I have been burned by opponets playing very looses with the rules. Such as capturing Moscow in a Russian front game with a flak counter etc.
You have not been "burned" unless opponent has cheated. You have been beaten fairly under the rules of the game;^) That is not to say that the game might not suck. Except for reloading moves or re-scripting files there is no way to Cheat in a computer game. Granted most computer games are very poorly constructed from Both simulation and game stand points.
Little understood fact NO GAME IS A COMPLETE SIMULATION (or even probably good). Solution: understand that it is a game and not a simulation on most levels.
Other important fact generally the more complex a game becomes the less valid it is as a simulation. As the complexity puts player on many levels of control not pertinent to the level of command being represented(rarely does regiment commander sight individual AT guns). Also as complexity increases more poorly thought out rules will appear that will be exploited by GOOD players. It is not hard for me to find opponents that are much better than I at exploiting much of the complex construction of a game like for instance Operational Art Of War. Solution Human opponent: find opponents with similar skill level to myself (lesser becomes boring after the first couple of games). I am not a GOOD player, I am a good player sometimes when I am in the ZONE with a particular game. Solution AI: As you state self limiting is a good way.
Huge problem with computer games. When they are broken you are stuck waiting for the developer to fix them. Most of the time this never happens. But they have the advantage of both players stuck playing the same game with rules enforced by the computer.
Board and miniatures games have the problem that the player who is most assertive about ambiguous rules interpretation has a serious advantage. Solution: tell them to screw themselves;^)(eg be more assertive).
