Amazingly enough, the last issue generated enough letters to keep this going which, in Inside Pitch history, is unprecedented. Normally Ellis and I write to each other until we get bored, but something in the woodpile is stirring and various people seem willing to actually write letters to me. Being as I greatly enjoy receiving letters and doing this part of the subzine, let's hope that this situation continues; not least because I have lashed out on an italic daisywheel to aid clarity.
I am starting off with part of an excellent letter that was in fact written to The General but I cheekily reproduce it here as it says, longwindedly but neatly, what I have been trying to put my finger on for ages:
Patrick Carroll of New Hope, Minnesota: "I disagree with Jon Freeman's categorization of wargamers (in the previous General). These types of gamers, in my experience, simply do not exist. The 'Historian' tends to read books more than play games; the 'Military Enthusiast' is usually another form of Historian who specialises more; etc. In my experience there are only three types of gamers: the Competitor, the Socializer and the Dreamer.
The competitor, similar to Freeman's 'Assassin', plays to win. He may not be out for blood, he may be a good fellow with an admirable sense of sportsmanship, but it's his nature to cut through all the frills and boil a game down to its mathematical essence, then to do whatever he can to win.
The Socializer, akin to Freeman's 'Gamer' is in it for the social interaction. The socializer cares little about winning; he hasn't the patience or inclination to study a game that closely, he just like playing games with people.
The Dreamer, who does not exactly correspond to any of Freeman's types, is into gaming for all the vicarious adventure. He is the antithesis of the competitor in that he lives for the frills and prefers to remain blissfully ignorant of the winning strategy. For the dreamer, a game is a vivid experience in imagination. He constantly wonders, 'What would this situation look like in real life?'"
Ain't that the truth. That is, broadly, my view of gaming in a nutshell. I am quite clearly a 'dreamer' who, in the main, plays the games for the images they create, which is probably why I find abstract, strategic and air games so unappealing and why, if there are flaws, I sometimes miss them. I also like clever mechanisms and am somewhat prone to rationalise all aspects of a game, often to the annoyance of fellow players. Anyway, enough of this theorising on why I am 'inscrutable sumo- san' and care not a jot for awards, the above is pretty much the answer. Right, with that off my chest and with thanks to Mr.Carroll for his timely assistance, back to the genuine post pile.
Rob Morris of Liverpool: "In Sensation 39 you mentioned a cycling game called Homas Tour. In the past few months I have tried without success to get a copy of this game and I was wondering if you could point me in the right direction."
Ah yes, the elusive Homas Tour. Well, when I played and commented on the game, little did I know that it is one of the rarest games going. I haven't even got a copy of my own yet! For those that don't know, the story is something like this; the game was produced by a Dutch company, Homas Spelen, and the bulk of the stock was destroyed in a warehouse fire and was never replaced. The remaining games got out onto the European game circuit a couple of years ago and became an instant hit - it is a very good game as well as being eminently collectable.
So, I have all the people I know looking out for copies for me but that seems a long shot now. The only other outside chance is that someone will re-publish the thing but that would be risky, if popular, move. I'd have thought with the current cycling frenzy it would at least be good timing. So, sorry to any readers who have been looking for it - as a rule I try to avoid mentioning hard to find games but I unwittingly picked on a rarity here.
Meanwhile, if a copy appears I will offer anyone interested the chance to take a copy of the rules etc as it is quite easy to make your own setup, especially if you have the Vuelta game that I mentioned in IP 24. Alternatively, try John Harrington's excellent Breaking Away. That is as good as I can offer I'm afraid and I'm sorry for getting your hopes up.
Charles Vasey of East Sheen: "Your comment on the Civilisation lobby at cons struck a chord. I suspect that while most people like to try new games, or play multi-players at cons, some prefer to play the same thing over and over again. These are the sort of folks who never eat, drink or watch anything different. They provide a solid minority on the back of whom one can fund a con and they are usually pretty courteous while playing. They are not my cup of tea but, unlike your Pit players, are no trouble. Indeed the Babbacon attendees seem to have had a few pricks."
"Reverting to the Challinger Syndrome, one should not forget that the sorts of games you like tend to have very attractive components and while one should perhaps feel cerebral enough not to care about this, one never does. It all helps with suspending disbelief as well as being aesthetically pleasing (let's face it, these are toys for adults). Having experienced the work of the German professional designers the old S&T style of design and production appears woeful, but the GDW eclectics (like Crimea) have come back into fashion which is not how things were. Like they said, I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now."
And now, from the man himself...
Geoff Challinger of rural West Bridgford: "Now then - this here Challinger Syndrome. In my case, it dates back quite some way and only surfaced at Midcon '85 where I enjoyed myself hugely by simply playing a lot of very simple, short and entertaining games. But I'd felt the same way for several years before that, it was just that I felt that no-one else did. The scene at Midcon comprised Diplomacy in bulk (yawn), serious games of 1829/Civilisation and that year's silly game (Mousie Mousie, Pit and Pass the Pigs). The entertaining shorts seemed to be Speed Circuit and Election X with nothing else really worth the effort.
Thus I claim I was ahead of the curve and that it is everyone else who is catching up. The German wave has helped in a big way to achieve this by widening the scope of interesting games to incorporate more interest for ordinary human beings, be they enthusiastic games-players or otherwise.
There are in truth two elements to the Syndrome. The first is virtuous and is all to do with appreciating the elegance of a good games design and wanting to play the design, rather than the rules or the subject matter. The second is however indolent and is brought upon by an overdose of remote control TV, Ceefax and children, which all conspire to reduce one's standard attention span to about 5 minutes and ruin your ability to ever appreciate a film lasting beyond 108 minutes.
This side of things spills over into other parts of one's life and once you're sated with a game, you cannot concentrate on it for longer than the 30 minutes demanded by a game of Flying Carpet. I can remember playing Britannia for the first couple of times when we had only just learned it. The first game was haphazard, ill- planned out and great fun. The second was OK but as soon as it degenerated into players devoting a greater degree of thought to their moves it became a bit of a Sunday paper game; you know, your turn is over, time for the Review section while the other three have a turn.
Well, there you have it. The definitive answer and sentiments with which I fully empathise. Unless anyone else has relevant comments I should think that will do it for the Challinger Syndrome, look out for my forthcoming thesis from Penguin Books.
Charles Vasey: Mr Moon's list of games clearly demonstrates he is not much akin to myself. I suppose I would give Dune, Nuclear Destruction and War at Sea house room and dump the rest. I cannot think what my top 50 is, and if I was not such a lazy genial old fart I would look through the ones I have kept - a pretty good test that. But where is Cosmic Encounter eh???? and Up Front? Enough of this before I start writing a list."
Geoff Challinger: "Young Mr Moon seems to have some rather odd tastes in games. Admittedly my limited knowledge of wargames is frozen in time, but D&D, Junta and Origins are not my idea of wargames. Nor does there seem to be any mention of SPI games other than the Blue & Gray quads which were coming in as I was leaving wargaming. He ain't exactly a tactical fan either is he? Panzerblitz is probably too behind the times now but I still harbour a great affection for the smaller scale stuff done by SPI; Sniper, Patrol, Red Star White Star and Tank! The global games I could do wthout, but it does seem an Avalon Hill biased list - no surprise really."
Mike Clifford of ranking SE19: "Finally, I am compiling my favourite 100 games. I cannot resist lists."
No, me neither. I also thought some of Alan's choices were a leetle odd but of course this a very personal choice and you have, elsewhere, my long-considered offering this time. My big beefs on Alan's lists were with Careers and Monopoly but I guess the latter should come as a standard freebie, with a pack of cards and a chess set. But Careers? Mammy. The fact that Alan grouped his games should not be seen as that relevant, he simply sent me two separate lists with broad categories and I suspect RPGs were out on a limb.
Alan had a sneak preview of my list and has this to say about my choices.
Alan Moon: "I was very surprised to see Squad Leader, Ironclads, Lee vs Grant, To the Green Fields Beyond, Godsfire, Submarine and Korean War in your list. I had no idea you were that hardcore. I was also surprised to see Source of the Nile and Das Borsenspiel. I only played Source once and didn't enjoy it at all, mostly because the game progressed very slowly. Das Borsenspiel seems very average. Shark???!! I think you have listened to Brian (Walker) too much regarding this and Borsenspiel. Thunder at Cassino was a major dissapointment. The system is unique, but it needs a simpler situation to make it shine. Turning Point at Stalingrad will complicate things even more, taking the system in exactly the wrong direction."
Yet more evidence of how tastes can differ. I regard Shark as an excellent, tough game and Das Borsenspiel has hidden depths, being playable on at least two levels. Brian Walker was not instrumental in either choice! In fact, Brian is a great asset as when he says a game is great I simply save my cash as we have almost opposite views on most games. My liking of Source of the Nile is probably explained by the first letter on the subject of imagining game situations. Although I also like Storm over Arnhem, I chose Thunder at Cassino as representaive of the system because it is simply one of the most exciting and well balanced games I've played. As for being hardcore, I deny that in terms of being an old fashioned Zone of Control / Soakoffs type gamer. I have never been one and never will, though certain games of this sort are enjoyable, eg Russian Campaign. Either way, I suspect Moon is wagging me.
Nevertheless, for some reason I seem to have this problem with being pigeonholed as a wargamer in the hobby. Brian Walker gave me nothing but wargames to review at GI, John Harrington sticks me in the same hole and here we have Alan calling me hardcore! The truth, as I see it (and I should know!), is that I have quite eclectic tastes; I primarily like sports, 'European', card, railway and business/economic games, followed by wargames and, at a pinch (but currently dormant), RPGs and figures. I also like to, er, look at computer games rather than play them for any length of time. Abstract or chess-type games, with the exception of the excellent Abalone, don't even make the cut. I don't know where people have got the idea from really, perhaps it is because I have written rather more words on wargames, as they seem to get less coverage in the general hobby, and the whole thing has become self-fulfilling.
Geoff Challinger: CDs. "As mentioned in Home, the two things which most benefit from digital recording are piano (a bugger to record even these days) and the human voice. There are albums which I know would be magnificent if done DDD (digitally recorded, processed and pressed). However for obvious reasons, anything pre 1983 (?) is going to be AAD and anything since will be ADD at best. I would dearly love to hear Pete Atkin's A King at Nightfall on CD but it would never be sufficiently hiss free. Piano sonatas and concertii work excellently. If you have a taste for opera I guess that would be good; Philip Glass's Akhnaten is, er, impressive, even if it is quite hard work as a piece of music."
Having had the CD player for some months now, I still come back to the fact that certain records sound worse which is the most disappointing angle. Otherwise, I am really pleased with it. The convenience of CD over the album is a major plus, it being so easy to store them, pop one in and play a track without cleaning, mucking around with sleeves etc and, best of all, the fact that you don't have to rush over and take the arm off when it finishes. As for sound, one is simply spoilt with the right material. As Geoff mentions, piano recordings are a revelation and most vocals lose that 'ssss' problem so prevalent on even good quality turntable systems. Whether it is better on CD or not I don't know, but the best record I have bought for a long time is Soul II Soul's club classics. Marvelous stuff.
Mike Siggins. 18/7/89