New Desperation Morale Blog Essay: Innovation in ASL

[Pitman]

There's a new ASL opinion essay on the Desperation Morale blog:

http://desperationmorale.blogspot.com/2010_04_01_archive.html

Same Old Same Old? The Presence (or Lack) of Innovation in ASL

 

[Honza]

Good essay Mark. Innovation in ASL is an interesting subject. Too much or too little? Or just the right amount? Maybe the fact that it is still going strong indicates the answer.

Too much would blow the system apart and too little would result in stagnation. We still have a vibrant game system going. Which IS slowly developing and expanding. Maybe a bit too slowly, but better than not at all or too quickly.

 

[micky]

very nice Mark and really interesting.. have some clappies..

now for the topic at hand... I wouldn't exactly consider Ap6 innovative, it's just a logical (granted once put into practice :laugh next step to give more life and more interesting use of the same old geomorphs. To call Ap6 innovation is to call CH's Berlin modules innovative for decisions there in purchasing reinforcements could impact other unseen areas of the battle (the alternative purchase charts from off-board units which could lead to Soviet breakthroughs) which I don't recall done in other games. Innovative? just adding more challenges and possibilities to an existing (and proven) system.

Not exactly innovation on the order of what RB did which was change completely how one could play ASL.. and introduce new concepts to the game such as 'strategic' thinking and force conservation. Will we ever see that kind of innovation to the game.. perhaps... if someone can do what you mentioned what HoB was thinking of doing.. some way to link historical scenarios into the motha of all campaign games where you start with a base unit ..perhaps an infantry or tank company and your wins or losses determine where you fight.. and what you are fighting with.

 

[macrobo]

Hi Mark

I am very excited by your essay and job well done
I had some comments though....

Is it a surprise?
Inovation in the world would tell US- NO!
(a) We still drive the same CArs - 30 yrs on the Kinetic engine has to be babied by the combustion
(b) Each New Computer Takes us only a crawl forwards
(c) We still have no fuel that lets us all fly into space and likely no Hope
(d) We still consider Green energy, Climate change negating devices etc etc with the intelligence of Cavemen
(e) The same drugs for Medical disease (not changed for 30yrs) treat 95% of the population - newer drugs only treat the 5%

Dangers in inovation are rife!
(a) TVs have catpulted to devices that send out enough radiation to cause disease but we refuse to let public health clinicans study it
(b) Similarly mobile phones are attached to ears which have delicate tissue a few cms away that may turn into cancers (Brain tumours are universaly incurable)
(c) With every new update in the IT world - IT people get paid more for less, difficulties get more, understanding gets less and criminals from the bad ones that steal money to the REALLY BAD ones where children inoccence stealing get more powerful - progress for them is not good!
(d) 50% of new medical agents kill people alot more than they should!


The Old saying - "Death and Taxes" comes to mind

Rob

PS - still a good essay but I just wanted to express my caution

 

[Pitman]

I think I tried to make clear in the essay that in the ASL world "innovative" does not necessarily = good, and to point out the dangers of too much innovation with the cautionary tales of other game systems. Still, it surprises me how little there has actually been over so many years.

 

[King Billy]

Well,

As someone who has purchased Star Fleet Battles from the beginning I have to agree with Mark's view on that game to some extent. Same with World in Flames, three different versions in storage in my shed.

However, the fact that SFB is still a very popular game shows, perhaps, that gamers are happy to pu up with such antics.

I don't play SFB or WiF anymore, but I have just started playing Command and Colors: Ancients. It is a neat and tidy little game using wooden blocks that uses cards to issue orders.

We have a smallish group, not as large as our ASL group, but big enough, and we enjoy playing it.

Simple though th rules may be, the wargamers of the world cannot help but tinker with them. Go to the various websites and you will see a plethora of "home rule" suggestions, how to make phalanx units more realistic, a greater difference between light bow and slinger types, etc etc.

Then there is the official changes. You can now play "Epic" battles, using two boards together, twice the number of units, and a new deck of cards.

I enjoy it, so I put up with it.

With ASL it is different. I do not play house rules. I do not enjoy changes to the rules, I am not necessarily looking for innovation.

It is the certainty of the ASL rules that is it's strength. I very much doubt that ASL woud survive a 3rd edition ASLrule book.

I know Mark is not necessarily talking about a major change to the rules, but with ASL I am a conservative, and would prefer the slow evolution that has occured with ASL rather than some dramatic change.

 

[Spencer Armstrong]

Mark:

Once I copy your work into Word and can read without the Awful Orange (TM), I always enjoy your thoughts.

I think the question of the desirability of innovation is a very interesting one. The game was designed with a particular time and scale in mind and, within that context, has succeeded by handling things conservatively and without any radical changes. The lessons learned in SL were well incorporated in ASL. If SL is viewed as ASL's youth, then ASL as adulthood has learned fom its missteps and after that conservatism has served us well. Really, one of the worst mistakes in the system (UberFinns) was made early seemingly out of a desire for innovation and that has taken 25 years to get pulled back. "Filling in" the system has been the priority because, frankly, the system doesn't need radical change and can mostly be hurt by it more than helped. Lots of innovation just isn't really needed. I love the AP6 maps, but they're a logical (though clever) extension of the basic map system. The system is pretty darn robust and encompassing of its intended subject matter.

All that said, I'm surprised you didn't mention Operation Chariot/St. Nazaire's MGB rules. That rules set, introducing a new unit type (and fairly elegantly) is arguably the most innovative thing the system has ever seen.

S

 

[Spencer Armstrong]

It is the certainty of the ASL rules that is it's strength. I very much doubt that ASL woud survive a 3rd edition ASLrule book.

Legal issues notwithstanding, a living, annotated electronic rulebook would be the best thing that could happen to ASL. More to keep Q&A and errata incorporated than to facilitate change, mind you. I'm thinking midrash, not changing the tanakh here.

S

 

[micky]

Legal issues notwithstanding, a living, annotated electronic rulebook would be the best thing that could happen to ASL. More to keep Q&A and errata incorporated than to facilitate change, mind you. I'm thinking midrash, not changing the tanakh here.

S

oh repping you for that..

feeling the pain you all have probably felt in the past. Finally upgraded to the latest rulebook this week after relearning the game with an old 1985 rulebook I got when I started back into the game...

spending the day today incorporating.... CAREFULLY haha.. all the errata printed out from the MMP website into the new rulebook.

 

[Pitman]

All that said, I'm surprised you didn't mention Operation Chariot/St. Nazaire's MGB rules. That rules set, introducing a new unit type (and fairly elegantly) is arguably the most innovative thing the system has ever seen.

I weighed Operation Chariot for the essay, because it is an unusual HASL in several respects, but in the end came down on the side that it wasn't necessarily breaking new ground. The MGB rules, after all, are an extension of the LC rules of ASL.

 

[Aaron Cleavin]

VASL:
Just checking server logs for last months. Over 900 rooms have been used. A few of these perhaps were never full games but many had observers and many were used over multiple session scenarios or Campaign games. This does not of course include offline use. Fairly conservatively this represents over 10,000 man hours spent playing or watching ASL on VASL a month. This is a lot of bums on seats!

I vastly prefer playing FTF to VASL but VASL with SKYPE is a fairly good version of ASL. As long as you have a solid internet connection and a decent amount of screen real-estate.

While hiding from the BORG and hope they don't notice very much you are living in thier ship works for an amount of time eventually electronic media and computer based playing of ASL are things that need to be addressed in the MMP/HASBORO relationship because that is where the innovation cycle of ASL lies (However much I like playing FTF)

As Mark suggests SASL was a solid offering left somewhat to whither. I think That SASL could be fully computerized without too much work and that it could be tweaked to give a good experience WITHOUT needing to have the computer cheat (As so many Turn based strategy games do). It is certainly a solid direction for innovation in ASL

 

[Gen. Sosabowski]

I think That SASL could be fully computerized without too much work and that it could be tweaked to give a good experience WITHOUT needing to have the computer cheat (As so many Turn based strategy games do). It is certainly a solid direction for innovation in ASL

Sort of off-topic, but my understanding is that a computer AI has trouble developing a strategy and sticking with it. That is, AI is much better at making optimal short-term decisions, but it can't handle situations in which its proper long-term strategy requires foregoing its optimal choice on any particular turn. For this reason, AI can be awfully good at something like chess or Puerto Rico; both are games in which the best overall strategy is to make the optimal short-term decision on every turn. (I hope that made sense.) At any rate, designers make the AI "cheat" to offset its problems with long-term strategy.

Does anyone with more technical knowledge care to weigh in here? I read the above in an article published several years ago. In addition to the normal pitfalls (like the original author blowing smoke), my memory may also be faulty.

 

[Gen. Sosabowski]

Just returned from reading the article. It's probably Mark's best blogpost/article so far.

 

[Morbii]

It is the certainty of the ASL rules that is it's strength. I very much doubt that ASL woud survive a 3rd edition ASLrule book.

I disagree with this. I think a 3rd edition would be an immense step forward, incorporating all Known errata, q&a, clarifications, etc. I also think that some things that are still ambiguous should be fixed. Finally, I think many parts of Chapter E should be redone. Not to change the rules, but to clarify them to the point where there are as few questions as possible. I'm convinced that they way we play night rules isn't correctly explained in Chapter E and if we had no grognards/Perry there would probably be several different interpretations (take Rout, for example - IMO that section absolutely allows routing non-DM units with its wording).

 

[Aaron Cleavin]

I disagree with this. I think a 3rd edition would be an immense step forward, incorporating all Known errata, q&a, clarifications, etc. I also think that some things that are still ambiguous should be fixed. Finally, I think many parts of Chapter E should be redone. Not to change the rules, but to clarify them to the point where there are as few questions as possible. I'm convinced that they way we play night rules isn't correctly explained in Chapter E and if we had no grognards/Perry there would probably be several different interpretations (take Rout, for example - IMO that section absolutely allows routing non-DM units with its wording).

Completely agreed. However it better durn well have a DVD in the sleeve with a soft version of the rules as well!

 

[Michael Dorosh]

Just returned from reading the article. It's probably Mark's best blogpost/article so far.

The logic doesn't make sense at all. Pitcavage says "it turns out that it has taken people 33 years to come up with this variation to the original geomorphic map style."

Isn't that like criticizing Porsche for not inventing the Tiger Tank in 1917?

Everyone thinks they're an expert on what ASL "needs", despite the fact that the only one with access to the proof - the sales numbers - are MMP. In other words - there is no evidence that 'innovation' is good for ASL, or bad. The very term "innovation" is just spin. It's another word applied to new products, or another way to get money from the consumer. Putting out new stuff can do as much harm as good - especially stuff like yet another version of the physical rulebook, which can simply convince people to walk away in frustration, unable to keep up to all the changes, or unable to buy "all the stuff".

 

[Aaron Cleavin]

The logic doesn't make sense at all. Pitcavage says "it turns out that it has taken people 33 years to come up with this variation to the original geomorphic map style."

Isn't that like criticizing Porsche for not inventing the Tiger Tank in 1917?

Everyone thinks they're an expert on what ASL "needs", despite the fact that the only one with access to the proof - the sales numbers - are MMP. In other words - there is no evidence that 'innovation' is good for ASL, or bad. The very term "innovation" is just spin. It's another word applied to new products, or another way to get money from the consumer. Putting out new stuff can do as much harm as good - especially stuff like yet another version of the physical rulebook, which can simply convince people to walk away in frustration, unable to keep up to all the changes, or unable to buy "all the stuff".

I don't think it is any way analogous to criticizing Porsche. The components needed for the Tiger simply were not available until Post 1940 wheras the components needed for the new mapboard types have been there from the beginning, just human ingenuity required.

I think Mark is very clear that "innovation" is by no means in and of itself a good thing. His concern though is that over a longer frame a hobby/company/country that does not in someway reinvent itself in a different direction is doomed to a slow inexorable decline.

I think it would be very foolish not to look at the graphical and component innovations or Memoir 44, Conflict of Heros, and many Euro games and ask how ASL could enhance it's aesthetic attributes. Similarly if ASL does not move toward an electronic domain it will inevitably limit itself.

I don't agree with all of Mark's points; but as a piece of scholarship asking ourselves to look at our hobby with a longer and wider view on it's longevity and freshness; I think it is long overdue, trenchant, and most important largely positively aspected!

 

[Michael Dorosh]

I don't think it is any way analogous to criticizing Porsche. The components needed for the Tiger simply were not available until Post 1940!

Steel and rubber didn't exist until after 1940? I must have missed that in my reading somewhere.

 

[Fort]

The logic doesn't make sense at all. Pitcavage says "it turns out that it has taken people 33 years to come up with this variation to the original geomorphic map style."

Isn't that like criticizing Porsche for not inventing the Tiger Tank in 1917?

Everyone thinks they're an expert on what ASL "needs", despite the fact that the only one with access to the proof - the sales numbers - are MMP. In other words - there is no evidence that 'innovation' is good for ASL, or bad. The very term "innovation" is just spin. It's another word applied to new products, or another way to get money from the consumer. Putting out new stuff can do as much harm as good - especially stuff like yet another version of the physical rulebook, which can simply convince people to walk away in frustration, unable to keep up to all the changes, or unable to buy "all the stuff".

The premise "it turns out that it has taken people 33 years to come up with this variation to the original geomorphic map style.", is false. I presented these boards, and a double-wide board to AH and Don Greenwood in 1982, and the idea for a board scenario Pack to the same in 1984....all were rejected.
ASL is a great game, there is room for new ideas, new rules and new components. The graphics are top-notch, and I wouldn't change a thing...except to do a 3rd edition rulebook with comprehensive examples of play and an eASLRB AND, add slopes to the main rulebook.

 

[Aaron Cleavin]

Steel and rubber didn't exist until after 1940? I must have missed that in my reading somewhere.

Transmissions
Hydraulics
Engines
Armor
Guns
Optics
Treads
Human Factors awareness (Interior Design, Man Machine interfaces)