Talk:Abstract strategy game

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Strategy games, an effort by several users to improve Wikipedia articles on strategy games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.	Portal
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
Mid	This article is on a subject of mid priority within strategy games for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.
Strategy games To-do: edit  Create: Close Combat: The Russian Front • Close Combat: Battle of the Bulge • Close Combat: Invasion Normandy Expand: HeroQuest (board game) • Boku (game) • Qubic • Death Stacks • Entropy (board game) • Fitchneal • Five Field Kono Copyedit: Crossings (game) • Gonnect • Quoridor • Company of Heroes • Dark Reign • Myth (computer game) Cleanup: Abalone (board game) • Battle Realms • Outlive • Stronghold (2001 game) • Fleet Command • Combat Mission (computer game series) • Diplomacy (game) Cite Sources: Colonization (computer game) • MacHack (chess) Update: List of strategy video games More...

Contents 1 Category 2 Renaming proposal 3 Three man something 4 Favorite abstract strategy games 5 Delete "what counts..." and "favorite.." sections?

[edit] Category

We have so many of these, wouldn't it be worth making a subcategory of Category:Board games called Category:Abstract strategy games? Especially since some of them such as Connect Four are currently in no categories at all. —Blotwell 07:33, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I think this makes sense. Andreas Kaufmann 15:20, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Renaming proposal

As the lead section itself bolds abstact strategy game and the article mainly discusses abstract strategy games (as in "what counts as an abstract strategy game"), the title of this article, IMO, would be much more accurate as Abstract_strategy_game. What do you think? Fetofs ^Hello! 14:20, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I agree. Current name "Abstract strategy" doesn't have much sense. Andreas Kaufmann 20:25, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

I have moved the page. Fetofs ^Hello! 11:20, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Three man something

I don't even remember clearly it's name, I played it a long time ago... But it's a nice game... If anyone knows it, it'd be good to make an article... There was 3 squares in center of each other, and four radial lines making a cross, linking them... But the middle lines didn't went inside the inside-most square... Each player start with three 'pawns' in opposite sides... And moved it one line per turn... The objective being reaching the other side with all three pawns... If you never remove one of your pawns from the starting position, your opponent will never win, but so won't you... There's no capture nor stuff... Only moving and trying to get past the opponents...

You're probably thinking of Nine Men's Morris.

Markwpalko 20:44, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Favorite abstract strategy games

The section listing favorite games is a bit odd. Obviously, chess is far mor popular than most (probably all) games on the list; most chess players just haven't rated the game on those internet sites. If the lists are relevant at all, I think they should be presented with more reservations about what they really mean.--Niels Ø (noe) 19:09, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

The list should be deleted. It contains too many games that are not abstract strategy games at all, using rankings that are of questionable relevance and accuracy. — Aldaron • T/C 22:00, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Delete "what counts..." and "favorite.." sections?

The two sections "what counts as an abstract strategy game" and "favorite abstract strategy games" are pure original research and should be deleted. Any arguments in favor of preserving them? — Aldaron • T/C 19:56, 13 February 2008 (UTC)