Scheldt '44 - Realism versus Playability?

[Kool Kat]

Gent: 

"My point is just that more flexibility doesn’t always equal a more balanced game and that more thought was put into this than just trying to force players to recreate history." - Mike Prucha

My argument is that flexibility does not equate to balance, but instead leads to more engagement of the player with the game. I contend that a player's mind must be engaged and stimulated to maintain interest in a game.  
 
If historical accuracy and outcomes are paramount in a design, then the results are limited options, programmed movements / actions, and limited player flexibility. I content that such a design may have novelty at the start, but that players after a short time with such a design will not be fully engaged or interested. They quickly work out what must be done (or can be done) and move on to other games. Such designs do not encourage players to think creatively. It is more a historical simulation then a game. 

I am a player who values historical accuracy, but not at the expense of player flexibility and creativity. Scheldt '44 is designed with a specific type of player in mind. A niche market within a niche market. I am quickly discovering that I am not a Scheldt '44 player, but more of a desert or Russian steppes player. And that's ok. Mike - you stated that Scheldt ' 44 is "not everyone's cup of tea." I wish I had come to this conclusion before I purchased Scheldt '44.