What is your opinion on organic vs artificial complexity? I've run into situations - games that I have played that seem overly complex, multitudes of rules and items to track that seem to enforce variability by way of providing complexity.
Then there are games like Go and Chess - deceptively simple, yet produce a great deal of variation with only a limited set of rules or combinations.
Personally I am a fan of trying to design something simple, easy to learn, easy to play, but in a way that produces a lot of options. It's not necessarily an easy thing to do, but I'm curious to know of what your experiences have been taking one approach vs another? What was your aim, and how well did you succeed at it?
I'm currently working on my own project that attempts to produce variation within a simple framework (http://www.tricorngames.com/) but I'm not yet sure if I'm quite there. Having playing quite a few playtesting rounds, it seems to work rather efficiently for me - but ramping up new players means a round takes 2-3 times longer than a game with practiced opponents.