"Fast-Playing Rules" Topic

"I am satisfied…" because there is a variety of rules each with their own level of detail. I play some, not others, as the whim takes me.

I think there are some too fast-play rules, but they influenced rules In general to become simpler, which is good. We rarely see rules that read like law books these days.

Sort of like how punk saved rock-and-roll from its own excesses.

My feeling is that rules have become too simplified with too much emphasis on "fast play" and "fun" at the cost of historiocity

I agree with Shagnasty, rules have become too simplified and many of them have seem to show no historical research other than a few Osprey's prior to writing them.

Fast-play isn't a huge concern to me when choosing rules. I look for well written and clearly presented without superfluous photos. Simple mechanisms can work if used appropriately but that rarely happens.

I'm always wary of superficial simplicity, it often means some major factors or features of the period are being ignored or 'factored in' (i.e. the author can't work out how to take them into account).

My ideal is to be able to have 3 games in a reasonably relaxed afternoon or evening, preferably playing on a 2 to 3 feet deep table. That said, I want combat results to appear to be reasonable, and sensible tactics for the period to be rewarded.

There are potential problems with simple, fast-play rules, of course. For instance, you might represent a unit of Napoleonic Wars line infantry with one base. How do you deal with the "Is it in square because of the enemy cavalry within a move distance and if so, what to do about artillery shooting at it?" problem?