4 ms·

Even simultaneous turn based strategy games take hours. I cannot imagine the time commitment for non-computer managed strategy games. I also don’t understand th

Even simultaneous turn based strategy games take hours. I cannot imagine the time commitment for non-computer managed strategy games. I also don’t understand the point unless it’s mostly about face to face interaction.

cl42 2y ago
I believe in this case that's very much the goal -- less about who wins, and more about the options/tactics debated to inform actual military battle prep.
ranger207 2y ago
It's about the face-to-face decision making and teambuilding. The lack of a computer is also somewhat of a bonus as it forces players to be intentional about processes, because in battle the computer probably won't be able to handle every process that comes up and so experience doing it by hand is useful
- chaostheory 2y ago
  I hope that they at the very least use a computer to calculate the outcomes of a battle.
  - KineticLensman 2y ago
    > I hope that they at the very least use a computer to calculate the outcomes of a battle. From the article: The real core mechanic is how dice are used in the game. The dice act as an instant adjudicator and the system uses different sizes of dice that can be adjusted during game play. The map and counters also encode a lot of rapidly accessible state information. Using a computer would require all of this state info to be maintained in the computer, which would be a very different game, probably without the person to person interactions that make the game what it is.
    - chaostheory 2y ago
      This sounds extremely inefficient and even Luddite like. Having a computer involved wouldn’t reduce interaction. It would allow you to drastically increase the game speed.
      - KineticLensman 2y ago
        > It would allow you to drastically increase the game speed. A lot of the value of these games is the human interaction of several people working closely around the same table, not sat at separate screens interacting via the systems rather than each other. These sorts of games have real value for training senior decision makers whose day job is all about personal interactions, e.g. gold or silver commanders in a blue light emergency response scenario. They need to get into the syndicate room and immediately start to discuss how to respond to a crisis, not learn a new game interface.
        chaostheory 2y ago
        You don’t need a separate computer per person, just per team. You probably only need a single computer for the entire game. This is really bad mental gymnastics.
livrem 2y ago
Back when I had more free time I played in some really long non-computer games like that. It was great to have a group that got together 1-2 evenings per week, played for a few hours to complete one or a few turns. The alternative is to get together and play for a long day or weekend, but many games are much too long for that. I played one earlier this month with six other players (in two teams). We started in the morning and played til late in the evening, but we did not get halfway through the game. It was enough to see what side was likely to win. That is the usual outcome in my experience. More common these days is to use a tool like VASSAL (https://vassalengine.org/ https://vassalengine.org/) to play those games online.

cl42 2y ago

I believe in this case that's very much the goal -- less about who wins, and more about the options/tactics debated to inform actual military battle prep.

ranger207 2y ago

It's about the face-to-face decision making and teambuilding. The lack of a computer is also somewhat of a bonus as it forces players to be intentional about processes, because in battle the computer probably won't be able to handle every process that comes up and so experience doing it by hand is useful

chaostheory 2y ago
I hope that they at the very least use a computer to calculate the outcomes of a battle.
- KineticLensman 2y ago
  > I hope that they at the very least use a computer to calculate the outcomes of a battle. From the article: The real core mechanic is how dice are used in the game. The dice act as an instant adjudicator and the system uses different sizes of dice that can be adjusted during game play. The map and counters also encode a lot of rapidly accessible state information. Using a computer would require all of this state info to be maintained in the computer, which would be a very different game, probably without the person to person interactions that make the game what it is.
  - chaostheory 2y ago
    This sounds extremely inefficient and even Luddite like. Having a computer involved wouldn’t reduce interaction. It would allow you to drastically increase the game speed.
    - KineticLensman 2y ago
      > It would allow you to drastically increase the game speed. A lot of the value of these games is the human interaction of several people working closely around the same table, not sat at separate screens interacting via the systems rather than each other. These sorts of games have real value for training senior decision makers whose day job is all about personal interactions, e.g. gold or silver commanders in a blue light emergency response scenario. They need to get into the syndicate room and immediately start to discuss how to respond to a crisis, not learn a new game interface.
      - chaostheory 2y ago
        You don’t need a separate computer per person, just per team. You probably only need a single computer for the entire game. This is really bad mental gymnastics.

livrem 2y ago

Back when I had more free time I played in some really long non-computer games like that. It was great to have a group that got together 1-2 evenings per week, played for a few hours to complete one or a few turns. The alternative is to get together and play for a long day or weekend, but many games are much too long for that. I played one earlier this month with six other players (in two teams). We started in the morning and played til late in the evening, but we did not get halfway through the game. It was enough to see what side was likely to win. That is the usual outcome in my experience. More common these days is to use a tool like VASSAL (https://vassalengine.org/ https://vassalengine.org/) to play those games online.