From: United States
In board war gaming you had the classic 60s style (albeit simply and somewhat boring) games such as Afrika Korps, D-Day, Battle of the Bulge, Waterloo and Chancellorville.
Then something wonderful happened in 1969, SPI was born and during the 70s thanks to JFD you got Panzerblitz, Normandy, Barbarossa, Bastogne, Borodino, Austerlitz, Breakout & Pursuit, Bull Run, France 1940, 1812 and War In The East (1st edition 1974).
These all led to all the Quad games (Napoleon at War, North Africa, West Wall, AGS and Modern Battles, plus the Blue and Gray) and then to the “monsters”: War in Europe, War in the Pacific, Campaign for North Africa, Atlantic Wall, Terrible Swift Sword and Wellington’s Victory. Not to mention all the modern war concepts like The East is Red, The Next War, Oil War and so many other titles. Red Star/White Star, Mech War 77, Mech War 2, Air War, etc.
The 70s was the golden age of board war games, with companies like GDW producing The Europa Series, and the Third World War Series along with the Assault Series. It also saw the revival of AH which finally produced some good games like Anzio, The Longest Day and Squad Leader.
The 80s-90s saw some more improvements with The Gamers OCS and SCS series, both of which were more complex and enjoyable then the old Classics of Year’s gone by.
So the point is, most war gamers are hard core, have many tastes and want many games usually more complex or intricate then before.
So I don’t agree with your arguments.
War in the East/War in the East II - Alpha Test Teams WarPlan Beta Tester DG CWIE2 tester/SPWW2 and SPMBT playtester/scenario & campaign creator