Interviews by an Optimist #96 - Andy Lewis

Andy said this about himself....

I’m a chemical engineer by training so my style may be different from others - not as wordy, it’s not that I’m not interested; I’m just not verbose. Of course, this call meant I had to go read other people’s bios to see what you want here.

Born: Oct 1962 in Delaware

Degrees: BS in Chemical Engineering, University of Delaware (Go Blue Hens!), MS in Chemical Engineering, University of Idaho, worked on but never completed PhD Chemical Engineering, University of Maine

Currently reside in Delaware with my wife of 10 years, Carrie, and our two sons, Dan and Wes.
I’ve lived in Delaware, Pennsylvania, Idaho, Maine, and California (met Carrie there). Started gaming in 1971 with D-Day from Avalon Hill

Game Collection: probably about 1,000 games - I’m a game junkie who likes to read rules for fun..
Counter Clipper - been doing it since about 1980. Started with Modern Battles 2 - I kept moving 10 units when I tried to move one because of the corner nibs.

First Developer Project: Saratoga (GMT Games)

Current Hobby Position: VP of Design, Development, and Events GMT Games LLC - Basically gate keeper for design submissions and head scout to search out unsigned projects.

Favorite Topic/Genre: Don’t have one. I love a good board game no matter the topic or type (Euro/wargame/sports)

Top 3 All-Time Favorite Wargames: We The People, War at Sea, Advanced Squad Leader

Favorite Conventions: WBC (for tournament play) and Spiel in Essen (one huge dealer area and in Germany to boot - can’t wait to go again)

Other Hobby besides wargaming: Sports (whole family is huge fans of most any kind of sports including lacrosse and Australian Rules Football)

Tom Vasel: Can you tell us exactly what you do at GMT games?

Andy Lewis: I do a variety of things which are associated with getting games into our P500 project. I do the following specific things:

Review game submissions.
Look for new exciting projects people are working on which haven’t found a publisher yet to review.
Assign developers to the games we accept for final work on the projects.
Assist developers with creating, copying, and mailing playtest kits out and provide guidance where needed - in many cases I’ll have provided feedback to the designers during the review process.
Arrange booths at the conventions we attend in the Midwest and East.
Run the booth at a lot of the above conventions - the main exception is WBC where Tony runs the booth the majority of the time.

Tom Vasel: GMT is well known for its P500 system; can you give us a quick explanation of what that is?

Andy Lewis: The P500 system is a pre-order system which allows us to determine which projects our customers are interested in and to generate production capital for those projects. We put games on the P500 list which have been through our development process and are close to complete. The component list is set so that we can price the game. We list the game with its retail price and a P500 price, which is approximately a 30% discount. Our customers then place commitment orders for the games that we want to see published. When a game reaches 500 commitments, we say it has “made the cut”. At this point, we let the designer know that the game will be published. As we can only publish so many games at a time, we use the overall order level and the rate of order increase to prioritize the games in the production schedule. It is this relationship between GMT and our customers that has allowed us to grow and to produce games on less mainstream topics - our customers through their commitments have told us that they are interested in games on those subjects.

Tom Vasel: What are the benefits and disadvantageous of the P500 system?

Andy Lewis: Let me answer this from two perspectives since the focus is different for each, and I fit both.

First, there’s the game buyer. I see three benefits. One, you get a discount of up to 30% on the retail cost of the game. Two, you directly support the company to keep it in business, making the games you like. Finally, the biggest benefit is casting your vote for which games you want to see produced and in what order, since the faster the votes roll in and the higher the number raises normally means the game is produced sooner. The disadvantages are you don’t know how well the game plays and are therefore relying on the reputation of the designer and company for it being a game worth the money, and your money is spent 2-3 months before you receive the game. Also, since you can’t combine most P500 purchases, it’s tough to save on shipping.

Second is the game company itself. Our primary benefit is that we produce those games where we have the money to pay for the production because the P500 subscribers have provided that money. Without this system, GMT would not have survived as a company. Two, or in some cases, just one bad choice of game to produce could sink a company in this hobby (and have). Most wargame companies are undercapitalized, a consequence of not having a large return on investment and getting into the business without enough start-up money to cover expenses until increased product sales kick in. The disadvantage to the pre-order system is we’re at the mercy of our consumers for pre-orders to produce a game. There are more games, especially non-wargames, that I would like to produce because I really enjoy the games, but they never are even listed on P500 because I know they won’t pass. Several of the ones I’ve passed on have never been published.

Tom Vasel: Why do very few companies utilize it? Does the P500 work best with war games?

Andy Lewis: Depends on your perspective about so few companies using it. Our main market is the wargame hobby, and the majority of the companies in that market are now using some form of pre-order system. When you consider Euro or Family Strategy games as well, then ,yes, only a small portion use it. In the Euro/Family Strategy market, I don’t think a pre-order system is used for several reasons. First, there are enough companies that are willing to take the financial risk without a pre-order system that consumers can get their fill of games without pre-ordering. In addition, from what I saw during my visits to Spiel in Essen, a lot of European families make their big game purchases for the year at this show and only after having actually played the games, in some cases several times. I think this ties into the second reason for no pre-orders in this market segment which is that you’re never quite sure what you’re going to get in a game just from its description. I think the percentage of marginal games produced is much higher in the Euro game segment versus the wargame segment. This would make any buyer cautious about buying a game before trying it. Third, I believe the number of games produced per year in the Euro market is much higher than in the wargame market, so there are more choices for your gaming dollars. So you want to spend carefully, which ties back into the “try it before buying” point above. Finally, I would also say that since on average Euro games are cheaper than wargames that a 30% pre-order discount has a higher monetary value in wargames providing better incentive to take the discount. A lot of times I can buy a Euro game at full retail for the same as the pre-order discount on a wargame.

Tom Vasel: Speaking of wargames, what is GMT’s criteria for publishing a game? You have published the occasional Eurogame…

Andy Lewis: This is an easy one. To be published, it has to pass the P500 system.

I expect the question really is what does it take to be put on the P500 system? It needs to be a game that I find enjoyable or has potential, and the component list is such that the price will work for what is in the game.

Tom Vasel: What happens if a game lingers too long on the P500 list? Does it stay there indefinitely? And how do you determine when to print the game?

Andy Lewis: If it lingers too long, then we will take it off the list. Normally this is a process which we discuss with the designer. To a certain extent it is his call as to how long we leave it up. In some cases, they want to take it down to pursue other avenues, DTP in some cases. Some topics we know aren’t going to garner pre-order as fast as others, so we’re more willing to allow them an extended stay on P500. However, if a game doesn’t get close to 500 and doesn’t receive any additional orders for several months than that is a
pretty good indication that it isn’t going to make the cut.

>>>Does it stay there indefinitely?
No.

>>>And how do you determine when to print the game?
No game goes to print until it has at least 500 pre-orders. The specific order of printing games which are over 500 depends on several factors, but the major ones are the total number of orders and highest rate of order increase. In other words, a game that has 800 orders and reached it in 4 months will have higher priority than something at only 650 orders.

Tom Vasel: When actually printing a game, how many games do you print?

Andy Lewis: There is not just one. It depends on the subject, the total pre-order number, the rate of pre-order, and our perception of the game. We normally print between 2,500 and 5,000.

Tom Vasel: What about people who say, “I’ll just buy it from an online discount store, and not bother pre-ordering”? Don’t people like that ruin the whole system?

Andy Lewis: There are folks that don’t P500 stuff from us. From what I see, there are three categories of these gamers. Group one wants to wait for a review first. Group two just doesn’t pre-order games but will order from us within a few days of a game being released. Group three doesn’t pre-order through us but arranges to get a copy from their local store as soon as it’s available.

None of these groups ruin the system as long as we keep a strong P500 base. If this base declines to the point where we don’t get enough orders to produce games, then hopefully some of the others who don’t pre-order will consider switching. The one area where not pre-ordering can hurt those customers is if the game they really want doesn’t rise fast enough or reach the numbers needed to get production moving. In this case, they’ll be waiting longer to get that game they really want.

The good thing is that our overall customer base continues to grow every month at about the same rate it has been growing for the last 7 or 8 years. This means more people who may pre-order. In addition, we’ve made improvements to the P500 system to continue to grow our customer’s loyalty. The charge to ship time is down to about 9 weeks on average and has been for about the last 3 years. On some games, we’ve included bonus items for P500 customers. In addition, we recently adjusted our discounting levels for online discounters so that there should be an actual price advantage again for ordering through P500.

Tom Vasel: What do you think of the fact that other companies are running with the P500 (or some variation) system?

Andy Lewis: I think that whatever works for other companies to remain viable and produce high quality games is great. I’m a game consumer like everyone else. I have little opportunity to play new games these days, but that fact doesn’t reduce my cries of Maypo like the rest of the hobby. I actually enjoy reading rules and seeing what systems that designers have created as a form of relaxation.

Tom Vasel: Do you think more companies will switch to this way of producing games?

Andy Lewis: I can’t speak to what other companies might do. I know that many of the companies that I buy from already have some form of a pre-order system in place. I know for GMT the P500 system allowed us to survive and now allows us to consider game submissions on more unusual topics, which before the P500 system we couldn’t afford to consider, since we wouldn’t know if it would sell. I like this change as it has allowed the hobby to see some really good games on new topics which are done by new or lesser known designers who have a real passion for the topic. This helps also in letting established designers spend more time on the projects they enjoy.

Tom Vasel: You’re very involved in answering questions online about your games. How much time does it take, and how important is it to the company?

Andy Lewis: I couldn’t even begin to estimate how much time. Not necessarily because it’s a large amount, but it’s just something that I do throughout the day.

It is very important to the company and to me. It is our main interaction with our customers outside of phone calls or conventions. Since I have never been to the office, my only other interaction with customers is conventions. Plus as I said before, I play games from other companies, and I want to be able to get answers to my questions quickly too; so I follow the adage, “Do unto others as you want done unto you”.

Tom Vasel: When it comes to board games, what internet sites do you enjoy the most?

Andy Lewis: Consimworld for discussion and Boardgame Geek as an awesome reference site. I also use Web Grognards. The other sites I use for board games on line are ACTS for playing card driven games and March Madness, specific game company sites and online stores - my local store is 90 minutes away, and sometimes I don’t make it up there for a while when a new Euro game comes out that I have to have.

Tom Vasel: Tell us about the future of GMT games…

Andy Lewis: We’ll continue to expand our wargame base with the best games we can offer. We also want to publish some games aimed at introducing gamers in the Family Strategy crowd (Euro gamers as I refer to them) to our style of gaming. Our recent release of Commands & Colors: Ancients is a step in this direction. We also have Winds of Plunder and Conquest of Paradise, which have both made the P500 cut and will be additional steps.

Tom Vasel: What advice would you give an aspiring game designer? How about an aspiring war game designer?

Andy Lewis: First and foremost, don’t design a game because you think you’re going to make big money and do game design as a primary job. Very few people do. Your reward should be in the design process.

Second, playtest the game a lot before ever thinking about submitting it. By this I mean that the finished version you want to submit should be tested dozens of times with a wide range of groups. Don’t just use one group of players and think the game is finished. Those players will play the game, as they have become conditioned to play it. New people/groups will play it totally different and may find other problems. In addition, just because you’ve tested the previous iterations hundreds of times doesn’t mean you can make a final change and test it a few times and call it good.

Third, write a good and complete set of rules that you have other people edit for you. Rule sets with lots of holes are an indication that the game hasn’t been tested enough for the submission reviewer to have confidence that all the major flaws have been caught.

I think the following points are more specific to wargames. Fourth, if you want to design a wargame, pick a subject that you love versus what you think will make a best seller. The passion and quality of work will show through if you’re working on a subject you have a great interest in. In addition, I think a lot of gamers really are looking for games on subjects that they haven’t gamed before.

Fifth, pick the right systems/mechanics to properly portray the key elements of battle/campaign/situation you’ve selected. Don’t just choose a mechanic because it’s the hot seller - for example, Card Driven Games are very popular now. Not all situations should use this mechanic. Be creative. Who knows maybe you’ll design the new hot mechanic which replaces Card Driven.

Finally, contact me when you have a wargame you’re proud of and think is ready for the world. I’d love to review it for publication by GMT. The first step in my submission process is an introductory email including a short summary of the game, a component list, and what things you think make the game so cool.

Tom Vasel: GMT is often looked at as being in the forefront of the war game scene. What steps can you take to ensure that you won’t suddenly fall, like Avalon Hill did?

Andy Lewis: I think comparing GMT with Avalon Hill is like comparing apples to oranges.

Avalon Hill employed people to make the games but was run by people in the printing business, so really management was focused on the bottom line. They “fell” when an offer was made that made too much financial sense.

GMT is run by gamers, some of whom have very good business sense so that we can make it as a company. We are in the business because we enjoy making the games. If we were focused on the dollars we could make for our investment of time and money, there probably wouldn’t be a GMT. I think most any other business has more of a financial up side.

To answer the question of what does GMT need to do to stay viable, we have taken many of those steps already. The institution of the P500 system was a very important and critical step for us. We also need to continue to produce high quality games that people enjoy; without this the P500 system will not work. Finally, we need to continue to have people design and submit wargames for us to produce. We do not have any full time in-house designers, so we depend on freelance designers.

Tom Vasel: There has been some debate recently on the internet about errors made when printing games. How difficult is it to catch errors? What should a company do when errors are located (say a misprinted counter, or something)?

Andy Lewis: We strive for perfection. No designer or developer wants a game to go out with errors. Each game, however, contains literally thousands of pieces of data from individual map hexes to rules sub-cases, and everything in between. Designers, developers, playtesters, proofreaders spend countless hours pouring over every component. Regardless of time spent, something will almost always slip through.

In this day and age of on-line communications, most errors are easily corrected through the use of living rules incorporating errata, and electronic jpeg downloads of corrected counters, map hexes or player aid cards. Individual counters with errors are reprinted later in subsequent C3i editions, and counters or maps with catastrophic errors are reprinted and shipped to customers (some examples - the For the People and Borodino maps, and two of the three counter sheets for Grand Illusion).

Tom Vasel: What are your personal favorite games? Have you ever thought about designing a game yourself?

Andy Lewis: My top 3 all-time favorites are War at Sea, We The People and Advanced Squad Leader. It’s hard for me to rank/pick below those, because there are so many good games.

I designed a game with a friend when we were about 12 or 13. I have not thought about it since then. I don’t have the interest in doing the historical research. In addition, I don’t have a design vision on games. I have a developer’s view. The two really are different. To be a good developer, you have to put away the desire to make the game, be what you want it to be. It’s supposed to be the designer’s vision, and the developer is supposed to polish it so that the design vision shines though.

Tom Vasel: What are little things that you find yourself constantly fixing in most games as a developer?
Andy Lewis: I wouldn’t say that I really find the same things to fix a lot. Each game is unique and needs attention in different areas. I think the biggest area which gets attention isn’t a mechanic. It’s the presentation of the rules. It’s very hard to write a complete and well organized rulebook when you’re designing a game. The designer is so close to the project that they can’t see things which are obvious to someone who has no clue about the game, which is one of the reasons we assign developers in the first place - a fresh set of eyes.

I do ask designers to think about doing two things which are positives for the game if they’re feasible:

A) If the game would work in a tournament setting, don’t leave obvious places for people to cheat. This is why Twilight Struggle has the rule for tournaments that you must reveal any cards you’re holding at the end of turn. Otherwise, a few players might hide a scoring card and play it the next turn, when it works better for them by saying they just drew it that turn.

B) Try to make the victory conditions based on points. This makes it easier to adjust the balance in a game after it is released. Maybe a strong strategy is found by the masses that the crack playtesters never thought of. If the game is won by victory points, the numbers can be shifted or in tournament play you can bid points to play a side.

Tom Vasel: Have you ever gotten a game that needed no further development?

Andy Lewis: We have gotten several games that have not needed internal development, but they were from designers who had their own developers and a very large core of dedicated playtesters. So the games went through the same process all our games do; they just did theirs before submission.

Tom Vasel: Andy, thanks for spending time with us and answering these questions. Do you have any final thoughts for our readers?

Andy Lewis: It was my pleasure to have this interview. I was surprised and honored to be asked. Gaming has been my hobby and passion for 34 years now. I have enjoyed it not just for the games themselves but the camaraderie with my opponents; few things beat an evening spent over a game with friends. I hope what we do at GMT spreads this joy to many others for years to come. Enjoy the games!

© 2006 Rick Thornquist

---

Comments:

You must register with BGN in order to comment. Registration is free!

No comments yet.

< Back Home