10 Famous Historical Myths Perpetuated by Strategy Games

1 – You Always Know Where Your Enemy is

I think the most prevalent myth in video games, especially in strategy titles, is the misleading assumption that commanders always have clear, real-time knowledge of enemy positions and their intentions. In reality, fog of war was constant and often decisive (the recently released Task Force Admiral does a great job of making the player act under uncertainty, and how complicated and dangerous it can be), with armies relying on scouts, messengers, unreliable reports, and educated guesswork. Misinformation, delayed intelligence, terrain, weather, and simple human error routinely led to surprise attacks, missed opportunities, and catastrophic misjudgments. Most games often grant players some sort of battlefield awareness to preserve fairness and playability, but this dramatically understates how confusion, uncertainty, and incomplete information shaped the outcomes of real historical conflicts. One can imagine that playing a game and spending 99% of the time looking for your enemy isn’t the most fun experience.

Conclusion

Video games have the special power of making history more exciting than books and movies, but the fact of the matter is, and this pains me to tell you, they rarely tell the full or the most accurate of stories. By examining the myths that persist and comparing them to the way things actually were in real life, I think it gives us a greater appreciation of the work done by developers in trying to make what are often boring aspects of reality into exciting bits of gameplay, while also giving us a glimpse at what other people lived and experienced. I think that understanding these myths doesn’t diminish the fun of historical games; it enhances it, giving players a deeper sense of historical context for real events. I hope you enjoyed this article, and let me know in the comments down below if you’re aware of other historical myths that games are constantly making use of.

Support Strategy and Wargaming

I do what I do in Strategy and Wargaming because I love to do this, and I’m never going to stop. If you would like to support me with that, you can buy me a coffee for a dollar if you’re feeling generous. If you can’t, no worries, Strategy and Wargaming will always be free, and I’d love to have you around!

Pages: 1 2 3 4

14 responses to “10 Famous Historical Myths Perpetuated by Strategy Games”

  1. Just a heads up, check the spelling on #4 title. “Gunpowder”

  2. FYI Stronghold got that idea from the original Castles game. I’m sure they got it from something else before that, though.

  3. Trebuchets and other siege engines in field battles. Unless it’s the Romans, siege engines would rarely ever be used due to how long it took to assemble and reload them. One of my major annoyances with total war, they should be restricted to constructable siege equipment. Also heated sand was very common as a siege defence weapon, especially in the middle east, very nasty and almost a limitless resource!

  4. Protracted Cavalry melee combat. Cavalry was a shock weapon not a melee one, just like you mention with the bayonets, it was mostly the psychological factor that gave horsemen the the advantage. They would crash into broken units and cause tremendous damage, but any formation keeping it’s ground until the end would cause an automatic break of the charge. It was a mental game to see who would break first, discipline and drill/maneuverability were key. This was valid both vs infantry and other cavalry.

  5. AI slop, only 7 items listed.

    1. I just counted all the items, and I’m sure there are 10 of them.

    2. Your comment reads like it was written by an AI…

    3. The link I followed to get here brought me in at page 2. I suspect you did the same, but we’re too dim to notice.

  6. Orders are received instantly and understood perfectly…

  7. More of an issue with movies and games like action RPGs (not strategy games so much), but I have two major gripes: 1.) Characters not wearing helmets, and. 2.) No one gets wounded. If you’re hit, you’re dead. In the American Civil War and before, wounded-to-killed ratios in battle were commonly 4-5:1. In WW1 & WW2, it lowered slightly to 2-3:1. In modern warfare, with advances in body armor, it’s back up to 4-5:1.

    As for strategy games, it’s always driven me crazy that they rarely factor in advantages from elevation, and weather effects are almost never accounted for either. Both of those things play MASSIVE roles in battlefield tactics and strategies, especially in battles set in times before the proliferation of air power.

  8. Been watching the old Sharpe series based on the books by Cornwall and really gives good examples of the realities you mention like the French throwing bales of burning straw down from walls. no oil in site. And the confusion of command…looking at you silly Billy. Also its a great show to get you amped for the upcoming napoleanic game by that 7 years war/civil war dev Oliver Keppelmüller.

  9. Bernie Brightman Avatar
    Bernie Brightman

    Guess what: hardly anyone’s playing medieval war games. It’s all WW2 and a little Napoleonics, so relevance?

  10. […] the recent success of my 10 famous historical myths list, and with over 25 years of experience playing history-related titles under my belt, I wanted to […]

Leave a Reply

Trending

Discover more from Strategy and Wargaming

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading

Discover more from Strategy and Wargaming

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading