3 ms·
There's a huge upside the article misses. Having discrete movement allows the rules to be easily and exactly mentally simulated by humans. And that is key to a
by tgb 8y ago
There's a huge upside the article misses. Having discrete movement allows the rules to be easily and exactly mentally simulated by humans. And that is key to a lot of tactical thought where you enumerate the possible responses and counter responses you and your opponent can have.
For the opposite side of the spectrum, see the excellent game Frozen Synapse which has non-discrete motion and so to allow this "simulate the future" aspect they actually allow you to plan future moves for both yourself and the opponent and test them out. Without that, exact movement loses a certain appeal that is shared by chess and go and hex-based games. There's still pleasure to be had in free-form movement and it should be better explored too. But don't forget why the old ways were great.
- tyingq 8y agoI agree. I used to play a game called "Full Metal Planet", which was hexagon based. It didn't resemble real military tactics in any way. But it was fun, addicting, and you could do it all in your head...no need to consult the manual, take notes, etc. Mapping a game such that it's as true to life as possible doesn't necessarily make a fun game.
- dalore 8y agoBut then one might say you miss the point of war games. The point isn't to have exact movement and have it calculated like chess, it's meant to be messy. War is messy and analog. The war games are trying to capture the real life element of war which isn't at all like go or chess with exact movements.