I find it confusing that the linked article claims that “output randomness does not belong in a strategy game”. Strategy games, originally, were intended to mimic warfare, where there is a significant amount of “output randomness” due to what Clausewitz called “friction”. The purpose of injecting randomness via dice rolls is to simulate that friction. Sometimes the weaker unit makes a heroic last stand and drives off a force many times more powerful than it.
In fact, one of my critiques of most “strategy” games is that they don’t have enough randomness. Where are the units getting lost? Or orders being misunderstood or deliberately disobeyed?
I find it confusing that the linked article claims that “output randomness does not belong in a strategy game”. Strategy games, originally, were intended to mimic warfare, where there is a significant amount of “output randomness” due to what Clausewitz called “friction”. The purpose of injecting randomness via dice rolls is to simulate that friction. Sometimes the weaker unit makes a heroic last stand and drives off a force many times more powerful than it.
In fact, one of my critiques of most “strategy” games is that they don’t have enough randomness. Where are the units getting lost? Or orders being misunderstood or deliberately disobeyed?