Horological Meandering

How many of you here like multiple complications? For me a watch can have too many complications, I really prefer time and date, a 24 hour hand is nice to have also. I really have no use for chronographs, moon phase, leap year, perpetual and annual calend... 

I have the Jaeger-LeCoultre Master Ultra Thin Date in rose gold ( ). It's gorgeous, perfectly balanced and timeless. Since you have 2 Rolex with bracelet, a strap option might be nice. This watch sits 7.45mm thin and is a joy to wear. -Dean ...  

Aesthetics and design are the key for me. Some perpetual calendars are an eye examination while others are intelligently laid out and can be read with ease.

Which is the addition of a perpetual calendar, a tourbillon, a minute repeater and a chronograph ( split seconds ). I admire all of them, I am more fan of some rather than others ( mad about minute repeaters and split seconds ), but when it comes to use, ... 

I do admire the complicated pieces like a split second chronograph which might not be used much but it is a demonstration of the skills of the watchmaker. How can one not like a minute repeater for example which might not be so useful since the invention ... 

as long as the the time itself remains highly legible. Things like a Perpetual Calendar seem to be overkill when a triple date or annual will do, but if the best looking and most appealing watch to my eyes at the time happened to be a perpetual chronograp... 

I realize you are asking for opinions and probably asking the wrong audience if you expect the majority to vote against complications, because this is a place where we enjoy not only form, but function. Taking a bit further: Mountains can't be too high - ...  

My most recent purchases have been a hand-wound watch with sub-seconds and a 3-hands automatic with window date. I like the thinness and legibility of these. They complement other watches which are busier and thicker. If I had to choose one or the other, ...