a very quick time (they started publication late spring 1979), Task Force has put out a bushel of relatively competent games on a wide variety of subjects (but mostly science fiction and fantasy). Initially, their games were thinly-disguised rip- offs of Star Wars, Star Trek, Alien, etc. Lately, though, a few historical subjects have been creeping in, and Cole's Prochorovka is probably the best of the lot certainly a much more mature and complete work than his previous Jagdpanther efforts.

The subject is the massive tank battle that highlighted the larger, major Kursk battle in July 1943. Units are battalions (usually either tanks or rifle) and hexes are 400 meters across. The map is clear, if unspectacular (but not as Spartan as Metagaming's), but the counters are a mite crude albeit printed on substantial stock. While not being a totally professional job in the glossy- OSG/SPI/AH sense it is certainly acceptable.

The game offers no innovations, and most of it is both recognizable and pretty simple. Yet Cole has taken some old rules and used them in a fashion which recreates the absolutely wild and woolly tank battle around Prochorovka. There are no ZOC's, and units intermingle freely, like teams in a soccer match. There being no front - although play is divided, by terrain, into three specific areas - players must move fast and react even faster. The play sequence is short - move/fight - and the CRT is pretty basic (although it does use a differential).

The result is a fast-playing exciting game in which neither player can predict what will happen next. While it offers little insight into tactics or even operational maneuvers, it does provide a good feel for the actual battle in a basic, historical sense. It also provides an interesting counterpoint to Eric Goldberg's remake of Kursk for SPI. For $4, the player could do a lot worse.

Panzer Pranks

Our final entry in the midget sweepstakes is an unusual item from The Chaosium -a firm that seems to specialize in the unusual. It's hard to really decide at what level to treat PanzerPranks, designed by Kurt and Steve Lortz. Although the subject is, basically, WWII tactical combat, that really is not what the game is about.

A good deal of it is some pretty broad - and occasionally very funny - humor. There's no map to speak of (there is a plain hexsheet printed and bound with the rules), but the counters are fairly nice. I would quibble at some of the values given the Italian M/13 seems to be stronger than the Stuart Honey, which is certainly not what one would find in a "serious" game - but, then again, when you have a table of term definitions to use - such as "Die Amerikanersind kaput", "Vroosh", and my old favorite, "Budda-buddabudda" - who checks out numbers?

The rules for play are quite simple, but some are bordering on the insane. I do not think this was really intended to be played, although it certainly can be. If it is, unless you are in a mellow and somewhat silly mood, it will all be rather boring and certainly not too incisive. Then again, most written humor tends to lose its impact the second time through, and most of the fun in this item is in reading it for the first time.

After all, the designers admit that the reason they did the game was because anything with the word "Panzers" sells - which is certainly true - and as a Bibliography they use the War in the Pacific Seminar at Origins '78 (although none of the scenarios takes place in the Pacific) plus GI Combat comic books and old S&T's (which, in many respects, are interchangeable). So, if you've been raised on Humphrey Bogart, Conrad Veidt, and/or Greg Costikyan, this should be your meat. If not, spend your $4 elsewhere.

Two things I feel should be added here. One is that you can get a pretty good game for $3-4, and the ratio of enjoyment to bucks is often higher with the smaller games than with many larger, more hyped efforts. And finally, it occurs to me that I ran across the term "micro-game" many years before Metagaming started to use it - specifically I remember seeing it in GDW's Crimea. For whatever it's worth, Howard, put that in your Air Eater and chomp on it.