updated 031105

From F&M 8; by Joe Balkoski

A comment about errata:

Recently a writer in an important wargaming magazine accused Richard Berg of having 'botched' TSS, largely because of the errata which has appeared for that game. It is hard for anyone who has not been personally involved in game design or development to realize the impossibility of perfecting the rules before they are printed. I use the word 'impossibility' advisedly. When someone comes out with a flawless rule-book, then we can say that it is difficult. Until then, I feel justified in saying that it is impossible. Taking WACHT as an example, I believe that exasperation is justified for certain oversights. For example, surely SPI should know better than to use the term 'U.S.' when 'Allied' is meant. There are at least half-a-dozen examples of this sort. I don't know if SPI has a 'style-book' for rules writing, but if they do, it should include the niggling, but annoying, points such as these. It is the larger points that seem to me more excusable, despite their greater significance, such as the question of blocked entry, or entry traps. In a game of this scale particularly, it is a Herculean labor to anticipate all the tricks which the players will discover, and it is only by a willingness not to pretend to perfection. but to issue those ubiquitous errata sheets, that we finally arrive at thoroughly sorted games.

Please send comments and corrections via to Wargame Academy

Go to the Wargame Academy main page