The following are the results from the Alternative Gaming Survey included in The Herald #37. Twenty-two members responded, 20 through e-mail, and 2 through the U.S. postal system. Several surveys were only partially completed, thus not all questions have the same number of responses, and some chose options not originally included in the multiple choice questions. Where answers were not necessarily one of the options listed or expected (such as "yes" or "no" for question #5), I have endeavored to fit them into the most appropriate category. I have also included some of the ideas and commentary offered in the survey responses at the end of the summary results. Commentary ranged from light-hearted to constructive to deeply frustrated.

Despite the amount of discussion generated on the Great Lakes e-mail list, and the number of members with e-mail (at least 49%), just under 10 % of the membership responded to the survey in total.

Number of responses: 22

1) Should HMGS-Great Lakes allow alternative gaming in the form of alternative miniatures events at its conventions and what should the percentage of the total number of events be permitted?

8 a. Less than 10%
6 b. 10% to 25%
0 c. 26% to 50%
1 d. Unrestricted, i.e., no limits on games or formats
7 e. No alt gaming at GL events

2) If alt games were allowed in ANY percentage would you refuse to attend?

4 Yes (would not attend)
6 No (would still attend)
2 Maybe (would consider not attending, factors outside the scope of the this survey would be included in decision)

3) If alt games were allowed what is the MAXIMUM percentage that you would tolerate at any HMGS Great Lakes convention before you would consider not attending?

9 a. less than 10%
7 b. 10% to 25%
3 c. 26% to 50%
3 d. Unrestricted alt. gaming wouldn't bother me at HMGS events.

4) How important is this issue to you?

8 a. Vital. It may determine whether or not I remain an HMGS Great Lakes member.
5 b. Important. It may decide which conventions I attend within HMGS Great Lakes.
5 c. Of Interest. I'd like to see something done on the subject.
2 d. Huh, who me? I don't really care one way or the other. (PLEASE NOTE: This option can also be signified by not participating in this poll.)
1 e. Sick of hearing about it (added from one of the responses)

5) Are you subscribed to the Great Lakes members e-group?

17 Yes
4 No

6) If you are not subscribed, do you visit the e-group site on the web?

1 Yes
2 No (or very seldom)
17 Subscribed, thus question 6 is not applicable

7) What one thing would you most like to see added to Great Lakes conventions? (responses are summarized here, but generally offered explanation).

1 Better Flea Markets at the GL cons
1 Expert run demo games for new gamers
2 Seminars inc. painting, history, modeling etc.
3 More attendees
1 More dealers
2 Nothing more needed at this time
3 Better availability and/or quality of food
1 Need more ways to bring gamers together
1 Implement 4-hour time block gaming sessions at cons
1 Dancing Girls
1 Continue to focus on quality
1 Quieter/ better noise protected gaming rooms
2 Alt Gaming
1 Addition of several GL one-day mini-cons throughout region

Comments:

"A note on my answers.....I don't feel that an HMGS convention should be turned into another GW Games day. Historical events should definitely have priority over Alternative events. I feel that convention coordinators should not be constrained by some ratio set down by HMGS. I would rather see 3 Command Decision/2 Alternative events in a time slot than 5 CD events. Convention coordinators should have the freedom to make such decisions rather than be hamstrung by some limit on Alt. gaming."

"Better flea market. Perhaps it should be allowed to run from 5 pm to close each day. It has been weak so far. On a separate note, (we) were discussing that perhaps an option for alternate gaming would be to allow them on Sundays (if the membership was not inclined to allow every day) since attendance and the gaming on Sunday is a little weaker anyway."

"It seems to me that a lot of members wishes will not be met if that many want alt gaming, but it is disallowed just so we can say 'ALL HISTORICAL ALL THE TIME.' It also seems a 'No Brainer' to me that we are suddenly in a little bit of a dollar crunch. So slow and steady growth at our cons may not apply. We need to maximize our opportunities NOW! Will Drums make money? Who knows....... Will ATC when we move again? Probably, but any guarantees? I know that several of the dealers were disappointed with their sales. I know you are fair minded on this topic, Brian. I am not directing my questions solely to you. No answers are given by the board so..."

"I don't mean to be a snob or put down alternative gaming but I have seen several historical only miniature conventions go down the tubes once they allow alternative gaming. That will happen to AtC if we allow too many alt. gaming events. There are several historical miniature gamers who feel the same way. There are several conventions already that have alt. gaming. People complain those are bad. Then why don't they try to make those conventions better? I don't see people complaining about the 7YW convention in South Bend about not allowing Napoleonics. Finally, I still don't see why we can't attract new people to the hobby with historical miniatures. Isn't seeing a Napoleonic, WWII or ACW miniature game stirring enough? Sorry for getting on my soapbox but I wanted to say this. Thank you."

"Fixed 4-hour slot schedules instead of hourly, shotgun starts. It's much easier to plan a day of gaming and play more games."

Unsolicited feedback concerning alt gaming:

"While I am opposed to any alt gaming at HMGS GL conventions, I do play and enjoy a variety of alt games. However, I feel that HMGS GL is a historical miniatures group and should not stray from its core purpose in life."

"I think the current policy of allowing up to 10% 'alternative' gaming, IF there are empty slots to be filled is fine. Personally, I doubt if many non-wargamers would show up at an HMGS event (i.e., I don't see it as a vehicle for recruiting), but if some wargamers want to play with aliens, it doesn't bother me."

"If they (alt gaming events) are more than 10%, I would highly reconsider my possible attendance."

"I think it's ok to allow some alternative gaming, since there are a lot of 'close to historical' games such as future SF tank battles, 1930's-era 'alt.history' aircraft games and others such as the infantry 'shoot-'em-ups' using Space Man To Man rules developed in Toledo."

"I will certainly still attend (with some alt games), and if the amount and type of alt games is close to our historical pattern I see no problem. (If we get swarms of preteens and their 'magic' card games, or lots of trolls, orcs and dragons, then we drop this type of game, or spin it off into a separate game conference run by HMGS-GL members who wish to support that theme. A careful definition in the conference literature could set out these ground rules clearly in advance.)"

With respect to an upper limit of alt games being 25%: "I support a maximum limit due to space and time limitations, and especially because I don't want to detract from the 'historical' basis of the events. 'Alt games' should be an experiment, and a way to draw young gamers in to see the historical games, which must remain the dominant theme of any HMGS-GL event."

"(Alt games) seem to be an idea favored by a minority within the group, and it deserves to be treated as an idea worth consideration."

7) Things to add:
a) snack food and beverages (if it cam be done at reasonable prices);
b) introductory sessions where our expert members provide an overview of a rule set, and perhaps demo it for the other members.

"It's good to see that The Herald can be a useful vehicle for this sort of discussion and polling of the members. It makes the newsletter that much more useful and valuable to all of the readership."

"I hope this survey puts an end to this discussion on Alternative gaming! To tell you the truth, I don't know if I'll renew my membership. I came into gaming late and thanks to (a regional gaming group -- name edited in interests of anonymity), I've had a lot of fun. I went for the military gaming, but had a great time when they did Alt. gaming. I think others should have a chance to see if they like Alt. games or not."

"3.a. I would not like to see large numbers of alt, games, but they would not prevent me from attending."

"5. No, I quit the e-group because of all the whining on this issue.

6. No, see 5, above."

"7. Right now, I don't see a need to add anything, maybe in a few years a seminar or two on military history, painting, scenery building, etc., would be nice."

"10-25% I think some limit is needed to preserve our identity and our focus on history. I think the alternative crowd can help us financially."

"2) I would always attend."

"3) D. If unlimited alternative events are needed to keep cons financially solvent; so be it."

"4) A. Vital. I WILL remain with HMGS-GL as long as it lasts, HOWEVER, without financially solvent conventions and dealers our hobby and its social contributions (discussion & dissemination of historical information itself, family based activities of making models, figures, terrain & attending cons, etc.) would be significantly reduced if not lost altogether. Without solvent dealers and cons there is less need/use for a group like HMGS-GL."

"The amount and quality of food service needs to receive a higher level of priority/attention. I've been to too many conventions where the only things to eat or drink were caffeinated pop and candy bars, or else nothing at all. The guys that run the Michigan Miniatures Gamers events (Pro - or - Con, Battlefields etc.) at least manage to get some hot food (pizza & hot dogs, chili) and water at their events. Admittedly I've only been to one HMGS con, but not having to 'pack-in' food and drink for a 14 hour day of gaming sure improves my sense of enjoyment and level of play."

(Editor's Note: Thanks to Brian for all the work he put in tabulating the results and transcribing the comments. If anyone who responded does not see their particular viewpoint printed here, it is MY decision not to print it -- not Brian's. During my tenure as editor, I have made it my policy to not print submissions I feel are spiteful and harmful to Great Lakes as a whole. It is for that reason I remain NOT a member of the board. That way, the Board can always remain as a recourse to anyone who feels slighted by my policy. They can remove me from my editorial position at their will. If this sounds a little self-gratifying, please accept my apologies.)