Grognard Wargamer Thread!


I think Grigsby’s War Between the States was built using the engine he used for World at War. Like most wargames I’ve never spent the time with that I should. The central role of generals seemed interesting. I think there was a mechanic to somewhat randomize the attributes of the generals to add some replay value.


Finally! These can now be found on your LocknLoad account page.



NM, found em. For some reason I was looking in the 'Downloads and Serial Keys" section. Silly me! ;)


Is there an easy comparison between Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa and Strategic Command: WWII? I’d like to pick one for my wishlist. I think I’d prefer the shorter and less laborious game as long as I don’t lose too much interesting strategy.

I know Barbarossa has the political decision-making. That doesn’t necessarily excite me more than anything else.


I would call DC:B a less complicated Grigsby game, while SC:WW2 is a more complicated Panzer General game. Both good in their own way though.


Would Strategic Command be similar to Commander: The Great War (WWI)?


Pretty much, you’re making tactical moves on the map while managing production and engaging in some light diplomacy options.


Now I want to play both. I forgot to mention I’m attracted to the idea of a hardback manual in DC:B, just for fun.


I think I’m in the minority, but I hated Decisive Campaigns. It is super duper fiddly, while not actually giving you any good way of figuring out which fiddly bits are coming into play in any given combat. I honestly had no idea how you were even supposed to play it. It also has the typical “all digital wargames must have a crappy interface” problem.

Strategic Command is much more approachable. I do wish it had some small scenarios to help get into it. The interface is a bit better, but still not great. It’s a lot more like a traditional board war game than Decisive Campaigns.


Looking at stuff like the Desert War game that Matrix is previewing, and the screens for Operational Art of War IV, and the like, I realize now that I no longer have the patience or the real desire to play these sorts of hex-grid and counter wargames. I grew up playing them, from around 1972 onward, and at one point was deeply into it, with hundreds and hundreds of games in my collection.

The computer versions of wargames that try to emulate the board game experience are increasingly inaccessible, or at least, I find them so. I find I have zero interest nowadays in pushing around digital versions of cardboard on pixel versions of paper maps.


Heh, that’s exactly what I want in a digital wargame. What’re’ya gonna do.


Got in a game of Silver Bayonet (25th Anniversary Edition) yesterday. My god what a great experience. The asymmetry in capabilities and therefore strategy between the PAVN and the 1st Cav is so striking, and I suspect captures the historical problems very well. My opponent didn’t reinforce his Special Forces camp at Plei Me very aggressively, so I won an auto-victory by capturing it. (I had luckily drawn that as my Auto Victory chit.). First time through the new version for me (although I had played the old version 25 years ago), first time with the game for him, and it only took us about four hours for three turns. I suspect our second play will cut that at least in half, probably more. Here are some pics from teh tweats from yesterday.


Because you hate all of life’s true pleasures?


Great description. Although I would say that D.C. is almost more complicated than War in the East because you actually have to pay attention to some of the fiddly bits, whereas in Grigsby’s game you can just finesse a lot of it based on how cardboard squares fought each other in wars historically.


Barbarossa has been sitting in my backlog since shortly after purchase. I really ought to go back to it.


OMG those stacks! How many pairs of tweezers did you wear out playing this?

Seriously, looks fun though. Haven’t seen that battle board before.


Oh, I hear you. I envy you, too. I just can’t muster up the energy or focus for this any more. Looking at Bruce’s great descriptions and write-ups about Silver Bayonet just confirm for me that those days are long gone. I used to spend weekends with friends playing monster games set up in someone’s garage or whatnot. But hell, today I can’t even get up the energy for booting up Strategic Command.


I’ve been getting back into Sengoku Jidai : Shadow of the Shogun the past week or so.

When I first bought it I bounced off of it despite loving Pike and Shot to death but it’s been getting its hook in on me now . I think a lot of it was just me switching to campaigns instead of historic battles and accepting that the strategic map is just a fancy random battle generator and I shouldn’t worry about it too much.

I do think the historic battles in Pike and Shot are better though.


FWIW, I find these to be two different things. I, too, can find myself tired after spending two hours alone playing a computer wargame. It can be actively energy-sapping. But sitting with one or more other people around a table, playing a game and socializing, is a totally different beast. I find it rejuvenating.


Wow, look at all those nicely rounded counters. I’m weak at the knees!

Or is it the wrist, at the thought of clipping them all? :)