Scheldt '44 - Realism versus Playability?

[Liebchen]

Technically, the only historical accuracy is at the start of the game.  Everything after that is what you choose to do.  Cdr's didn't get replays to watch.  You have an advantage already, if you choose to use it.  I don't.  The more time I spend on replays, the less time I spend on playing and I would much rather play than watch videos.  I got EFII in Dec 94 and haven't watched replays since sometime in 95.  Personally, I think replays should be an optional rule.

Replays are an option, since it always asks you if you want to watch or not... 

[Outlaw Josey Wales]

Technically, the only historical accuracy is at the start of the game.  Everything after that is what you choose to do.  Cdr's didn't get replays to watch.  You have an advantage already, if you choose to use it.  I don't.  The more time I spend on replays, the less time I spend on playing and I would much rather play than watch videos.  I got EFII in Dec 94 and haven't watched replays since sometime in 95.  Personally, I think replays should be an optional rule.

Replays are an option, since it always asks you if you want to watch or not... 

That is not what I am saying.  Right now, you could choose not to, but, your opp can.  In reality, Cdrs don't get replays before deciding what to do.  As an optional rule like I am talking about, is both players can watch or both players cannot watch.

[Outlaw Josey Wales]

Technically, the only historical accuracy is at the start of the game.  Everything after that is what you choose to do.  Cdr's didn't get replays to watch.  You have an advantage already, if you choose to use it.  I don't.  The more time I spend on replays, the less time I spend on playing and I would much rather play than watch videos.  I got EFII in Dec 94 and haven't watched replays since sometime in 95.  Personally, I think replays should be an optional rule.

Replays are an option, since it always asks you if you want to watch or not... 

That is not what I am saying.  Right now, you could choose not to, but, your opp can.  In reality, Cdrs don't get replays before deciding what to do.  As an optional rule like I am talking about, is both players can watch or both players cannot watch.  It's just another way to play.

[76mm]

  In reality, Cdrs don't get replays before deciding what to do. 

But of course commanders don't need replays because, unlike in the game, they actually lived through and experienced the events the first time.

I don't watch replays simply because they take up too much time, but I can't see how watching them could be considered "unfair" or "unrealistic"?

[lezgo killemall]

  In reality, Cdrs don't get replays before deciding what to do. 

But of course commanders don't need replays because, unlike in the game, they actually lived through and experienced the events the first time. 

I don't watch replays simply because they take up too much time, but I can't see how watching them could be considered "unfair" or "unrealistic"?

I don't watch replays either but that's only because I hotseat against myself and have already lived thru the horror.  But if I were still pbem i would always watch.

[Liebchen]

That is not what I am saying.  Right now, you could choose not to, but, your opp can.  In reality, Cdrs don't get replays before deciding what to do.  As an optional rule like I am talking about, is both players can watch or both players cannot watch.  It's just another way to play.

I don't think that a replay is any more cheating than watching your troops in combat in real time, getting action reports on the radio, etc.

While I don't always watch replays, in some situations (Smolensk, say) not watching the replays can lead to forced errors, such as moving into contact with a formation that your troops saw and knew was there, but that may have moved out of sight before the end of the turn.

[Volcano Man]

Personally (not that anyone asked!), regarding unit quality:

I think that using lower quality units is not done enough in wargames, in general. If you go back and look at the past PzCs, the quality levels are usually all very high - which I have referred to as the "quality level arms race". The attacker is usually given high quality levels (like B, average), because its felt that they need it to be successful. Then it is discovered that the defender must be given good quality to defend, or else they get run over, surrounded and destroyed, so you end up with both sides being rated very highly, typically.

I think Scheldt '44 takes a realistic look at the quality levels, and I applaud that.

We are so used to everything being A-B, but A quality should be used rarely, with C and D being used most often, and then you end up with some realistic performances. Especially in PzC series, where the attacker almost always has a near total advantage, except in cases where the front line is heavily fortified (its one of the reasons I like N44 and K43); more realistically lower quality levels helps give the defender some ability to conduct a historical defense rather than being overrun everywhere, all the time.

----------------------------------

Side note regarding the differences between Market Garden in MG44 and S44: I would guess that it has to do with more research being available. Its the same reason why so many books can be written about the same campaign, and yet they can each still contain different information as more becomes known, and research digs deeper.