{Warning: Author is about to go off on a rant. This could get boring}

I think that people have forgotten the point of games.

A lot of games seem to be written around the idea that a good game is a simulation. I'm especially looking at computer games. So much effort goes into the design of physics engines, graphics, on and on, so that anything resembling fun is banished in this wierd search for realism.

And what kind of realism is it? Car thiefs killing cops, zombie gorefests. Computer games in particular seem to have turned into particularly gruesome fantasy fullfillment.

I don't think wargames are especially immune from this disease, either. You only need to look at, oh, Star Fleet Battles or any of the Ad Astra stuff, and there's a crazy obsession with simulation as a replacement for gaming.

Okay, there's my rant. Now I want to talk about game design philosophy.

I think games should be fun. And one of the things I think is fun is a good simulation (I used to dm a game based on Swords Path Glory, about 10 pounds worth of tables and lookups - it took all of us to manage a two man combat - I loved it).

When you play a sim, you sort of have in your mind that it's a model of reality. Truth is, it's not a model of reality. It's a model of one person's idea of reality. We've all got different ideas of what's real, what's important. And any sim is just an agreed upon set of rules about what we all think is real.

You see it in game design. On one end, you've got games like Piquet, which is focused purely on managing chaos. Starmada seems to be a game of system design. I notice on the boards here, all conversation about Starmada is about the balancing and management of system design.

At another extreme end, there's chess, which is a very abstract representation of reality. The idea that no piece is more important than another (even the king, although he is the goal of the game, cannot function without support).

So what's my point? I don't think I really have one. I'm just thinking out loud. I'm working through designing a couple of games myself, and I'm trying to decide what are the aspects of reality I think are good for gaming.

These are some things I think might be fun:

I like games where there's a lot of bits on the board. Lots of things to manage.

I like games where the bits need to work together in a sort synergistic effect.

I don't like games that are too rigidly defined. I find chess to be a horrible bore.

I like games that depend on me to make things happen. Too much luck is a bad thing.

What do you think?

So I was thinking about the setting of Iron Stars, particularly about the technology and the implications thereof. Obviously, these are my own musings, they have no reference to canon, though I think they could be included.

First and foremost, Cavorite, the foundation of the Royal Aether Fleet. The material as described by Wells blocks the effect of gravity. There are a couple of interesting inventions I see springing off from this. The first I call the patented Cavor Bearing. Line the exterior casing of a bearing with Cavorite, the result should be a repelling force within the center of the bearing. A shaft placed in the center should be held up, resulting in minimal friction.

I would imagine that sometime after the introduction of Cavor Bearings into steam engines, speed records would be set, with the attendent catastrophes. I would also imagine the rich would be using Cavor Bearings, soon to be followed by Cavor Dampers (shock absorbers for the yanks) (though to be precise, they would be replacing the springs) in high value carriages.

Another use of cavor would be lining the interior of a steam cylinder. Not only will it result in decreased friction from the piston, but the affect of cavor on steam injected into the cylinder will be to compress it even more, resulting in higher pressure with less steam.

The results of this will be a much higher efficiency in steam engine technology. I imagine that sometime shortly after the introduction of Cavor, His Royal Majesty King Edward will have a carriage fitted with Cavor Bearings and a small independent steam engine, resulting in a pratical horseless carriage.

This is going to make it harder for gas/diesel engines to be developed. There simply won't be as much need.

----

The Aether Screw

While I was painting my IS ships, I was thinking about the functions of the sails and the propellors that are visible in the illustrations on Brigade Games website.

I don't imagine the Aether Screw really looks like a propellor. I imagine it's probably more like a tube. Passing energy down the length of the tube allows it to "grip" the Aether, causing propulsion.

In my fevered imagination, the sails then are the actual aether screws, they are the devices that propel the ship.

So what are the propellors on the back? I propose that Aether screws are not terribly effective when close to a planetary mass. If they were, there would be no need for cavorite to get the ships up into space. Those propellors are on the back are for maneuvering when in the atmosphere.

Again, this is my own fevered imagination in action, but I think there are still Aeronef within the IS setting, because they are specialized for maneuvering within the Earth's atmosphere. The IS ships are specialized for operations beyond the debilitating effects of gravity on the aether.

Yeah, I got a lot of things to think about while feeding babies.

.r.

I've been pondering about Martians lately. How would Martian Tripods work in Wardogs? How much are you going to abstract infantry out?

.r.

ps - Hey Dan, I'm not being a wet monkey today!