Game of the Week: Baseball Strategy

With the Red Sox forcing a Game 7 in the ALCS and the World Series ahead, it seems an appropriate time to look at the classic Avalon Hill game Baseball Strategy.
Like Football Strategy, Baseball Strategy was an original design by Tom Shaw that actually predated its Avalon Hill edition. Also like Football Strategy Baseball Strategy uses a matrix to resolve the duel between players, in this case the duel between the pitcher and the batter, which makes up the heart of baseball.
The dueling aspect makes it a pretty enjoyable game, although like Football Strategy this emphasis on one particular aspect of a very complex game reduces the "simulation" value of Baseball Strategy. In the basic game both teams field identical rosters and it's up to the managers to make the difference. There's an option in the advanced version of the game to use the statistics of actual players and I have a set of cards for the 1969 World Series matchup between the Orioles and the Mets from an issue of AH's old All-Star Replay sports game magazine, but the game is not primarily a statistical baseball game. Even when using actual players the game results will turn much more on the manager's calls than player stats.
This game never achieved the popularity of its football sister game, and I'm not sure why. In those days America was much more of a baseball country than a football country, so I don't think it was the relative popularity of the respective sports. It may simply be that Football Strategy was a more direct head-to-head duel that would appeal to non-sports fans more than Baseball Strategy did. The baseball game was definitely a more intricate reflection of its game, and maybe that meant it needed that fan base to really appreciate it.
Be that as it may, Baseball Strategy succeeds as a game depicting its chosen subject very well. It helps make clear why managers make the kinds of decisions they do, although the game really does this best when played as part of a series and not a single game.
The heart of the game is the duel between pitcher and batter. The pitcher selects a lettered pitch card and the batter then selects a numbered swing. The two are cross-referenced on a matrix which provides a number. That number is then checked against another chart which varies based on the fielding quality of the defending team. Many results also need a die roll or two to find the final outcome, so chance plays a bigger role in Baseball Strategy than Football Strategy.
Unlike real life, when pitchers get three strikes, in Baseball Strategy most matchups comprise a single pitch and swing, so the duel really represents the entire "at bat" not just one pitch.
Base-running, scoring and other aspects of the game follow regular baseball rules and the game is short on abstractions.
Unlike Football Strategy, which suffers somewhat because of the evolving style of play in the real NFL that makes the boardgame less like typical games than it used to be, Baseball Strategy still does a good job of reflecting its more conservative sport.
Like the sport it's based on, Baseball Strategy has a cerebral and slow-paced play that may not appeal as much to current tastes as other games, which is too bad, because it is a good game.

Game of the Week: Football Strategy

A true gaming classic, Football Strategy has been around for almost half a century now. It was one of my neighborhood gaming group's staples back when I was a teen and has never disappeared entirely from the table in the years since.
On the other hand the game, unlike the actual NFL version, hasn't really evolved over time, so it doesn't bear as close a resemblance to the current pro game as it used to. The 1980s addition of the "Aerial" and "Ball Control" charts merely fiddled with the edges.
For those who don't know the game, the essential game mechanic is this: The Defensive player secretly selects one of 10 defense cards labeled A through J. The Offensive player then selects one of 20 offensive plays numbered 1 through 20 listed on a chart and announces it. The Defense reveals its card and the two are cross-referenced on the chart to determine the result.
For example, on a 1st Down and 10 on the Offense 40 yard line the Defense player picks "E" (a 4-3 defense). The Offense announces "4" a Slant. Cross-referencing we find that the result is a gain of 4 yards. Continuing our example, the Offense, now on the 44 yard line, calls a pass play, "14" a pop pass. The Defense reveals card "I" which the cross-referenced result shows to be an incomplete pass. And so on.
The main conceit of Football Strategy is that it is a game of pure strategy revolving around play-calling. As such, it isn't really a simulation in the same way as a wargame might be, despite the fact it was published by the well-know wargame company Avalon Hill. The game takes the approach that play-calling is the central strategic decision in football, all things being equal. There's no Tom Brady throwing the ball, nor any T.O. catching it. All player talent and most luck is stripped out of the game.
Of course, in real life all things are never equal, so the Statis-Pro style football games using actual game statistics were better simulations than Football Strategy. On the other hand, Football Strategy was in many ways more satisfying to play because the player had control over his fate. Aside from some luck in the kicking game and the long gain table there wasn't any chance in the game, and better play-calling would prevail, especially in league play.
Wargames are set in situations that are always (and deliberately) unfair, so game designers usually need to attempt to balance the players' chances of winning to a certain degree, often by redefining game victory away from its military counterpart. Its not uncommon for a player to win a "game victory" in a wargame that would still have been an actual military defeat. Few Battle of the Bulge games, for example, require German players to actually win anything like a true military victory in order to claim a game win. Usually just doing better than the historical result is enough.
Sports games, on the other hand, are set in situations that are always "fair." So differences between teams can make playing a statistically based game frustrating for players. Unless one resorts to creating a gambling-style "spread" to play against, its hard to balance it. Hence the attraction of Football Strategy. Its not a simulation because both teams have an exactly equal talent pool and precisely even chances of winning. The end result is completely up to the players, except for a small chance element.
Taken on those terms, Football Strategy, as a sports-themed game of wits, is a timeless classic.