For a new chum it might be necessary to start off with a very long runway and the usual post failure steering exercise until runway head and freeze.
Once the rudder work is up to speed, a useful technique is to use repetitive takeoffs (via freeze at, say, 300ft and reposition to BRP)
(a) run the training exercise raw data
(b) start with a reasonably high weight, forward CG which gives reasonable control and a high V1. (If the student needs an easier introduction, try using an overspeed schedule).
(c) step sequence to lower weight forward CG which retains reasonable control with a reducing V1
(d) step sequence either to minimum weight at forward CG for minimum (stall limited) V1 or the weight at which V1 becomes constant (Vmc limited)
(e) step sequence slowly to aft CG. Generally the main problem seen is a rapidly increasing roll response. The trick for this is aggressive rudder and aileron
(f) once the student gets on top of this introduce reducing minima. This ought not to be a real problem as the last bunch of failures have been on the clocks anyway but it does boost student confidence.
(g) then return to min weight forward CG and run the failure so that the yaw response is delayed until well into the rotation.
(h) step sequence to aft CG
That's as hard as we can make it.
The only other useful workload increase is if the particular sim has a realistic catastrophic failure. On a contract around 10 years or so ago, the 732 sim concerned had an FDR record crane impact modelled and that was interesting .. especially until we got used to the button's location and avoided selecting it in the dark during cruise ... As an aside, this particular operator's procedures generally emphasised high overspeed schedules so the general training work for their pilots had been skewed to the easier end of things ...
I've used this approach for a number of students who were a tad frightened of engine failures (and, as a consequence, were poor performing) and the results were uniformly productive.
Subsequent "normal" sim failures were a doddle and my students had no trouble with such exercises during their endorsement checks.
Of course, the instructor penalty usually is a few slabs for the sim techs who turned a blind eye to extra time and sessions where required ..
The degree of sim fidelity is pertinent. However, providing that the apparent response is reasonable, the generic training value will be useful. The handling delta between min V1 and aft CG and "normal" will be significant.