The IGA announced their Historical Simulations category winner for 2007, and it was A Victory Lost. Up against it were several mediocre games, including the sadly broken Shifting Sands, and the SCS reprint of Afrika, but I have to say I was stunned that Combat Commander did not whup every other game in the field. CC:E is superior in almost every measurable way to AVL, the sole exception being that if you can't handle the fact that a battlefield is an inherently chaotic place, you won't like the game. Most armchair generals tend toward being control freaks, I guess. Still, they gave the nod to Twilight Struggle the year before, which I find equally baffling, so I guess they are living up to their non-newsworthiness that has plagued the award since it's inception.
What is definitely disturbing, and why I won't pay the slightest attention to the award in the future, is that the developer for A Victory Lost is one of the judges. Yes, I've looked at how they vote and who wins, but the very fact that the developer is involved in any way completely destroys the credibility of the vote. [Ed. note - Adam Starkweather abstained from the voting, and I apologize to Adam and the IGA for not checking this before posting to the blog. I still stand by my contention that CC:E is a more worthy recipient of the award. Thanks to Greg for catching this.]
I would like to be clear that I think that AVL is a very good game, and in any other year it probably *should* be the winner. However, given the expandability, story, elegance, tension, literary feel, and above all the best damned wargame rulebook *ever*, how CC:E failed to win completely escapes me. So what killed it, guys? No tanks? Didn't draw a Recover card when you needed one?
I guess that's why no one cares about this award.