"Games & Simulations - a tie!" Topic
5 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please remember that some of our members are children, and act appropriately.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Wargaming in General Message Board
Areas of InterestGeneral
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Featured Showcase Article A cheap way to pick up on the latest fad and get your own dice cup for wargaming?
Featured Workbench Article
Featured Profile Article Need to ship an army abroad from the U.S.?
|
 Editor in Chief Bill   | 06 May 2019 4:16 p.m. PST |
You were asked – TMP link One of our members once said:If you are playing a game, you are not reproducing the battle. Do you agree? 39% (tie) said "I agree" OR "I disagree" |
| von Schwartz | 06 May 2019 4:37 p.m. PST |
You are only reproducing the conditions, the course of the battle is up to the participants. Why engage in a competition if you already know the outcome? |
| surdu2005 | 09 May 2019 4:05 a.m. PST |
The simulation vs. game debate is a false dilemma. All games are simulations, and vice versa. The debate needs to be over resolution and fidelity, which are independent variables. I will use somewhat loose definitions of these terms: Resolution is level of detail.
Fidelity is how well the game matches expected historical results -- the "accuracy" of the results. You can have a game with lots of resolution (detail) that is no better -- and sometimes worse -- fidelity than one with less resolution. The resolution vs. fidelity debate is impacted by sloppy rule development in which someone throws together a set of rules in 4 months. Reducing resolution without loss of fidelity requires time and analysis, which I think takes years. Buck |
| ACWBill | 09 May 2019 6:52 a.m. PST |
I approach scenario design with this question: Is an historical result possible? This does not mean designing a scenario that will always come out in any particular result. As others have said here, it would no longer be playable or fun. |
 etotheipi  | 09 May 2019 3:30 p.m. PST |
Managing both resolution and fidelity is important, but can only be done in the context of the primary question, "What's important?" Any wargame will have different things at different levels of resolution and fidelity. The fact that everything can't be included means some things are at no resolution and no fidelity. Many basic (necessary) things that are included wouldn't even have the same type of resolution and fidelity; ground scale at level of command – fundamentally different things with fundamentally different characterizations of resolution and fidelity. The things that are included get the context from the "why" behind the "what". We're going to have company level orders manifested in squad level movement. How do we do that? Well … why are we issuing company orders and representing units as atomic at the squad level? |
|
