Now this was a computer I could actually do things with!  It had a great manual, and we got “Appleworks” an early office bundle of word processing, spreadsheet and database.  But perhaps best of all, I was able to buy games to play on it!

It wasn’t too long before I discovered strategy games.  And I quickly determined that complex wargames were an ideal use for a computer.  My history with various cardboard wargames had been I would buy them, study them, and then almost never play them.  On the Apple, I would actually play them!  And an added bonus was that I didn’t have to read the entire manual.  Instead the computer enforced the rules.

I don’t recall the sequence of events, and they don’t really matter.  But I discovered two lines of games for the Apple that I dearly loved.  One was a series of games written by David Landry – Gettysburg, Chickamauga, and Sons of Liberty.  Good games, now lost to me due to changing operating systems.

Eventually people stopped writing for the Apple II, and it was time to either move to a Mac, or go the PC route.  Looking at the amount of software that was available, we opted to get a PC.  And I discovered my sort of games were also available.  One day, I found Panzer General…

Panzer General turned out to be a big hit with me.  I loved the game, and was delighted to realize it was part of a series of games.  The “5 Star General” series.  I bought them all.  Panzer General had been ported over to Windows 95 by the time I discovered it.  But all the other titles in the series were older DOS games.  There was Allied General, an obvious companion to Panzer General (but not quite as much fun), then there was Fantasy General, which was great!  Instead of Panzers you recruited trolls and other fantasy creatures.  I loved this one so much I still have the old DOS version around here somewhere.  There were others too.  I remember there was a Space Empire version, which somehow failed to catch my imagination.  Perhaps more, its been a long time now.

But I must not have been alone in liking Panzer General the most.  Because along came Panzer General II, and a damn good game that turned out to be!   And then People’s General brought the conflict up to near modern times, and life was good!  But then the folks at SSI seemed to lose the groove.  They issued a couple more Panzer General Games – a 3D version and one other I cannot clearly recall, other than I didn’t like it.  It’s worth noting that I was playing on Windows 95 and then Windows 98, unless DOS was called for.

SSI had one more gift to give.  They issued David Landry’s Age of Rifles.  This was a great game, and surpassed even Sons of Liberty as my favorite 17th/18th century-based wargame.  It was well enough received they even put out an expansion for it!

But then, sad news,  SSI closed its doors.  My favorite computer wargame company was no more.  Time marched on, Windows XP became the inevitable future, which I ultimately had to migrate to when I got a new computer.  But I was okay, because I could still play my old games on the new computer.  But then – disaster!  I still recall how angry I was when I discovered that a service patch to XP broke my PC’s ability to play the old DOS and Win 95 games.

Worse, the popularity of Warcraft and Starcraft had changed the way people made computer strategy games.  Instead of the classic UGOIGO format I had loved, everything coming out was now an RTS – real-time strategy game – which turned the strategy games into arcade like games.  Eventually I pretty much gave up on playing wargames on my PC.  I would play Warcraft II or Starcraft (they are good games), but part of me would pine for the older style games.

This situation persisted for quite a while.  But one day I heard about a game company that was releasing a game by Gary Grigsby.  Gary Grigsby was a game author I recognized from the old SSI days.  I had played some of his early games.  I never liked them as much as the David Landry games, but still – worth checking out!

This led me to Matrix Games, and I enjoyed Gary’s World War 2 game – the title which I cannot recall right now – but it was a bit too close to Axis and Allies.  Some fun to play, but not entirely satisfying.  I discovered that when I changed computers again, this time to Windows  Vista, that I could no longer play this game either.  So I decided to buy another game from Matrix Games, and I selected Operation Barbarossa, which was reputed to be similar to Panzer General.  Sadly I could not get it run, and after getting frustrated with Matrix Game’s tech support, I gave up.

Then, out of Russia, came a game called Fantasy Wars.  It was apparently inspired by Fantasy General, so I bought it, and liked it enough to buy the sequel Elven Legacy.  These were quite fun to play, and I still keep them nearby, and will play them occasionally.  And because I am a stubborn cuss, I still had the download file for Operation Barbarossa on my desktop.  Over a year (maybe 2) after I bought it, I decided to try again, and voila! Suddenly it loaded properly!  Much to my delight, now I was able to play Operation Barbarossa.  And a darn good game it is, too!  Which leads me to the current moment…

Matrix Games recently sent me a holiday sale flyer, announcing a sale on their library of games.  They called out a new game called Panzer Corps.  The successor to Panzer General?  Color me intrigued.  So I bought.

What a blast!  This is the game I’ve been wanting for years.  I am very glad.  It’s like finding an old lost friend again!

Last Sunday I bought a new printer.  I opted for a different unit, one that requires less bending of the paper – it feeds from the back.  I was initially pleased with the printer, and excited that it was a wi-fi printer, allowing me to set it up in a different room (no printer cable!).  But just 5 days later I am now unable to print again.  Somehow the new printer has managed to break my “print spooler” on my lap top.  Grrr.

Last night I wasted much of my evening trying to re-enable my print spooler.  No dice.  I have an e-mail off to my printer manufacturer.  I’m hoping they know how to fix this issue.  I find this sort of junk very frustrating.

Sorry for the lack of gaming content!

So for a spot of amusement, I thought I’d list the games I own that refer to bad weather…

A Few Acres of Snow – And in my opinion, a crackin’ good game!

Der Untergang von Pompeji – Okay that’s a stretch!

Snow Tails – And I will admit, I don’t quite get what a “snow tail” might be, except perhaps the thing the driver of the sled might see!

Tyranno Ex! – Okay this is actually about climate change, and the title doesn’t really refer to the weather, per se… but I’m running out of candidates!

Huh – turns out I don’t have much in this zone.  I did check out Meteo (also known as Wind und Wetter), which would have qualified.  But as it happened I didn’t like that game enough to keep it.

So it would seem that generally speaking we are reduced to complaining about the weather, but not really doing anything (in a game) about it!

Over on BGG they have done an ambitious amount of video podcasting.  They have had designers come to the BGG booth and demonstrate their new games.  While this should entice me, largely I have not taken advantage of this coverage.  I’ve watch 3 videos so far, and not completely.  I did enjoy seeing the demo of Paper Clip Railways, as this is a title I had already bought, but not yet played.  And I watched with some interest the designer’s intro to Champions 2020, a “big brother” to StreetSoccer, a game I have enjoyed for years.

What I have missed, though, are the written reports of Essen that seemed more common in the past.  I have enjoyed the reports written by Frank Schulte-Kulkmann available here:  http://www.boardgame.de/specials/messe/essen11/essen11.htm  But I have been surprised that the official BGG correspondent has not filed any updates since his Mid-Friday report.  I suppose it is bad form to complain, sorry.

I suspect there are lots of wonderful new games available at the Essen SPIEL festival.  I’m not finding much interest in them though.  I suspect I have achieved burn-out on new Euros.  My primary interest seems now to be in exploring some older Euros, specifically more of the Edition Perlhuhn back list, and dialing more into 18xx type games.

I continue to own many many Euro games, and generally like the games I own.  I will enjoy continuing to play them.  And I am not closed to trying new games that my friends place before me.  But I am now feeling that it seems less likely I will be buying all that many new games.

We’ve been busy around here with home improvements.  We hired a contractor to fix a few things, including some cracked plaster in our home.  They swathed the house in plastic on Thursday, and finished up with sanding Saturday morning.  We asked them to leave the plastic down, as we now need to paint.  Yesterday we got both spare bedrooms wiped down and primed.  Today we hope to wipe down the plaster repairs in the dining room, prime the dining room, and get final coats of fresh paint on the bedrooms.

Part of the fun of owning an older home.  (Our home was built in 1949.)

That leaves the kitchen, which needs some paint too.  We’ll assess how to proceed on it as today’s labors proceed.  I’m tempted to leave it for later, but we may bite the bullet and keep going.

I wish I were gaming!

Monday night I played Avalon Hill’s Civil War.  This was quite enjoyable, and you can read my comments about the session through the link above.  I also find myself with Panzergruppe Guderian set up in the spare room, and I’m contemplating getting a couple other wargames.

Further, I ordered A Few Acres of Snow, a new Martin Wallace game about the French and Indian War.  It hasn’t arrived yet.  But I am enjoying reading all the commentary about it on BGG.  Apparently lots of folks like it, and it seems to be a blend of wargame and Dominion.  I wouldn’t have guessed I would be interested in this one, as I’ve only played Dominion once (ok, nothing all that motivating either way), and had a rough experience with Martin Wallace’s Waterloo (prior 2p wargame effort).

But indeed, the theme enticed, and the idea of porting a Dominion type game mechanism over to a proper board game did catch my interest.  Also, it’s Martin Wallace, and even if I don’t end up loving his new games, they are almost always worth a few plays for me.

By noon I had put the room to rights, and after a trip to Good Will to dispose of some of the clutter, and a stop at Subway for a sandwich, I had the afternoon gloriously open before me.  With a date to meet friends at the baseball game this evening, it didn’t seem auspicious for getting friends to come by for a game.  But with the newly cleaned room available, I set up a card table and laid out Panzergruppe Guderian.

I have played Panzergruppe Guderian once.  But that was at least 3 years ago, and my opponent who taught the game wasn’t around today.  So I took it slow, reading the rules carefully.  Although Avalon Hill rates this as an introductory wargame (4 on their 1-10 complexity scale), I found some of the concepts hard to fully comprehend.  Fortunately I could draw on my prior game experience.  Even so, I made myself a couple of player aids – the turn sequence, and some reminders on supply and overruns.

I only completed 2 of the 12 turns.  But I have left the game set up, and anticipate playing more tomorrow.  Since this room is largely unused by us otherwise, I can likely leave it set up for an extended period of time if I wish.  Panzergruppe Guderian uses  untried strength for the Soviet forces.  So this makes it quite appropriate for solitaire gaming.

I have not been playing many wargames of late.  But I still like them, and suspect playing Panzergruppe Guderian solitaire may be quite fun.

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/blog/98/the-game-bistro.

I suspect that BGG will be a better read venue than here.

This is a strong reminder to me about why I only play games with friends, and in private settings.  To be sure, the Bistro game group keeps evolving.  Old players tend to fade away, but new folks tag along with old friends, and we seem to maintain a steady state of a couple of tables of gamers from week to week.  I rather like that the game group has this organic cycle.  That’s not to say I’m indifferent to people fading away – I am a bit sad when folks drop out of the regular rotation.  But my policy has always been to welcome those who come, and to never guilt-trip people to returning.

Details aside, I do truly enjoy the Bistro Players.  Each of them are fun gaming companions.  But to get to the point of my title – WHO I am playing with has a huge impact on whether a “10″ is really a “10″.  Now this seems obvious, and I’m convinced most everyone does this – but you gotta select a game that allows everyone participating to have a chance at some fun.

I rate three games a “10″ over on BGG:  Planet Steam, 1830, and El Grande.  Wonderful games, and ones I always look forward to playing again.  But even so, they are only a “10″ if I am going to play against like-minded strategy gamers.  If my wife were to indicate she would be interested in playing a game, I would never suggest any of these to her.  She has very different tastes in games.  And while I rate these three games a “10″.  I would get no satisfaction playing any of them, if my opponents were not enjoying playing the game with me.

In fact, playing a moderately good game can be elevated to (temporary) new heights in my estimation.  A good example would be my one and only play of Hameln.  A game Rob taught me earlier this year.  We played with two female friends, and the hilarity and camaraderie at the table made this game a real highlight for me.  Honestly, as much fun as I had, I wasn’t tempted to buy the game for my collection.  It was a good game, played with great players.  Or to say it another way, I had a great time playing a good game.

And that’s my point.  I would much rather have a great time playing a good game, than have a miserable time playing a great game.  I think this is where having a reasonably large collection of games can be a real asset.  You need to know your players, and have the knack of proposing games that suit your players’ proclivities.  It is also handy if you are a glib ‘splainer of the rules.

One of the reasons I keep my collection somewhere near 300 games, instead of more, is to be facile about which games I might suggest.  I see people go into overload when they survey my wall of games.  While I own and display close to 300 games, about 1000 have passed through my hands.  Had I kept them all, I would also go into vapor-lock trying to suggest which game should be considered.  Adding to this, I have a varying command of the rules to the games I own, but generally speaking I am decent at explaining them.  But I have my limits, and were the collection 1000 games, many of them would be routinely ruled out as I would be unable to easily explain them.

So what have we learned?  That I over think things, I think…

I use two different rating systems. On BGG I am forced to use their 10 point rating system. But here at home we use a home-made system at the Bistro. Here it is:

Poor – a game you would prefer to avoid.
Okay – a game you might agree to play, but would never request
Good – a game you enjoy occasionally
Excellent – a game you very much admire and wish to play repeatedly
Personal Endorsement – a game perfectly suited to your tastes in games.

For me, I have been relating the BGG 10 point scale to the above system, something like this:

9-10 = Personal Endorsement
8 = Excellent
6-7 = Good
5 = Okay
1-4 = Poor

This stance has largely worked for me. But I’ve also grappled with the “novelty factor”. Most games are good for a handful of games, as you learn how to play them. Honestly, with the large variety of games at hand, many games never get played enough to properly evaluate them, as we never give them 5 plays in relatively quick succession.

Another issue in ratings is the “owner’s bias”. I’m aware that I have it, and I’ve perceived it in other too, or so I believe. And this seems human. I just bought this game, so naturally I am predisposed to like it…

Whatever the rating system, it’s the nuances between good to great games are the ones that seem most interesting. Using the 10 point scale, I don’t see much advantage in exploring the nuances between a game I rate a 3 vs. a game I rate a 4. Either way, I’d prefer to not play them.

But the nuances between a 6 and a 7 seem still a bit blurry at times. I think, for me, the owner’s bias may be the first filter. “Do I like this game enough to own it?” If yes, it probably graduates to a 7. If not, it probably falls to a 6. But there are (hopefully) great games I don’t know about yet. So the owner’s bias seems to only apply to “Good, but not great” games. Another counter-example is the merely okay game that I still like enough to own. Im Zeichen des Kreuzes is a personal example. I’d say this game is merely okay on a strict interpretation of my enthusiasm of the game. But the unusual theme (recreating the 1st Crusade) is such a great hook, that I find the game compelling enough to own, even if I don’t play it much (if ever). So I rate IZdK a generous “6″, which is often below the cut, as I generally want to only own games I rate a 7 or higher.

One other filter I apply to my BGG ratings is how recently I have played the game. An 8+ rating is especially prone to being marked down if I consistently don’t play it. There was a time when I was rating Carcassonne: The City as a 10. But after a several months of never playing it, if finally descended into the 7 zone – reflecting it is a game I like enough to own. Other games that I own which maybe never soared so high in my personal estimation can slip even further. I owned Manila for a while. Nice game, I rated it a 7, I suspect. But over time, as the novelty factor wore off, and it sat unplayed, I degraded it to a 6. And this is my signal to consider if I should sell/trade or gift a game. Eventually Manila left my collection, and I haven’t especially missed it. But it is a good game, and should someone ask me to play it (on their copy) I would happily agree. And if I were playing at the Bistro I would unhesitatingly rate it “Good”.

So what have we learned here? Beats me. Write me a comment if this made any sense to you.