It seems as though we can hardly turn around without hearing some complaint about the glut of games on the market. Scarcely a month passes without our receiving a number of letters voicing this complaint, and every issue of the popular wargaming magazines seems to devote some section to this problem. With all these people protesting, we can't help but give further consideration to the basic question at hand - are there too many wargames on the market? I contend that the answer is no; the large number of games is an asset, not a liability, to the hobby as a whole.

When we take a closer look at these objecting letters, we find that they have one thing in common: none of the writers are really worried about the fate of the hobby. Many of these writers rant about how they cannot possibly afford to purchase all of the games being printed.

This objection condenses to the demand, "I can't buy all of the games published, so publishers should reduce their output so that I can." Naturally, this position is ridiculous; one wonders why these people are not complaining about the large number of historical books published each year - surely they cannot afford to buy all of those.

A somewhat smaller portion of those objecting make the more reasonable complaint that they simply cannot tell which games they want to buy. Although this is a definite problem, a reduction in the games printed each year is not the best way to solve it. A more reasonable solution would be to provide short descriptions of new games in the hobby magazines. Even now, this step is being taken; sections of "player's notes" are appearing more and more frequently, while some magazines have had such sections for some time.

Not one letter that I have read claims that we should reduce game production because there are too many games for the market to support. This is just as well, since all of the evidence tends to support the opposite theory, namely, that the wargaming market can and does sustain the current number of games.

For most companies, 1977 was an excellent year; furthermore, we observe that the companies which published the most games tended to fare the best. True, a few companies are collapsing, but this can be attributed to reasons other than a glut of games. Perhaps it is possible to overburden the wargaming market, but it is clear that we have not yet done so.

The advantages of publishing many new games are two-fold. First, with many games, we can cover topics formerly ignored simply because there was more interest in other areas. If only five new games could be designed each year, you can bet that most of them would be on World War II, and that none would be science-fiction or some of the other popular new subjects.

Secondly, we can form and implement many new design techniques. Back in the old days, when only a few games were released each year, every game tended to have the same combat system, the same movement system, etc. Only in the past few years have we seen really new ideas for simulations. Sure, designers come up with an occasional loser, but the bad ideas are weeded out and not used again. The good ideas are saved, to be used and improved upon in later games. This process will improve the average quality of future games which, of course, is the main objective for the wargaming hobby.

Starting with the next issue, we plan to add yet another regular section to the Grenadier. What we have in mind is sort of a group game review, open to the public. Each issue, we will announce the title of the next game to be reviewed. Readers can then write in their opinions of the game, and in the subsequent issue we will print as many of these mini-reviews as space permits. We will then have a collection of many short but different reviews on the subject game.

Naturally, we don't care whether your review is favorable or not. Authors should, of course, have some familiarity with the subject game. Also, in order to print as many different reviews as possible, we ask that you keep your reviews short; try to observe an upper limit of 500 words. All submissions are subject to editing, particularly those that exceed the above limit.

One last thing: the topic for next issue's "roast." We've decided to start with a Workshop game, and we selected the revised edition of Bar Lev as the first subject. The subject for future reviews will be announced with the printing of the reviews in the next issue.