Surviving IS-2s ???

[Herr Straße Laufer]

One huge problem (with many subcomponents) with gaming design in general is marrying the "average" historical results and the "exceptional" historical results together in one game engine.

This is especially hard since the exceptional results, say Michael Wittman's run of success at Villers-Bocage, are typically the best known, whereas information on average results are typically much less clear, especially since you need to weed out the various things that affect the "average", e.g. terrain, offense-defense, range, cover, concealment, experience, etc. In my opinion, a game designer is better off biasing towards the average rather than worry about incorporating the exceptional, even if it does cut down on variability and "fun".

I think the AF rule was, at least in part, an attempt to satisfy the market's craving for exceptional results in a system that was designed around the average. Some like it, some don't, and that's fine because it's all optional.

Mike

Good points Mike. :smoke:
Remember, too, any plan does not survive first contact?
And, we are all players of various skill levels and tactical quirks that effect any plan?

Plus, the simple playing of a scenario could never be a historically accurate recreation of a battle. Though, some designers are painstakingly meticulous in having them start out that way? Once the game begins anything can happen. :eek1:

We also can not account for the quirks in the game engine for rolling the dice. When luck is included as a factor facts will mostly take a back seat to "real" events? :chin:

In the historical equation that does not even count the "options" available?

Good thread!



HSL