Lurking the forum I’ve found many posts labeling this game as “funny but not a simulation”. I do agree with this statement, although I consider “funny” too little, because this game is really engaging and exciting, but I’m pretty curious about the areas that you guys think could (should?) be improved with regard to realism.
I wouldn't speak of "realism". This is a game, and it is not real:
- you don't get shot at, or cause anyone to be
- you assume the position of hundreds of commanding officers and their staffs, and decide pretty much everything, from individual pilot transfer, to ship loading and unit movement
- you have, at all time, a perfect knowledge of your troops, and their capabilities, everywhere, and can interact with them instantly
- against the AI, you can restart or replay a turn,
- you benefit from all the technical knowledge (about the game and history) shared on the forum
- you have hindsight, ie you know which were the strengths and weaknesses of each side, and you know the game designers knew them, and factored them into the system
I think you can call it a simulation, though, and that it is a pretty good one. You get results which make sense, according to what we know, or believe, about the historical events, and warfare. Like all simulations, it is based upon facts, but also opinions the development team had about the war, and why/how things happened. One might agree, or disagree, with some of those opinions, but again, nothing feels "totally wrong".
This said, I believe we all have things we like more, and things we like less.
Personally, I like the ground model, because it feels right to me, and it is not overly detailed (I don't care much about the hardware, and if I wanted a tactical/grand tactical game, I'd play one). I enjoy the air war less, because I find it too detailed for my taste, so it often feels like an exercise in clicking and testing how the system works, but I understand some people love it for that same reason.
More generallly, I really enjoy the large scope of the game, having to think global and long term, and like the micromanagement less. I'd love a future AE to allow me to automate some of those tasks, and not cause TF2356 wait in port because I forgot to tell her to load, or refuel, or disband, or pilot John Doe wait for me to tell him where he should go next. This amount of control is also the part of the game I feel as the "less real". I have the impression the game gives me much more control over my units, and much shorter reaction delays, than any actual commander, or staff, had.
But those things I like less have not stopped me from playing. So I suspect the game "works" for me.
< Message edited by fcharton -- 1/9/2013 9:07:50 PM >