Thoughts on the military and military activities of a diverse nature. Free-ranging and eclectic.

Thursday, January 29, 2004

Board Game?

This is coolbert:

The inevitability of it all. Stalingrad.

How the German Army was defeated in the turning point of the war against Hitler.

And endless debate has gone on since with thought about, "well, if the Germans had only done, this, or if the Germans had only done that". Etc.

I recall that Avalon-Hill put out a board game say forty years or so ago that was called Stalingrad.

As a lark, some students at say, the Army War College got this game and played it in their spare time.

At some point it became more than a lark when over and over, the end results of the board game came out more or less the same as did the actual battle for Stalingrad.

Whether the game was played by two players, a team of players, or by one player controlling both sides [this game was one of a type where one player could fairly play the game by themselves], the results were more or less similar to the actual outcome of the battle.

The Russian victory according to this board game seems to be more or less pre-ordained.

A result not anticipated by the players. Even knowing all the mistakes made by the Germans, and taking these mistakes into account during play, Russian victory was almost always a sure bet.

Why would this be?

Is there a flaw in the board game?

Anyone else have comments on this?



Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home