In his essay on the board game Twilight Struggle (TS) from Pat Harrigan and Matthew G. Kirschenbaum’s 2016 collection Zones of Control: perspectives on wargaming, Jeremy Antley notes that “wargames are synthesized reflections of the past situated in the present mindset of their creation,” and concludes that TS is “in effect, both a secondary source about Cold War history and a primary source about modern reflection on the Cold War experience. Because of this, Twilight Struggle, and by extension the wargame genre as a whole, holds tremendous promise as an investigative source for use in historical scholarship and pedagogy” (Location 10727). In the same collection, designer Ted S. Raicer, comments on the nature of Card Driven Game (CDG) systems and how “having a hand of cards allowed for a certain level of advance planning, while lack of knowledge of the opponent’s hand introduce an element of fog of war and the random nature of the draw Clausewitz’s ‘friction’ (‘In war everything is simple, but the simple things are difficult’)” (Location 3852). I write in support of these notions, not only to further explore them inside the design of TS and their ubiquity and applicability in other game designs, but also to consider the broader ramifications of this line of academic enquiry.

中文翻译：

---

具有意义的棋盘：对游戏设计和史学的思考

Jeremy Antley 在 Pat Harrigan 和 Matthew G. Kirschenbaum 2016 年合集《控制区：兵棋推演的观点》中关于棋盘游戏 Twilight Struggle (TS) 的文章中指出，“兵棋推演是过去的综合反映，位于其创作的当前心态中，”并得出结论，TS“实际上既是关于冷战历史的次要来源，也是关于现代冷战经验反思的主要来源。正因为如此，《暮光之城》，乃至整个兵棋推演类型，作为历史研究和教学法的调查来源，具有巨大的潜力”（位置 10727）。在同一个系列中，设计师 Ted S. Raicer 评论了纸牌驱动游戏 (CDG) 系统的性质以及如何“拥有一张纸牌可以实现一定程度的预先计划，而缺乏对对手手牌的了解则引入了战争迷雾的元素和克劳塞维茨的'摩擦'（'在战争中一切都很简单，但简单的事情很困难'）的随机性质和平局的随机性”（位置3852）。我写这些观点是为了支持这些观点，不仅是为了在 TS 的设计中进一步探索它们以及它们在其他游戏设计中的普遍性和适用性，而且是为了考虑这一学术研究线的更广泛的影响。