It is commonly perceived among gamers that the fanbase of our hobby in the United States is constantly shrinking. This perception is an exaggeration. A recent poll on Consimworld, in fact, indicates quite the opposite.

In the 1980s and 1990s the demographics of conflict simulation markets turned the traditional game publishing business model inside out. Players aged into the low income-large debt period of life and stopped buying games to buy homes, get married, have kids, and buy minivans. Well, this was the general trend that game publishers hadn't planned for.

But I believe there is another element to the wargaming downturn and the recent upturn as well. I will call this the "separation" effect of gaming, and we all know this happens on and off among gamers (and among anyone that seeks entertainment). By "separation" I mean the tendency of placing the games in the category of frivolity and unimportance, whereas the really important aspects of life are handled in another realm altogether. Today, we can sense this problem when the hobby is not taken seriously, let us say, by the typical spouse (or girlfriend) of a wargamer.

I propose this is precisely because we haven't taken the games seriously enough to learn the lessons they attempt to teach us, whether they be history lessons, strategy lessons, or simply sportsmanship lessons. I do not want to imply that all the games we play can offer valuable lessons.

There is good news in the recent renaissance of conflict simulation-witness how Consimworld.corn has brought together this far-ranging community. Consider the strides made to learn the tastes and preferences of serious aficionados via the use of pre-order systems. I see these events as indicators that gamers and publishers are learning from the games. It was summarized well by Clausewitz: "It would be better, instead of comparing [war] with any Art, to liken it to business competition." Let's face it. We expose ourselves to war in these games. Maybe we do it as history buffs. That is fine. But if you start out this way, slowly and perhaps in a subtle and unconscious manner, you begin to see the better games as tools for living. If you can accept my premise that the games can teach us more than history, then I believe you can become another advocate for the hobby. Outsiders might discover through you that the hobby and real- life may benefit from each other.

It would be better, instead of comparing war with any Art, to liken it to business competition.

Conflict simulations should be a place where we have fun while learning some history and pushing around the cardboard. But let me add that conflict simulations also may be a source of personal development. The games can teach us the mental skills and pragmatic skills of playing well and living well- how best to use all your resources to achieve your objectives.

One thing a conflict simulation highlights in this real-world notion of strategy is the planning needed before action. The conflict simulations do not provide simple recipes for action. Instead, you learn in a kind of experimental setting certain basic principles that are common to many contexts. If in a real world situation, you supplement the general principles you have learned with information specific to your actual situation-then you can derive a successful strategy.

For example, if you play enough tennis or racquetball, you discover a general principle known as exploitation avoidance. You keep your opponent guessing, so that he doesn't take advantage of your weakness while you get the chance to surprise him. Tennis teaches you to exert maximum effort at the most crucial times, not at all times (otherwise your strength and stamina will fade and your opponent will dominate you). Another example I derive from the Campaigns of Napoleon series I call the trick-counter trick. You learn how to distinguish the real attack from the feint, while masking your own maneuvers that give you the advantage in the crucial battles. We can find lessons that apply to the real world concerning movement and attrition.

You need to preserve your resources until the crucial moment, and then use them with greatest intensity once that moment has arrived. Such lessons hold for real-life situations as well if we make an effort to learn from the really good games in the market-I mean to say the Really Good Games are just those that might help us in real world situations.

This is the most important and advantageous aspect of conflict simulations, even more important than the inherent history of the situations depicted in the games. The history in the games is important and often intellectually stimulating. I view conflict simulations as classrooms that can teach us about conflicts in personal relationships, decision making in business and finances-indeed any sort of interactions with individuals in varied walks of life. The way game publishers have made it to the Twenty-first Century, for example, is enlightening.

The revival of gaming in the last few years--some people have called it a renaissance--is partly savvy marketing by publishers. The lesson that the game publishers learned was that pride goes before a fall. Well, that's something we learn from books like The Iliad, but we don't really learn this lesson unless we experience it firsthand. The old model worked so well, the game publishers were not ready for the market crash. Publishers like AH and SPI thought their simple model, "if we build it, they will buy it," would work continuously. It didn't, so game publishing adjusted (we lost companies, founded new companies, struggling all the way in search of better ways to accomplish the tried and true model of game publishing). The Golden Age of Conflict Simulations we could call the 1970s (if I had to pick only one decade).

The Dark Age would be the 1980s and most the 1990s. We have an opportunity now to analyze the situation of the past--maybe someone will make a game about all of this?

The gamers aged and married. The demand for conflict simulation games fell through the proverbial floor, and gamers' kids played video games. Now most if not all of the current game companies are doing well, though it is not a sort of business marked by the level of sales and profit margins of the 1960s and 1970s. Partly the recovery in conflict simulations is due to demographics-many gamers are back.

Their kids are in college (or beyond) and the gamers have reached their income-earning peak. Less family expenses and more income translates into more money for spending on games. This demographics event connects to the publishers who have learned from the past, so we feel ready for this new and Better Marketplace. Oh, and note, that many of the better selling games are larger counter, larger hex types of games--these products appeal to the bifocal crowd.

But if game publishers are playing these games, they are likely learning from them as well. We must plan for the coming friction. The demographics shift that is coming within 10 to 15 years is going to make conflict simulation publishing once again a rocky road.

We need to step back and learn a lesson from the games. We have to plan for the circumstances, and we must realize that there will come a time when publishers will need to exert maximum efforts to keep loyal customers and attract new, younger, gamers. The lesson of trick and counter-trick may come in handy. For example, consider the recent marketing of the new 'toy soldier' games jammed with plastic pieces (and there are many more to come if we look at the marketing plans of a couple of the conflict simulation and game companies). This is a bold step, an attempt to marry the traditional board wargames and miniatures (used in the past with success). I recently bought $50 worth of 20mm Napoleonic figures to supplement my strategic-level Napoleonic wargames (like La Guerre de l'Empereur) and my 2-year-old has a bunch of extra pieces as well. This is no market thievery, because in the end it is a win-win kind of gamewe can crossbreed board and miniature gamers for the benefit of both communities.

"Only an immense force of will, which manifests itself in perseverance admired by present and future generations, can conduct us toward our goal."

We can learn another strategy from the miniatures community: bring the kids, get them involved and playing the games. This is one reason the miniatures gamers have more numbers and resiliency. Possibly, we should recall Clauswitz again: "...only an immense force of will, which manifests itself in perseverance admired by present and future generations, can conduct us toward our goal."

Things look bright for Operational Studies Group. Witness the many pre-order titles in the design and development queue that will come to market if you, the customer, decide to choose the title(s). A new Campaigns series game (the first new one in a long time!) dedicated to the Austerlitz campaign is on its way through production. And Wargame Design available in an on-line format for a very low annual subscription rate. Please have patience with us in the transition process. And take notice: we will maintain a hard-copy magazine for readers that like to feel the paper and smell the ink.

This bright future holds for other game publishers we know and support. The fan base is not shrinking. Instead, a better way to describe the market is that it is dynamic. The great news is game publishers have learned from playing the game of business the key to success-to Operational Studies Group's success especially-good people. You are an integral part of the Group.