"Insight of Women Wargaming" Topic

Of possible interest?

PDF link

Armand

I find it interesting that the author thinks commercial rules sets have "game mechanics that are generally too complicated for professional use". I'm not sure what that says about commercial rules or professional wargamers.

Wait someone actually gets paid to play? My first instinct is sign me up. But talk about killing a simple joy.

Ha!…

Armand

I find it interesting that the author thinks commercial rules sets have "game mechanics that are generally too complicated for professional use".

Obviously, she's never played Dunn-Kempf or any of the Army's other "professional" games. A friend of mine recounted the tale of an Army wargame (being played to provide input for a logistical exercise) where each individual shout was tracked in detail. One of his soldiers fired at the start of the game, and the result wasn't tallied until some six hours later!

There is a difference between "complicated" and complex, detailed, or granular.

Dr. Wong has run games with far more detail than various instantiations of Dunn-Kempf.

In a hobby wargame event, gaming the game or rules can be as much a challenge as gaming the scenario, strategy or tactics, thus can be as enjoyable for some people. In a professional analytic wargame, the purpose is not enjoyment, but insight. So just like you want to minimize the things that get in the way of enjoyment (different things for different people on different days) in a hobby game, you want to minimize the impact of things that do not directly contribute to the desired insight in an analytical wargame.

Her statement is not much different than hobby gamers saying one game is too "crunchy" another not crunchy enough, and they one they like just right. In many cases the things that contribute to an enjoyable competition get in the way of providing clear insights on specific relationships in warfare.

Thanks.

Armand