I'd call it "smart", mate. The purpose of a hobby is enjoyment. there may be some frustrations (like making 0.3mm eyes out of copper wire, for model WWI aircraft rigging) and disappointments, but as long as the enjoyment lasts so will the hobby. So there's nothing wrong with preferring a good game to a tedious "simulation".ochoin wrote: ↑Fri Nov 29, 2024 7:08 pm I don't know if it's shameful or pragmatic to admit that I often prefer to let history be ignored in favour of a good game.
Poor leadership & a creaky system of command certainly existed. But if by using such historical precedents, you make it virtually impossible for a side (in this case, the French) to win a game, the French player will stop playing.
I haven't given up on a possible trip, Donald, though European plans are slowly disappearing over the "Dad Bank" horizon.
I don't mind reasonable cock-ups in C&C rules either, VB. Even something as simple as a guard mount can go extremely pear-shaped in real life. But it's the way some rules deal with C&C issues that can be irritating. Having a unit unable to do anything- defend itself, take a defensive posture, ask for orders, make a brew, etc- because they are 1 nanometre out of command range is a major one for me. Even of the senior officer is a waste of oxygen, food and water then there will be someone/s who will take charge and try to extricate the unit.valleyboy wrote: ↑Sat Nov 30, 2024 6:47 pm Interesting comments Donald, I know nothing about DKK but am a real fan of GdeA (both 1 & 2). I like the ADC order system because it brings the "inability to control" into a game. I enjoy the frustration that not being able to do what you want to get units to do into the game. That aspect does irritate the hell out of my gaming mate though so its not everyone's cup of tea!