This deserves some discussion....

[Kelen]

Small = Rewards microing the game principles in how they apply to each unit, carefull meticulous manouvre of each peice/unit. Individual units can sway the game. How one controlls the singular is key.

Large = Rewards meta concepts such as planning and strategy. Individual units are irrelevant compared to formations of units. How one controlls the many is key.

Whilst I agree in general I would have to qualify the bit about, 'Individual units are irrelevant compared to formations'; standard infantry units, yes, specialised units no.

Many a game I've managed to recover a dodgy situation because of the actions of a lone AT gun, tank, FAO, etc, and many the time I've seen my plans turn to ashes because of the actions of same.

The one is always subservant to the many, but woe betide the player who ignores that lone unit!

As for game size for new players, I started on 2000pt QB's and moved up to 3000pt. My first small game didn't come for many months and games after and was a total disaster as, as has been said already, small games are VERY unforgiving. One slip-up, or one bit of luck for either player can, (and did), end the game right there.

It must be remembered though that everyone will find their preferred size and type of game, and that not everyone has it in them to be a General, and not every General makes a good Captain.

[Zemke]

[Ratzki]

small games are VERY unforgiving. One slip-up, or one bit of luck for either player can, (and did), end the game right there.

Kelen, you have hit apon the hinge-pin of the small game vs large game debate. The fewer units you and your opponent have, the more luck and chance have potential to play a major role in the outcome. Good planning and execution still take the lead but when a single shot can eliminate 10-20% of you force in points, the door for lady luck is open wide.
To make a comparison of sorts, sports championships at all levels are more difficult to win when the number of playoff games increases. If it only takes one game to advance to the next round in the playoffs, and you and your team puts together a good game and your opponent plays a poor game, well you win he loses and you advance. But make the series a best of 5 or 7 or whathaveyou and odds are that the best team will win with luck playing a lesser role.
One tank vs one tank all being equal.... or 1000 tank vs 1000 tanks all being equal, luck plays the greater role in the former. Are small games good for the beginner, I think so but you may win or lose much more readily reguardless of your opponent. Few times in larger games will the player with the better plan and execution lose to chance or a few lucky shots.

[Walkure]

OK here are my two cents worth...................IMHO small games are for guys that like to micro manage and for guys that are just starting out. The larger games lend themselves better to giving orders by doctrine.
I think the frustrantion kicks in when a micro manage guy takes the plunge and starts a larger 5K+ game and doesn't change his frame of mind and vice versa.


Walkure:whis:

[Zemke]

Walkure are we ever going play? I am starting to smell....hmmm what is that....oh yes Fear!.....lol

[Walkure]

You have nothing to fear, i'm usually very nice to you.............................we were suppose to find a good map to have our usual large game.


Walkure

[Zemke]

Heck with the map, we now got two 5000 pointers on a computer generated map.