Single Comment

It would be interesting to start a committee to review the games at this
site. But we would really need to be considerate while doing so.

Yes, we can use mathematical formulae to quantify various aspects of a
given variant. Being careful not to carry over prejudices from one to
another. And all evaluations must be taken in the context within which
they are being derived.

And I can quickly see an initial area of debate. This being the value of
pieces. It must be kept in mind that this can take many forms. One piece
could be valued one way in a particular variant and might receive another
value in another variant. Overall rules can have a dramatic effect in this
regard.

And the approach to these reviews should not be to prove or disprove any
particular preconceived preference for the game. But simply to categorize
the various aspects and thus help others to make their own personal
determinations.

For example, a game may have a rather large number of potential turns.
This can be noted. But whether this is a positive or negative aspect
should not be the goal of the review. Some people enjoy long games(see
RPGs).

And if there are discovered 'errors' in the examined game, we should
offer assistance in repairing such. Let's not be simply critics but offer
positive feedback.

And if we play-test these games, there should be a fair number of games
played. I would opt for at least twenty, but some might find this rather
tedious. But to really get a good feel for any particular game, it might
be necessary to play it at least a hundred times(gasp).

And the data from these reviews could be used to expand the categorization
at this site. Thus helping people quickly discover those games which appeal
to them.

Might I suggest that we start with the Recognized Variants at this site.
This will give a nice baseline to work from when tackling the remaining
games.