Teproc
King
Well, here's the definition of Simulation taken from Wikipedia:
Simulation is the imitation of the operation of a real-world process or system over time.[1] The act of simulating something first requires that a model be developed; this model represents the key characteristics or behaviors/functions of the selected physical or abstract system or process. The model represents the system itself, whereas the simulation represents the operation of the system over time.
In that context I have no problems at all with abstractions or simplifications in the simulation modell for gameplay sake. I am sure it would be pretty confusing to have leader traits change every third or four turn. Or how would you know when to start counting BC as long as you don't know when christianity will actually be founded?
Well yeah, my point is that realism is nice when you can get it, but gameplay comes first. It makes no sense to count years in BC/AD inside of Civ, but it's more practical and gives you a sense of the era you're in, if you're ahead of time or not (launching a spaceship in the 16th century is kind of fun).
So I don't have a big problem with archers shooting over hundred of kilometers, because the gameplay of 1UPT is more enjoyable than stacks were. I also think stacks have realism problems, which makes the choice even easier and obvious to me.
I should note that I do like the idea of limited stacks (2 to 4 would be a good range I think) of similar units.
Aside from that, your post actually backs up my point. Note that I obviously didn't claim that the battle of Stalingrad or of Verdun were the only battles going on at the time, or that there weren't front lines during the world wars. This is no contradiction to Civ4's system at all, where in large wars it is very sensible to split up your stacks and where small battles and skirmishes occur every round along the battle lines. 