Quote Originally Posted by David Manley View Post
I think thats a bit unfair. There are plenty of "fast and fun" games out there. And also many that are good simulations whilst also being so. The "game versus simulation" argument is one that comes up frequently amongst wargamers. There seems to be a belief that a set of rules can only tick one of these boxes. I strongly disagree with this belief.
I'll have to agree with David here, as long as there have been wargamers there have been discussions about design for effect (simplify things but with the design created to still achieve historical results on more occasions if you use the historical strategy) versus design for inclusion for want of a better term (this method of design tries to include everything and is generally more complex, slower to play but sometimes preferred by the proponents of minutae) Both approaches have their strengths and both have weaknesses. Both can achieve good historicity and both can be completely ahistorical. These design decisions are not mutually exclusive, sometimes they simplify certain aspects and load complexity onto others. Gamers being gamers, will either load the game with optional/house rules to improve "perceived" realism or drop off rules to simplify the playing of the game.