While we're all waiting for me to get my game up on the board, I'd like to propose a possible system that might be useful in "rating" games in the GDW.
From an article in the Games Journal (www.thegamesjournal.com) called "game alignment", the writer proposes a five-step scale in three categories:
Chaos/Control, Light/Heavy, Abstract/Themed
See the site for an explanation of these. So, for Seth's game, 8/7c, for example, I might speculate the following ratings might be appropriate:
Chaos - - | - - Control
Light - - - | - Heavy
Abstract - - - - | Themed
These aren't meant to be subjective, but can be useful in determining whether a game is likely to be to one's taste. I think they could be useful for us in helping to quantify our impressions of the games we're hearing about, and to provide another means of feedback for the designer as to whether impressions are consistent with the game experience he was trying to create. One could also add categories like "Dull/Fun", which would be more subjective.
I encourage people to consider using something like this, if interested, as a supplemental and quick way to say a little bit about the game, if it helps one to formulate/articulate one's thoughts on the game.
Hopefully, my Archaeology Game will be up on the board sometime today. I'll let you know!
-Jeff
BTW, what type of game are you shooting for with Profit and Provenance?
Good question. I would say, for P&P, I was shooting for:
Chaos - - - - | Control
Light - - - | - Heavy
Abstract - - - | - Themed
Dull - - - - | Fun (obviously!)
I want the game to be pretty high on control, or at least, pretty low on random elements (the Black Market being the obvious exception). Obviously, what other people do will heavily determine whether or not your plans will succeed, but I want you to feel like your decisions matter a lot and directly impact your fate in the game.
I want it to feel semi-heavy. That doesn't necessarily mean "long"; I envision a 60-75 minute game here. 45 minutes would be great, but is totally unrealistic. 90 minutes would be tolerable, but I think it's pushing it. I want the game to be good natured and fun, and interactive, but still with some depth, perhaps depth that takes several plays to reveal.
As for theme, obviously I want the theme to be somewhat engrossing. I'm envisioning a "1930's", Indiana Jones kind of feel to the components. I am a bit concerned that I'm going to be relying heavily on the components to evoke the theme, but I think the gameplay at least isn't at odds to the theme.
I want the game to be fun and interactive, not chess-like. I think it could result in some heavy thinking because there are a lot of factors to consider, and so perhaps there need to be ways to streamline that, yet in general, I think it will be fun to play, although only testing can reveal that.
Not sure if this helps. I think so far, most of the commentors have similar gaming preferences to me, so I don't think people have been trying to steer me in a different direction than I was already going in...
-jeff