Another issue with most games: most games are set up with a single "player-profile". All players are expected to want to interact with the others in a single way. In Diplomacy, everyone plays the head of a European Great Power. In Kingmaker, each player is an abstract alliance, the members of which change as part of game-play. In Kriegspiel, each player is an officer in command of a body of troops.
It is only with the sophistication of Kriegspiel (which depends upon the presence of a referee) allows some diversity of play, and at that only a matter of levels of command within the historical military structure.
Fact is, though, not everyone wants to play the same game. Some people want to conduct military operations, some to wheel and deal; some want to play abstract games where their viewpoint is abstracted from the historical participants, some would like to role-play a single character even if the character is operating in a strategic mode.
I'd like to have a game where there is only one imposition on all the players: they must be willing to accept that other players will approach the game differently. That does mean that there has to be some mechanism to bridge differing play modes and provide a seamless interface so that the differing approaches do not jar the expectations of the interacting players.
Sounds like an opportunity for a team effort where some players do the economic/political angle and have a separate military commander on call should there be war while others might be soldier-king types and do it all.
ReplyDeleteI think the potential for team play should be there. It can be good fun.
ReplyDelete