[Castout]

Originally Posted by Skybird

What do you complain about? It'S at the very basis of any cosim, and has been seen as a valuable tool for military training as well. Compared to it, a cosim's sequence of play and strategic "depth" - I would not call it that - is shallow, and just a sequence of repetitive automatically carried out actions (for that reason real-time strategy games, at least all I have ever tried over the past 15 years or so, hardly are strategy games at all, they do not pose a challenge to your strategic imagination - you just find the one winning playing mechanism that is successful and then repeat that one in every match with your mouseklicks as fast as you can, mostly it is about in what seqeunce to produce units, and producing them fast). The basis of any strategic thinking is the balacning of the three factors space, time and matter (fields, moves, pieces) in various, ever-changing constellation, and how the one can be traded for the other. When you think of it, any military problem comes down to a constellation of these three factors, from logistics over Blitzkrieg to gaining important grounds.

Chess is not about a given strategy in a specific constext or environment, like in a cosim where you have these and no other rules and this and no other map, and such counters and no others. It is about strategy itself, and the need to constantly change and adapt it. A Cosim does not give you that challenge raised by ever-changing challenge, it'S always the same limited set of types of challenges. A cosim teaches you strategic thinking at best in the context of the game system, but not beyond. You cannot carry it over to for example economic problems or behavior at the stock market in reality, because your way of handling space, matter and time within the cosim'S context cannot that easily, if at all, taken over to the way you want to set up the policy and competitive behavior of your business company. Chess trains your strategic thinking at a much more profound, basic, general level less depending on the context of the rules of that game, and that game alone. And that's why you can benefit from that in real life as well - not from the rules of chess, but your habit of being used to handle and balance these three factors on the chessboard, and in a cosim and in real life as well: space, time and material. It'S a bit like being a "culture-free" (="game-rules-free") training of strategic thinking.

Not related to real life...?! I must say that chess has had a certain, maybe not spectacular but still undeniable influence on my way of thinking and analysis. It'S hard to tell whether I liked chess because it met my analytical mindset, or my analytical attitude emerged due to having learned chess (in my early childhood). Probably a mixture of both.

However. The other things chess can teach you wonderfully, are: patience, and discipline. Not before and not after the right time has come, you carry out the most appropriate action. And that also is an art you can use very well in life. The right move at the wrong time, the wrong figure for the right task, a misled situational understanding while having advantage in time and material - and you nevertheless spoil it. Only when all three come together, you secure the win: time, space and material.

-----------------

BTW, there are quite some competently done PC cosims. It helps you to save table-space, and money.

A classic is The Operational Art Of War III, which is a reference title. I do not like the font and am not happy with the itnerface, but I must admit with that complaint I seem to be alone - I never heared anyone else complaining about it (except the fonts).

I currently digged myself into the matter of Modern Campaigns: Danube 85, doing the full campaign with the front from Denmark down to Austria. Again, I initially cmplained about the interface giving me some visual problems due to the smallnesss of some things, but I have adressed that by using a map mod, and having edited the design of unit counters myself, so now it is a bit more friendly to the eyes, or so it seems to me. A title I also would recommend.

And available for free, there is Steel Panthers: Main Battle Tank (or World War II, if you prefer that era). Still an outstanding title, despite the looks showing it's age.

First I wasn't complaining about anything just gave my opinion about chess. I don't mean it was a bad game I just think it's a too abstract game for me. Too abstract to relate to real life situation at least that's how I perceive it but you seemed to argue that it trains your mind to adapt to different changing challenges even though chess is a pure abstract game. Well I may be able to see that point but other games teach you that too . . .

As for RTS yea I do completely agree that there's no strategy at all in RTS games or hardly any strategy in it. In fact I even found little strategy in games such as Hearts of Iron 2(never tried the third) due to AI being not a very capable opponent( and the lack of human psychology in AI).

As for cosim,
But I think I just wrote what I've learned from one specific German board game which I listed about 18 points of them. That too give the players training to adapt to different ever changing challenges like chess does. It really does and does it much better at least to me with multiple enemies and much more chaos and uncertainty! So it wouldn't be valid to state that only chess can teach one the ability to adapt to ever changing situation. Shogun for one teaches you just that without being too abstract. That game teaches the art of war to put it bluntly maybe not as comprehensive as Sun Tzu's Art of War but it does teaches one the strategic aspect of art of war! No kidding!
I don't have anything against chess . I really don't. Just that because of its abstraction I found it hard to play and master well but I have to admit I never give it a serious attempt. I don't find this difficulty with the board game Shogun for example.

I played Steel Panthers but somehow electronic adapted board game never attracted me much largely because I feel I couldn't outguess the enemy because it has got no psychology and even I never seemed to attempt to play a serious strategic game with AI or rather compelled to give a serious thinking and felt no reward for having defeated it. For example while playing board game such as Shogun people who are not used to thinking hard for extended period of time like 3 hours or more(5 hours on first game) will find it difficult to keep up in the last hour or minutes. I have had friends becoming agitated because they were too much damn tired for having to think hard for extended period of time. One even needed to lay down for a while to rest before the game ended because he was really mentally drained up and to think that they are almost ten years younger than me! As for me being a nerd who spent extended period of hours studying until 2-3AM really paid off by granting me extended mental stamina and allows me to be still able to think well.
In the end somehow I find witchcraft appeal to a box of components and placing those on the table and playing them with other people.

Originally Posted by UnderseaLcpl

I enjoy playing Axis and Allies as a casual game, but as a strategy game it has about as much depth as Risk, a game whose depth of strategy is aptly described by its name. A&A suffers from the lack of a fog of war and the resultant strategic possibilities and pitfalls, as well as an oversimplified probability mechanic. The pre-arranged and unchangable alliances don't help matters any. And then there's setting up all those damn pieces...

A simple game I would recommend is "Diplomacy", which is set in pre-WW1 Europe. Nothing is left to chance in this game, but rather to your ability to think creatively and read other players. All moves are planned secretly on paper (which you may or may not choose to reveal to others) and made simultaneously. The actual game mechanics are a bit like GO, which is to say that they are focused upon guile and maneuver, but the real game takes place between the players, not on the board. No single power can stand alone at the outset, so the emphasis is placed upon, unsurprisingly, diplomacy.

Yeah I'm aware that it's not a very detailed strategy game but it does still allow one to analyze to try to defeat multiple human enemies. It's basically a game of placement a little like chess only much less abstract(no pun to Skybird or chess just me who's too stupid to play chess )

As for diplomacy I too once got interested in it until I played it on the web.
The game will definitely ruin friendships(and to think I already haven't had great friends to board game with) Frankly i hate the game which forces the players to lie and I'm not a very wicked person and I don't believe in being one either nor I am very good in lying made worse with easily trusting other people.