A short intro from yours truly today, as there’s been plenty of things happening this week that we can catch you up on, even though we’ve already had a fairly interesting week already. I mean Steel Division II! Who’d have thought it? And Bill actually liking a Total War game!? Madness!

Meanwhile, in the world of wargaming…

Armored Brigade’s second dev diary

The top-down WW3 real-time tactical wargame Armored Brigade has received another dev diary. This time game designer Juha Kellokoski takes us through how players can manage defensive battles plans, talking us through the various stages, and options available the player.

There’s a bit too much information to summarise here, but it’s a very interesting blow-by-blow account of a sample skirmish game that show cases all of the tactical options available to a defensive player, as well as reinforcing what the concerns are. If you remember from the last dev diary, the prevailing point is that “if you can see it, you can kill it”, so you have to plan carefully. Read the full diary for more.

Lock’n Load Digital Teaser

Lock’n Load Publishing have been talking a lot more about their upcoming digital products these past couple of weeks. Yesterday, they put out a new trailer showing some demo footage of Lock’n Load Tactical Digital, the computerised version of their table-top LnL Tactical ruleset.

It’s not even 3 minutes long, but already things seem to be shaping up nicely.

Grand Tactician Celebrates Bull Run

Grand Tactician is an upcoming real-time American Civil War game that will put a lot of emphasis on supply and logistics. In celebration of the recent anniversary of the 1^st Battle of Bull Run, they’ve released a gameplay video from the Alpha version.

Command & Colors: Ancients goes AWOL

As we hear news of more GMT digital games coming on the horizon, another GMT digital project goes AWOL. HexWar’s adaptation of Command & Colors: Ancients was supposed to be releasing today, however at some point the release date on the steam page changed to simply ‘August 2018’. We’ll keep you posted.

Victory at Sea: Ice Cream Edition

Evil Twin Artworks continue to mercilessly tease as with their new naval RTS/Wargame, Victory at Sea: Pacific. Instead of sending us a shiny steam code that we can use to actually play they game, they’ve instead sent another teaser on some of the ships that will be part of the roster.

Victory at Sea: Pacific is set to boast over 120 ships and aircraft that will be available for use through-out the campaign, including some stranger vessels that turned up during the course of the Pacific campaign.

These include the Japanese I-400 Submarine, the largest vehicle of its class fielded during WW2: It was so large, it was capable of launching airplanes. They decided to stop short of the US Nay’s Ice Cream barge though, which is a shame. 

Wargame Design Studio’s second half-yearly update

Nearly a month after the first half of their half-yearly report, Wargame Design Studios as released the second half of the half-yearly report. It’s a bit of a mammoth update – you might want to sit down before you start – and it focuses purely on how their work on Panzer Campaigns France ’40 is coming along. I’d tell you, but I’m not entirely sure myself… it’s a really dense update, you know?

Weekend Wargaming

Going to experiment with another featurette for the column… the “something different” section was cool, but I don’t always find something unique to share so this latest offering will be more consistent, at least.

This weekend I plan to play a bit more Xenonauts, having backed the sequel on Kickstarter recently, and then I’ll be having a weekend of table-top wargaming in the form of War of the Ring.

What will be playing this weekend? Let us know in the comments!

Fantasy Flight have had one toe in the world of miniature wargames for years. Some of their board games have enough figures to pretty much qualify by themselves, but now they've gone the whole hog with Star Wars: Legion. It's a fully-fledged figure based game replete with ranges and rulers. 

Looking at the design, it’s clear they still can't quite leave the world of board games behind. It’s a fertile crossover - The card-based rules make it a little more complex than other streamlined skirmish games on the market, as Legion has to go toe-to-toe with the likes of 40K’s Kill Team, Warmachine/Horde’s Company of Iron and more. But this hybrid design is a good thing - it elevates Legion from a vanilla set of firefight rules into something far more interesting.

Part of picking your army is choosing a leader and the initiative cards that they can use. Both players pick one of these at the start of each of the six rounds, face down. They're revealed simultaneously and determine two things: First, a pip score in the corner determine who goes first. Second, they let you determine the order of activation for some of your units. Everything else is random.

It is both inevitable and realistic that most cards don't let you do both. You can't both go first and organise a lot of units for activation. Right away, this ensure every turn starts with a deliciously difficult blind choice. What are your priorities? How much do you need to go first against ensuring you get to issue the orders you need? We've all been in situations where I-go, you-go games have hinged on activation or attack order. Legion solves that problem by turning it into a brilliant mini-game in its own right. FFG’s Star Wars space battle game, Armada, has a similar process where you can ‘bid’ to become first player or not, but it only happens the once and is fixed for the rest of the game.

The actual mechanics are smooth and sparse. Unit cohesion is so minimal that it's barely worth checking. Instead the focus is where it should be, on moving, defending and firing via the two actions each unit gets when it's activated. As you might expect from a Fantasy Flight title there is a dedicated movement tool and some custom dice. Nothing so convenient as an everyday tape measure and six-sided dice here. On the plus side these accoutrements do help speed up play. There will be few arguments here over what gets to move where around which scenery.

This spartan approach applies throughout play, resulting in a fast, exciting game. Cover, for example, simply protects a target from one or two hits non-critical hits. Tactically the foundation is a series of rock-paper-scissors trade-offs based on keywords. Units with the "armour" keyword, for instance, can ignore non-critical hits. But a weapon with the "impact" keyword can convert all non-critical hits to critical ones.

Between them, they create enough meat to keep the tactical and positional bones of the game juicy with interest. A good general can't just rush forward but must make good use of scenery and defence actions to minimise casualties as they manoeuvre. The strength of cover rewards flanking actions without the need for complex rules. And the keywords working against each other gives a real sense of combined arms tactics. Co-ordinating units so that each fills its proper role is critical for success.

Simplicity isn't always a good thing, though. The streamlined nature of Legion sometimes makes it feel like a generic firefight-game more than an authentic Star Wars experience. The included leader figures, Luke and Vader, do have the Jedi ability to reflect fire with their defence actions. But mostly it comes down to the considerable visual appeal of the box contents. Made of slightly soft plastic, the figures are easy to assemble but lack the variety and detail we've come to expect from modern sculpts. They still look great arranged for battle, and it's good to see some basic scenery included in the box too for a change.

On the other hand, it's less great to find each side only has half an army - and an insufficient quantity of dice - in the box. Veterans of expandable miniatures games might expect this, and indeed if you play any of FFG’s card games you might also be used to the idea that a single core-set is not enough. For newcomers attracted by the IP though, it could come as a shock. Although it keeps the price of the core set reasonable (and thus, tempts you into buying more of them), it does mean that the best part of the game - those initiative cards - fails to shine. With only a few units on the board it's often easy to balance the requirements of going first and ordering the units you need. The thrills and excitement of random activations for the rest only rarely come into play.

Once you've added some more figures to the table top, though, the whole game comes to life. As well as the thrills and spills of initiative and manoeuvre, it showcases Legion's other key card-based innovation. At the start of a game, you deal out three sets of three cards that determine the scenario: objectives, environment and deployment. Players then take turns to eliminate ones they don't like until there's one of each left. It's a great little system that offers a lot of variety while helping prevent too much metagaming. Bringing a one-trick army to the table is dangerous when you don't know what tricks the scenario might call on it to perform.

The trick will be seeing how well Legions adapts and scales to the inevitable releases of new expansions and figures. X-Wing had to be rebooted because of flaws in the original design, although so far Armada is proven more resilient (on the other hand, they’re not releasing as many new ships either). Expansions are definitely coming for Legion– right now it’s a stimulating, streamlined title that walks a fantastic line between miniature and board game. Will the inevitable bloat of new keywords and effects ruin this balance? Only time will tell. Adding more picks to rock-paper-scissors does nothing to improve the game.

Tigers on the Hunt: Normandy is the newest DLC addition to the Tigers on the Hunt base game. The original game is required to run the addon, and it comes with two campaign scenarios and six additional battle scenarios. The game itself remains the same, meaning that this DLC is a pure content package similar to the Kursk expansion released a year back.

Tigers on the Hunt is based on the famous Advanced Squad Leaders board game. This, for those not in the know, is one of the hallmarks of tactical wargaming from the early 1970s. The roots of the game series are therefore over half a century old and the mechanics well tested and established.

Like with most grognard games the learning curve is steep and is aimed at a specific type of player. Though I would usually gripe about lack of intuitive user interface it is not very fitting for this title given that it is more of a computerized board game than a computer simulation. This is also the strength of the game and the major reason players keep coming back to the series. Whereas modern wargames tend to run everything by the mathematics and thus have become complex calculators rather than wargames, Tigers on the Hunt concentrates on simply running the calculations with simple and time-tested rules which, in the end, give the same results as your modern warhead angle and armour thickness calculations.

Squad level segmented action leads the way

The first thing you need to do with the game is to open up the manual and fire up the tutorial scenarios. There really is no other way to learn the ropes. The units in the game are half-squads, squads, leaders, or single vehicles and guns. You can have over two hundred units on any scenario, though with that many units you will tire yourself out sooner or later. The smaller the action the better the game handles it.

Each scenario comes with a set of turns, and each turn is divided into segments. When playing campaign battles these turns represent a longer time-frame(adding day and night cycle), but do not affect the gameplay in any significant way. Each scenario starts with a deployment segment to place the units. After this each turn runs the same fashion: administer your forces, fire if possible, move if necessary, suffer from defensive fire, lay advancing fire, advance if possible, move your routed units to safety, and resolve any close combat. Once the turn ends the sides switch and the same segments are gone through again.

The one disadvantage of this system is that you can only play multiplayer on hot seat mode: That is to say, on the same computer. Though there are ways around this you will most likely have to settle for playing against the AI.

The game comes with four tutorial scenarios and a walkthrough for these in the manual. These are all necessary and should not be skipped before jumping into the actual action.

What’s new for Normandy?

As said, this game only includes scenarios and campaign content. There doesn’t seem to be anything else added, with even the graphics mostly borrowed from the earlier installations. Whether fighting on the Eastern or the Western front the terrain and the buildings look all the same. Well, there seems to be some sand on a couple of the scenarios.

The action in the new scenarios is concentrated on the initial battles for the beaches, with two scenarios covering the landing at the Pegasus bridge. The campaigns that come with the add-on are concentrated on the 82nd Airborne. The first one around Amfreville, and the second one at the La Fierce Causeway. Both of the campaigns cover four days of action and can last up to 44 turns. The campaigns are quite well planned, and your flame for action is not smothered away by size or multitude of units. There is a certain flow that keeps the action fresh, at least for a time.

Other than this the addon doesn’t really add anything of substance. If you are interested in professional work then this all might be worth the price, otherwise, you can simply download scenarios from the mod database for free.

When Adolf Hitler declared the German jackboot need only kick in the Soviet door to make way for lebensraum and glory, he probably didn't expect to be receiving a furred valenki in return, a mere five months after hurling around three thousand tanks, two thousand aircraft and a whole lot of arty over the border. Fifty kilometres on the first day, Moscow outskirts by October; eight-hundred thousand-odd men from a four million-strong invasion force whittled away in a brutal grind only the Soviet could withstand, halt and eventually drive all the way back to the Reichstag.

As such, in the vacuum of wargaming and its canvases of case-specific freedoms and restrictions, I've assembled a clutch of titles that investigate, depict and go beyond those fearsome first few months of German's tilt at the Russian bear. Check out our list of excellent war games from WW2's Eastern Front.

Gary Grigsby's War in the East: The German-Soviet War 1941-1945

Developer: Matrix Games
Available: Direct, Steam

What Barbarossa list would be complete with a monster hitter like the succinctly-titled Gary Grigsby's War in the East: The German-Soviet War 1941-1945? Each session is a massive undertaking; the length and breadth of the German-Soviet front is measured in an inordinate amount of statistics and counters. As if to appease the target audience, little is automated and players will either love or learn to accept re-positioning up to hundreds of units per turn. War in the East is a hyper-detailed game for detail-oriented players. A celebration of the grizzled grog with a dedicated game table and pricing accommodation to match. No part-timers here. 

An accommodating gamut of scenarios helps to familiarise newer players with its deep mechanics, but War in the East is a defiantly old school giant. If the idea of chits stretching far into the digital horizon sounds appealing, pack a few extra layers. I hear it gets cold.

Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa

Developer: Matrix Games
Available: Direct, Steam

You might be deft at driving on Moscow, but how strong is your purge game? What's a fellow to do if he fails the Fuhrer? We've known any number of PC wargames that deal exclusively with chits in the East, but VR Games'Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa also includes the chaps. Atop the hex and counter system Dr. Bruce Geryk described as "not for the faint-hearted" sits a unique political strata. Players must make hard calls as a member of the German officer corps, or as Uncle Joe managing the turn of the Red Tide. 

A wrought-iron wargame with a grizzled party management dermis, the asymmetry of command issues make each side of the front engaging. It might not always work, and the factional squabbling in the Reich may be a touch too nugatory in some areas, but for a game that can inject life at the top as much as it puts boots on the ground, Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa is a worthwhile addition to the discerning Ostfronter. 

Il-2 Sturmovik: Great Battles

Developer: 1C Game Stiods
Available: Direct

Even if you don’t care one whit for flight sims, this reinvigoration of the series that ruled the WW2 air combat roost for a decade features the finest recreation of the Stalingrad battlefield in video gaming. That alone is enough to warm even the most hardened wargamer’s heart. Veterans of Red Orchestra 2 in particular will spot more than a few familiar sites.

Of course, those that do persist beyond such (wonderful) eye candy will be rewarded with one of the more welcoming of the hardcore flight simulators. A generous selection of warbirds from both sides of the massive conflict, ranging from the classics to the more left of field (because who can’t say no to a Ju-52?) is supported by a variety of single and multiplayer modes. The first realistic tank sim in perhaps half a decade (fittingly set at Kursk) has also just begun to join Il-2’s line up as well.

Unity of Command

Developer: 2x2 Games
Available:Steam

Unity of Command has been called one of wargaming's greats. A triumph of visual and mechanical design, grognard Übermensch Tim Stone called it "wargame of the year material", and true to proposition, it scooped up. It's a clean, smart and accessible breeze through a musty, stat-addicted grotto. In short, Unity of Command blew the doors off a relatively insular part of modern strategy gaming.

The original Unity of Command dealt with the later stages of the Eastern Front conflict, but it was with the Black Tide DLC that we got to see Barbarossa treated with the same straightforward mechanics of supply. The game still retained that jugular-pouncing AI found in the base game, so no supply chain or wavering line was safe along the front. Essential wargaming, Barbarossa and beyond.

Graviteam Tactics: Mius Front

Developer: Graviteam
Available: Steam

It’s back, it’s meaner, it’s… easier? Graviteam manages to make the second iteration of their continuing love affair with forgotten Eastern Front battlefields much more user friendly than the last one – although we continue to deal with relative terms here.

Whilst the interface might as well be in Cyrillic for all I can make sense of it, push through and you will find probably one of the most realistic depictions of the fighting on the Eastern Front in video gaming. There are no heroes here and certainly no grand manoeuvres. Instead every battle is fought in steppe or miserable forest. After much bloodletting the frontline will move (maybe) a kilometre or two – nothing more. War at this level is distinctly impersonal. Your soldiers really would honestly prefer to just live. All that daring-do is for other brave, stupider, people. This might be what a game made by historian David Glantz, rather than Antony Beevor, would look like.

Assault Squad 2: Men of War Origins

Developer: Digitalmindsoft, 1C Games Studios
Available:Steam

The game that launched a thousand spin-offs, Men of War is an excellent WW2 war game series, that offers intense, tactical warfare with an engaging logistics system and excellent visuals to keep you rooted in the action. It's like a more serious version of Company of Heroes, although it does require a lot of concentration. It all started with the first 'Men of War' game released in 2009 (which in itself was a remake/spiritual sequel to a previous game made using the same engine).

This initial offering came with several story campaigns from the point-of-view of various factions, with the Soviet branch dealing with the Eastern Front in very broad strokes. Through the course of the Soviet campaign you'll be desperately trying to hold the Germans back as you retreat, scrabble for weapons with your scratch companies in Stalingrad, before finally pushing the Germans all the way back to Berlin.

Assault Squad 2: Men of War Origins is a re-make of the original Men of War (even though that's also still for sale) using the Assault Squad 2 engine. While it's not an essential purchase, Men of War classic's campaigns are a bit more structured and have more personality than Assault Squad's later preference for pure scenario-play, plus it doesn't hurt that Origins benefits form the improved visuals and gameplay mechanics the series has enjoyed in nine years since it originally released.

What's your favourite Operation Barbarossa/Eastern Front wargame? Let us know in the comments!

At Historicon just a couple of weeks past, I had the opportunity to sit in on one of several presentations by some of the original employees of SPI, Simulations Publications Inc, that firm of counter and paper wargame design fame. Those present included designers Al Nofi and David C Isby, as well as chief finance officer Howard Barasch and a full house of attendees. Yes, the place was packed, at a miniatures wargaming convention no less, so all you pewter pushers cut me some slack. I know you play these games just like I do.

To make a long story short, the presenters declined to comment on the future of the boardgaming (as in board wargaming) branch of the hobby but did provide some fascinating information related to it. They noted that SPIs best sellers were all science fiction or fantasy, followed by modern, post World War II conflict. And the all-time champ? That would be Starforce Alpha Centauri, which sold 50,000 copies at the outrageous price tag of $9.00 US. OK, that’s not the whopping 320,000 units of Panzerblitz sold, but it’s a mighty healthy count when compared to today. As but one option, GMT Games’ P500 system helps that firm determine what to print next, the idea that when 500 copies are pre-ordered, the game goes to print. As of the day this article was written, the top dog here was Imperial Struggle covering the 18^th Century competition between Britain and France for world supremacy, with 2662 pre-orders. Most other games making the cut had between 600 and 700 promises to pay.

Damn! Are you kidding me? Over 50,000 copies then vs 2662 copies now? What happened?

What happened was not terminal, but more continuing evolution that guarantees boardgaming of the hex and counter variety will prosper and grow for the foreseeable future. And this salvation ironically comes from the most unlikely of parties.

The Three Ps

Three things have driven the numbers for boardgaming down to rock bottom levels, and they are people, price and PCs. As regards the first of these, when I did my graduate thesis for the Defense Intelligence Agency’s Joint Military Intelligence College, the faculty asked that it cover hobby wargaming supporting military training. As part of my research I conducted several surveys and in one I discovered that boardgame players tended to be exceptionally introverted. In some respects that made sense as even SPI founder Jim Dunnigan wrote that the overwhelming majority of boardgamers play solitaire. The reason this is important is because the same survey indicated that computer (war)gamers also revealed themselves as exceptionally introverted. While this means a platform that includes an AI opponent or a NOT face to face human adversary across cyberspace is a real plus, the bottom line is that with the advent of the PC, computers and cardboard were competing for the same customer pool.

Now combine this with the need to update graphics and presentation to compete with the inherent glitz afforded by a good Nvidia video card. Well the hex and counter lads pulled it off with absolutely stunning production values in full color with glossy paper. Yes, young Padawan, there were days when cardboard counters came in multiple colors, so long as they were pink and baby blue, and yes, in most cases they weren’t even back printed. Maps were hardboard mounted but bland, the same terrain patterns used in every boardgame made whether it told the story of Gettysburg or Stalingrad. Not any more, but at prices that cause many to consider a second mortgage before purchase.

Consider this, back in 1978 the SPI monster game Wacht am Rhein (Watch on the Rhine, on the 1944 Battle of the Bulge) would set you back $20.00 US. Decision Games, the current surviving progeny of SPI, still sells the game in an enhanced edition for $160.00 (and no, that’s not a misprint). You can do the math (and certainly the following comparison is way from perfect) but consider that a barrel of crude oil cost $55.78 at the end of 1978 and the highest its ever been was June 2008 at $161.23.

And what about paper when compared to electrons? Matrix Games’ tactical wargame Pike and Shot Campaigns (which includes the original game plus add-ons to include user produced scenarios) costs $39.99 and has proven so popular that it rarely goes on sale. Its cardboard equivalent has to be GMT’s Musket and Pike series by designer Ben Hull with both games presenting an uber high standard for historical realism. However, to get all of the wars and battles covered in the GMT product vs the Matrix, you will need to buy five games (to include one new P500 dual pack reissue) for a retail total of $332.00. And while GMTs graphics are spectacular, they pale IMHO to the 3D terrain and unit formations (love the massed pikes and arquebusiers of the Spanish tercios) overlaying a square based map used in the computer product. It looks like a battle reenactment, but plays like a boardgame and remember this, $39.99 or $332.00, your choice.

Then of course, there are the inherent advantages of computer gaming built in to the software. And here we are not talking about Hollywood History fare like the Total War, nor products like VASSAL and its ilk that allow for remote counter pushing without any AI or number crunching. Instead we speak of firms like the Matrix Slitherine Group, HPS Simulations or John Tiller Software who produce solid, full function software that present conflict simulation in a very serious and accurate manner. As such this means an AI that can substitute for a human and provide a competitive alternative to solitaire. This also means software with full mathematics capabilities that allows for extensive record keeping and combat determination. This in turn means complex boardgames that are easier to play on a PC because the software does a lot of the mental manipulation for the player, so he might concentrate on – God forbid – strategy or tactics. This also means the ability to immediately set up (and take down) a game, and to save and leave it 'standing' until next time without the danger of Lollypop the Calico or Chumley the Basset Hound smacking the French Imperial Guard off the board into oblivion. Capisce?

I and folks of my... more 'distinguished' generation still buy and play lots of boardgames, as we grew up with them and are more comfortable with the way they work. Hell, I picked up five at Historicon, two dirt cheap at the flea market, and three recently published to include a Compass Games reprint of the classic Red Star – White Eagle on the 1920 Russo-Polish War.  Also, computer games aren’t entirely perfect for folks like me. For example consider the inability to see the entire game map at a glance. Scrolling, or peering at a small strategic mini-map, zooming, or whatever just doesn’t work. But the new generation of serious wargamers? They don’t seem to have an issue with stuff like this as they grew up with electrons so zooming and scrolling is “I don’t even think about it” natural to them. And then you want to convince them it really is better and absolutely worth it to pay $332.00? Right, tell me how that works for you.

Death and Resurrection

Yet I remain totally convinced that board hex and counter (or point to point, area or card driven) wargames will absolutely flourish in the future. To do so will require but one simple, yet perhaps difficult, change on both the part of game producers and their customers. The change concerns perception. By default when one hears the word “boardgame” they think of the presentation medium on which the opposing players compete. Since the beginning, this means most people think of paper hex maps with cardboard counters.

Perhaps its time to think differently and redefine the concept of a boardgame as a type of game design and NOT the physical platform where it is played. Right now most serious computer wargames play like boardgames, and in many cases look exactly like hex and counter offerings. If you don’t believe so take a look at some of the images supporting this article or computer games such as John Tiller’s World War I Campaigns Game East Prussia 1914 and Matrix Games’ Operational Art of War IV (with 200 + scenarios yet). Then compare them to similar products from GMT, Compass or Decision Games. They look the same, they play the same except that the digital version is likely easier because of all the behind the hard drive number crunching.

Indeed many boardgames (old definition) have been directly ported to the PC, with no discernible difference in many cases. In this category we have Matrix Games Guns of August or Empires in Arms, the latter a direct port of the Australian Design Group – Avalon Hill classic. Think also the World in Flames World War II monster strategy game (for $99.00, the equivalent cardboard edition is still made, $369.00). Other games may be original designs but have a very distinct boardgame (old definition) pedigree. For example, and again, the Matrix release of Campaign Series Middle East not only includes all the scenarios from the Avalon Hill game Arab-Israeli Wars, but also the SPI Strategy & Tactics game October War among others. Indeed, the Close Combat product line was originally conceived in 1996 as a computer version of Avalon Hill’s Advanced Squad Leader. Yes, the blood line is there, and it is strong.

Prognostication

One genre not mentioned above is miniatures, and briefly this is because it remains singularly insulated from the issues that plague cardboard. Outside the computer shaming visuals of a Perry Brothers display, the reasons also have their roots in the research I did for my thesis. Pewter pushers tend to be extroverts and when combined with the arts and crafts aspect of the hobby, makes the toy soldier community much more similar to model railroading or even quilting than other types of wargaming. Such games are designed to be group festivals in many respects, so the oldest form of wargaming is also the one less likely to require change.

For the cardboard community, however, do not despair for all is well. Board wargaming isn’t going anywhere and in my opinion will increase its numbers as firms like Lock n Load Publishing transition their games to digital format and as other companies like HPS continue to produce original designs that mimic classic hex and counter play. The single difference will be redefining this celebrated wing of the hobby as a type of game design, and not the physical platform by which the game is conveyed.

In other words, if it looks like a boardgame, plays like a boardgame, then it is a boardgame even if you use a mouse to move its counters around on your 50 inch monitor. Just wrap your head around that and you will live long and prosper.

Bohemia Interactive pride themselves on their post-release support for their games. While they’re not afraid to create premium add-ons, they’re also perfectly happily releasing platform updates and free patches that also come with new content for players.

Entering its fifth year since launch, ARMA 3 just received its 81^st platform updated yesterday. Version 1.84, titled ‘Encore’, adds a whole range of fixes and improvements (full change-log here), but also adds some bonus content:

• USS LibertyDestroyer Ship

The NATO carrier strike group has a new addition; a destroyer-class ship with detailed interiors and new naval fire-support options. It's also capable of launching/recovering small naval vessels and helicopters. The USS Liberty is a static object that can be placed around the map via the Scenario Editor.

• MIM-145 Defender SAM System &AN/MPQ-105Radar System

A stationary missile system used by NATO forces that presents a beyond-visual-range threat to even the most modern of aircraft. It can make use of the Data Link via the AN/MPQ-106 radar system.

• S-750 Rhea SAM System & R-750 Cronus Radar System

CSAT's variant of a stationary long-range surface-to-air missile (SAM) system capable of engaging aerial targets from beyond-visual-range. It works in tandem with the R-750 Cronus radar system connected via the Data Link.

• Anti-Radiation Missiles & Small Diameter Guided Bomb

Both NATO and CSAT receive new anti-radiation missiles, which are designed to auto-lock on ground targets that have their active radar sensor switched on. NATO fighter jets can also be equipped with new, relatively small, air-to-surface precision-guided bombs.

This marks the second major update for ArmA 3 this year, with a third update planned for Q$ which will bring a new single-player scenario to owners of the Apex expansion, titled Old Man. It will apparently experiment with open-world gameplay a bit more and serve as an epilogue to the game’s The East Wind and Apex Protocol campaigns.

Moving forward, the studio seems to be opening things up to third-parties to step in and take up the reigns. In a development post made back in June, Bohemia want to start courting third party development teams and community creators to create more premium DLC for ArmA 3. I’m sure we’ll be seeing the fruits of that labour in the months to come.

It’s been another oddly quiet week – probably because of GenCon, although that’s more of table-top thing. We’ve been talking a lot more with the Wargame Design Studio chaps, and we plan to re-double our efforts there in terms of coverage, and I’m on the look out for more contributors to help populate the site with content.

If you’re a:

• Person
• Who likes computer wargames
• Can write better than a teenager
• Can follow instructions and meet deadlines

Then I want to hear from you. Make sure you get in touch!

Meanwhile, in the world of wargaming…

Hearts of Iron IV

This is probably the most exciting dev diary we’ve seen for any Paradox game, let a lone Hearts of Iron IV. This is something that was hinted at when we talked to Dan Lind at PDXCon this year, but it’s now been confirmed in the recent update for the game – custom game rules.

Essentially, people play Hearts of Iron (and every grand-strategy game for that matter) in a lot of different ways, and even when you’re playing single-player, sometimes you want certain things to trigger so you can test yourself under specific conditions. Tailoring playthroughs is apparently an often request feature for the dev team and so they’re formally adding ‘rules’ to pre-game setup.

The full set of variables isn’t finalised yet, but the sky’s the limit here – anything from buffing individual nations, to forcing those same nations to stick to specific focus branches, to banning certain diplomatic or economic decisions before a certain time. These rules will be moddable as well, so all those multiplayer groups using house-rule sets can add them into the game themselves. We recommend you read the diary for the full break down, it’s fascinating stuff.

Grand Tactician

Another Twitter Teaser from the Grand Tactician guys. Yesterday they talked briefly about how player can delegate the AI to look after sections of your forces.

Minor Gettysburg Update

Shenandoah have published an update for Gettysburg: The Tide Turns, nearly a year since their last update. Version 1.05 fixes a USA AI freeze and two bugs/crashes related to Multiplayer.

Slitherine/Matrix Games Sale

There’s a board game themed sale happening on Steam right now, and Slitherine/Matrix have jumped in on the action by discounting a range of titles that have board game qualities, as either direct adaptations or made-for-digital experiences. The full list includes:

• Heroes of Normandie – 67%
• Magnifico – 75%
• Victory and Glory: Napoleon – 67%
• Battle of the Bulge – 51%
• Drive on Moscow – 51%
• Check your Six! – 34%
• Legions of Steel – 51%
• Field of Glory II – 34%
• March to Glory – 25%

HexWar have also joined the sale, with titles such as Hold the Line and 1775 Rebellion also being discount at 75% off.

Speaking of HexWar…

Is Command & Colors: Ancients Out Yet?

No.

Weekend Wargaming

Going to be a light weekend for me again – on Sunday I’m going to spend time with a table-top group just outside of London and do some playtesting of megagames and other cool projects the guys there are working on. In terms of digital stuff I have a desire to jump back into Battletech and keep trying out Xenonauts, but it’s a matter of finding the time.

That's all for this week - have a great weekend!

We thought maybe it was just a touch of summer madness – it is ridiculously hot here in the UK still, after all. Whatever it is, it hasn’t gone away – we’ve spied a new bundle on Fanatical and now we’re questioning if there even is a God.

Matrix Game’s all-time heavy weight Panzer Corps is the sole of focus of this new multi-tiered offer, starting at £2.89 and rising up to a fourth tier of £14.29. There is £84.84 worth of content on offer, and here’s how it goes:

Tier 1 - £.289

• Panzer Corps (Base Game)
• Panzer Corps: Grand Campaign ’39 DLC

Tier 2 - £4.79

Panzer Corps Grand Campaign DLC:

• ‘40
• ‘41
• ‘42
• ’42 – ‘43
• ‘43

Tier 3 - £9.49

• Panzer Corps: Arika Corps DLC
• Panzer Corps Grand Campaign DLC
• ’44 East
• ’44 West
• ’45 East
• ’45 West

Tier 4 - £14.29

• Panzer Corps: US Corps ’42 DLC
• Panzer Corps: US Corps ’43 DLC
• Panzer Corps: US Corps ’44-’45 DLC
• Panzer Corps Sea Lion DLC

That’s a lot of content for £15, and Panzer Corps' reputation speaks for itself. If you’re eagerly awaiting the sequel and want something to pass the time, this is your moment. You won’t find t cheaper.

Recently I had the pleasure of playing The War of Ring (Second Edition). I’d heard the legends – Three Moves Ahead have talked about it several times, of course, but it’s hard not to pick up stories of the slightly bonkers two-player wargame set during Tolkien’s iconic book trilogy. It’s not quite a 'monster' table-top game as fits the traditional definition, but it’s certainly a big boy that has a lot of miniatures and minutia to keep track of.

This article is not a formal review, and therefore is mainly aimed at people who already know something about The War of the Ring.

Rohan usually gets pummelled early.

What struck me about it was how deliberate the design was. The second edition has clearly benefited from the prolonged existence of the first release, although the summary of rule changes seemed modest. ‘Asymmetrical’ is becoming an increasingly popularised term thanks to GMT’s COIN series, but War of the Ring has this concept hard-coded into its DNA – the Shadow and the Free Peoples factions are so different in so many ways. It’s a wonder how balanced the final dynamic ends up being.

It’s also highly amusing how the differences are unashamedly obvious in places. As the Shadow player, you’re expected to be doing a lot fighting – every major Free People settlement in Middle-Earth is represented by a siege box on the edge of the map where they can place their miniatures during sieges. Helps avoid clutter. In contrast, despite the Shadow player having a near-equal amount of major settlements that can be besieged, they only have two highly generic boxes available for such battles. A token gesture towards the possibility that the Free Peoples player may actually go on the offensive.

The board state just before we had to call time on our third game.

Out of the two-and-a-half games I played, I was the Free Peoples twice and the Shadow player for the half-game. I lost my first session, but won the second – on a military victory, no less. The aborted third game was tense, but ultimately inconclusive as we were both in a position to make our victory moves.

As the Free Peoples (and especially in the second game that I won), I relished testing the capabilities of the free nations. My Shadow opponent got some bonuses to the table very early that would make the final journey to Mount Doom incredibly difficult for the Ring-Bearers, and my own counter-bonuses were nowhere to be seen. I made the very early decision to just ignore the Ring game entirely, other than for the purpose of separating heroes off to where they were needed.

Instead, I went on the offensive. This is very difficult to do as the Free Peoples because all but one nation starts in a ‘passive’ state, and no nation starts ‘At War’, which is the state you need to be in to do most board-related things. Still, with the right cards and die-rolls, you can get one or two nations ‘At War’ quite quickly and go on the offensive. Unlike the south where the Southrons and Sauron himself already posses fairly large armies, the North is relatively clear. Muster enough troops and concentrate in the right way and you can actually go on some very credible offensives. You can easily threaten Moria or Dol Guldur, and Angmar/Mount Gundabad in the far north are very vulnerable if the witch King shows up.

An unlikely victory for the Free Peoples, but a victory all the same.

I actually had a moderately successful time of putting pressure on my Shadow opponent in ways that meant he was constantly reacting what I was doing, as opposed to being able to make the plays and choices he’d want to do to keep me off-guard. In the end, my victory was achieved via a kind of psychological warfare – a fatal mistake allowed me to rush an army forward to seize the final objective I needed to win.

The Shadow player’s only realistic course for victory is to take ten victory point’s worth of locations. Strongholds are worth two, while Cities are worth one. They can also win by ‘corrupting’ (read: damage) the Ring Bearers, but through observations so far that’s only really likely to happen while they’re making the final journey to Mount Doom. There’s a lot of damage mitigation resources available to the Fellowship player prior to that, which they loose when they reach Mordor. It then becomes one of those “Do or Die” situations.

The casualties start to mount...

Conversely, the Free Peoples only needs 4 Victory Points worth of locations to win – two strongholds. It creates an interesting strategy where you can essentially abandon your own strongholds to keep the army in being and draw the Shadow forces out of position. Shadow casualties get immediately recycled so that they can be re-mustered, but Fellowship casualties are permanent. The Elves got badly savaged in both games. It makes this faux-'Scorched Earth' doctrine crucial – Strongholds can be taken back, but casualties can’t be replaced. Withdraw, consolidate, and come back to fight another day.

War of the Ring is a fascinating wargame steeped in a rich setting. Tolkien’s brand of fantasy can sometimes seem a bit bland in an era where we have Game of Thrones and a resurgence in table-top role-playing, but it’s made for surprisingly engaging Grog fodder. I look forward to the next time I get to try it out – I want to focus on the Shadow side for a change and stress test their own unique blend of options and strategies.

Last week, I noted that one advantage computer wargames had over their cardboard cousins was the number of scenarios that came with each product, the former beefed up even more when you consider all the player modifications (Mods) that are often available. Many PC games do come with editors of various types, and when you combine this with the tech savvy genius of lads who so imbibe, wonders never cease.

Many, unfortunately, ignore this gold mine beneath the keyboard, so hopefully my contribution for this week will rectify that. The test subject is Matrix Games Pike and Shot: Campaigns (PSC), which covers European warfare from 1494 to 1698. But for the doughty legion of dedicated modders, as we shall see, time and dates mean little.

Quantity has a quality all its own

When you first crank up PSC and go to the Historical Battles landing page, there will be a small silver globe in the upper left corner of the screen, third from the left. Click here to open up several screens listing community designed custom battles and campaigns. If the little globe is glowing and bouncing like a soccer ball, it means new scenarios are available – always for free. On the resulting User Content Downloads you will find THE list of battles and campaigns, as well as a few downloads modifying the internals of the game, such as reduced firing ranges for the 30 Years War (courtesy of one Interlocuter). In almost every case the mods come doubled, in that one is for single player use, the other for multi-player engagements. Then just click the down arrow to download and install.

At the time of writing, I counted 227 + user created mods in the list, and while most are other battles from the period covered by the game, some of these are just Jim Dandy. For example, there are two different renditions of the 1683 battle of the Kahlenberg which lifted the Ottoman siege of Vienna, by two different designers, showing two unique perspectives. Then there is also a mod allowing you to play the 1571 battle of Lepanto, pitting the fleets of the Holy League against those of the Ottoman Empire. Wait a minute, fleets!? No, I didn’t forget my meds, this is a mod recreating an entire nothing but sea for terrain naval battle. So when does PSC do naval? When you have a really imaginative modder, backed up by really good software, that’s when.

What’s really special to me are the many out-of-period mods. Some are earlier than 1494, such as the English knights cleaving heads at the battle of Bannockburn, 1314. But most are battles and campaigns later than 1698 and include selections from the War of the Spanish Succession, the Great Northern War, the Wars of Frederick the Great, the American Civil War and even British Victorian battles.

Specifically, these later battle mods by era are:

• War of the Spanish Succession– Blenheim, Ramillies, Oudenarde, Malplaquet
• Great Northern War– Narva, Poltava, Lesnaya, Jakobstadt, Kliszow, Holowzyn, Duna, Warsaw, Systerback, Fraustadt, Poniec, Gemauerhof
• Frederick the Great and friends– Zorndorf, Chotusitz, Kesseldorf, Soor, Lobositz, Burkersdorf, Culloden, Preslonpaus, Plassy, Falkirk Muir
• American War of Independence - Saratoga
• Napoleonic– Marengo, Austerlitz, Eylau, Borodino, Dresden, Ligny, Waterloo, Salamanca, Vitoria
• Crimean War– Alma, Balaclava
• American Civil War (plus) – 1^st Manassas, Gettysburg, Little Big Horn
• Victorian– Ulundi, Isandhlwana, Omdurman

In most cases, the mods only allow the player to command one particular side, but a few have a second or third mod that allows play for the enemy.

When no one else is looking

Henry Ford said quality is “doing it right when no one else is looking,” and IMHO this aptly describes the mods found in PSC and the brains behind them. Modders generally don’t get paid for their work, but the enormity of pride in their accomplishments shows through in the quality of the final deliverable. Oh sure, there will be some whose desire and talent may demand shortcuts such as using the original architecture, turf and troop sprites to produce new battles of a totally different time and geography. Nevertheless, the workings behind the visuals still functions like it’s supposed to, often better than the original game and that should count for something. And overall, these are understandable exceptions to the rule as the products most modders provide are exceptional.

To me, where this is least evident is under the hood, so to speak. A game like PSC runs at a battalion up to brigade scale, and this means that simple tweaks to digital die roll modifiers or changes to percentages will more than suffice to convert gameplay to an historically accurate representation of another time and place. Have rifled muskets vice arquebusiers? Just tweak the settings for range, accuracy and damage, plus when a unit will check morale and how quickly it will fail to stand.

And honestly, a lot of community mods are not that far out of period to begin with. The battle between the Swedes and their Russo-Saxon opponents at Gadabusch took place in 1712, a full 14 years after the period covered by PSC. Yet the Swedish regiments Östergötland, Hälsinge, Västgöta-Dal, Älvsborg and Västmanland still toted pikes and were so evil, wicked, mean and nasty using them that the Danish king demanded adoption for his own army (his generals smiled, nodded politely, then left them in the baggage train to be burned).

Yet even behind the monitor, the PSC modding community can still come up with a delectable surprise or two. A case in point is the 1683 battle of the Kahlenberg, the last chapter of the Ottoman siege of Vienna, deftly conjured up by a mod master named Odenathus (as in Malik or King of Palmyra perchance; I really gotta get a life). Here you play the Ottoman Turks facing the Imperial and Polish relief army descending from the Kahlenberg mountain ridge. There doesn’t seem to be an awful lot of opposition UNTIL . . . you realize that many enemy formations are hidden in the trees and you only see them when they move. If they advance into another forested area or similar defile, they disappear from view again. Whoa! Now that is both different and tough, and I like it.

Yet my guess is that the miniature or reenactment visuals of PSC is one of its strongest selling points, or the final product may have looked very hex and counter like. And visual presentation is where modders really shine, especially since I don’t have – or at least don’t know I have – the skills to reproduce such an effort myself. Nothing looks the way it does in the base PSC software, and their well-researched modded alternatives not only show immense artistic talent, but a solid eye for research.

Just a few examples out of many should suffice to make the point. Odenathus’ Gettysburg mod has enriched shadowing, with towns, buildings and farms in a unique 1860’s American style. Likewise Confederate infantry shows a variety of caps and clothing to include regulation uniform, militia attire and butternut, not to mention flags appropriate to the state the unit was recruited from. If its Hood’s Texas Brigade (or the Union’s Irish Brigade), then by Jiminy the state flag carried is the correct one. The same goes for the Crimean War battle of the Alma, and here we’re talking everybody, British, Russian and French forces. Or how about the multiple armies at the 1813 battle for Dresden or the hosts of the Teutonic Order at Tannenberg. In the latter case the mounted brothers of the order are accurately portrayed down to flag and shield level as is the foot with shield seemingly slung over their backs. Other allied retainers have their own distinctive attire and flags. But Odenathus’ best has to be the Victorian battle of Omdurman, with Gatling guns and gun boats.

My personal favorites are the mods on the Great Northern War as envisioned by Paul59, especially the winter battle of Fraustadt. These engagements are small, so most units are battalions and combined with the whacked out uniforms and flags of the Swedish army (no, Virginia, this army did not universally wear cornflower blue trimmed yellow, no matter what the movie The Sovereign’s Servant portrays) the presentation is really mind blowing. Each battalion or its cavalry equivalent is in its own distinctive uniform worn at the battle with its own regimental flag, which were varied and odd looking to say the least. Ditto for the Saxons and Russians, and with the gorgeously rendered snow covered real estate, the fact that it plays so well and realistic is a bonus.

The moral of this story

Pike & Shot Campaigns isn’t the only game with free player mods available, but its one of the best. So take a look to see what you’ve been missing and then take a peek at the same for other games as well. This stuff is professional, realistic and fun and a tribute to the efforts behind them. It’s a gratis bonus many other games exclude, so take advantage of it. If you don’t the wargaming gods may get angry. And you don’t want to make them angry. Trust me.

Battlefront.com's long awaited Combat Mission: Shock Force sequel/re-master is now available for pre-order via their website. Combat Mission: Shock Force 2 will cost $50 for the base game and then $35 each for the three available add-on modules – Marines, British Forces and NATO.

Various bundle combinations are also available – you can buy the complete package for $120 (saving $45 on buying piece-meal), where-as buying the base game and a single module together costs $75, representing a $20 saving. There's no bundle that involves more than one module currently.

It must be noted that these pre-orders are only for new customers– owners of the first Combat Mission Shock Force will be able to purchase the sequel at a discounted rate, but only after the game has been launched.

The current information we have is that CMSF2 will be releasing towards the end of September, and CMSF 1 owners can upgrade their copy of the base game for $15, and then $10 per module. The complete package upgrade costs $35. It's not clear yet how Battlefront will handle verifying owners of the original game.

The first Combat Mission: Shock Force game was released I 2007, with Paradox Interactive as the publisher, no less.

I’m not going to lie; all this unnecessarily good weather was starting to get on my nerves. It’s been raining for most of today and it’s been glorious. Meanwhile, I’ve had a great response from people regarding my call-out for new contributors last week. You should start seeing some new voices very soon.

Meanwhile, in the world of wargaming…

Week in Review

Battlefront fans will be pleased to know that Combat Mission: Shock Force 2 is available for pre-order. Meanwhile, Bill did a round-up of some of his favourite mods for Pike & Shot: Campaigns, and I mused about my recent play-session with the board-based wargame War of the Ring.

The 2018 Great Wargaming Survey

It's that time of year once more! Table-top miniature magazine Wargames, Soldiers & Strategy magazine are running their annual survey once again. This is something they do every year to try and get a beat on the evolving interests and desires of table-top wargamers, with a specific focus on miniatures.

Along with the usual demographic and general attitude questions, WSS also want to know what your favourite genre/setting is, what scale you play at as well as whether or not you paint your minis before bringing them to the table and the tools you use. There's plenty of other questions covering a range of wargaming topics.

Survey submissions are being taken until September 5th. Here's the link if you want to get involved. 

Matrix Games / Slitherine

Your friendly neighbourhood wargames company is back on form today, now that they’re taking a break from wooing the global defence industry with their shiny CMANO wiles.

First up, new Field of Glory II DLC! Huzzah! Although don’t let Bill know, I’m not sure he can handle the excitement. Rise of Persia takes the player back to 681 BC, during the decline of the Neo-Assyrian Empire. Here’s a summary of the features:

• 12 new factions
• 26 new units
• 20 new army lists
• 6 new Epic Battles
• 35 new Quick Battles
• Expanded Custom Battles module.
• Expanded Sandbox Campaign module.
• 4 new historically-based campaigns.
• Mixed units with front-rank spearmen, back rank archers.

Here’s a screen summarising the new army lists:

Next up is a new dev diary for Panzer Corps 2 has also landed. We’ve been given info dumps on the factions and units that will be in the game, gameplay modes and the branching campaign, and the specifics of how multiplayer are going to work.

You can read the diary in full if you want the details, but we’ll be digesting the diary and updating our master guide, so you’ll find the new information there on Monday.

On a random note – the developer behind Desert Warhas posted up on the Matrix forums asking for feature suggestion for a WEGO game set in 1942, Eastern Front. It’s possible the devs already know what subject they want to tackle for their next game.

IS COMMAND & COLORS: ANCIENTS OUT YET?

No.

Notable Dev Diaries

Hearts of Iron 4’s latest dev diary was fairly interesting– nothing major in terms of the new features discussed, but they did reveal that you’ll be able to take control of your faction provided you meet certain conditions. It can only happen every 6 months, to prevent a free-for-all, but could prove useful if your faction leader is being especially useless in a playthrough. You can also cancel focuses now, should you change your mind mid-run.

Military Operations also put out another diary. It’s er… yeah. I don’ think this one is aimed at us. I’m not sure who it’s aimed at, but the diary starts like this:

How can I do fast mesh instancing in a streaming scenario?

And then goes on to ask:

Is it possible to improve from 1000000000 draw calls to one draw call?

In all seriousness, this is a more tech-focused entry that looks into how MilOps handles the rendering and loading of its’ mahoosive game world. If you have an interest in software engineering, this might be worth a read.

That’s all for this week’s update. Enjoy your weekends, and happy gaming!

Panzer Corps 2 is the upcoming sequel to Matrix Games & Slitherine’s acclaimed turn-based WW2 wargame Panzer Corps. Currently the most popular successor to the legacy of Panzer General, Panzer Corps’ take on operational-level wargaming lets players command vast armies and fight massive battles in a way that’s manageable, yet still complex and engaging.

Panzer Corps 2 is being developed by Flashback Games and will feature a new 3D engine and other features that will bring the iconic wargame into the modern era. We’ve collected everything we know about the project so far – features, release date information, specs, multiplayer, and more!

Panzer Corps 2 Release Date

Slitherine and Matrix Games always hold information regarding release dates pretty close to the chest. If we’re lucky, we might get a rough window but at the moment they've only committed to a 2018 release. Ultimately, we won’t find out the exact date until they're ready to talk about it.

Panzer Corps 2 Beta

The Panzer Corps 2 beta hasn’t started yet, and there's no official information as when it will be rolled out. We will update this section with further details as and when they are announced.

Panzer Corps 2 Game Features

General

• There will be over 450 individual units and unit types in the game at launch. Specifically, every unit and faction that appeared in Panzer Corps 1 will be in Panzer Corps 2 at launch, with a few extra units thrown in for good measure.
• Will feature a new 3D design (made with Unreal Engine 4), with units appearing ‘larger than life’ in a manner similar to Field of Glory 2, although the terrain features are more noticeable and pronounced.
• The game is still hex-based, but with the new engine and visual design the hexes are going to be a bit more subtle on the map.
• The maps can now be dynamically/procedurally generated using their new content generator - this is its own separate mode of play, and is different to the historical campaign content. Can feature up to eight players (See Note 2).
• The game will launch with a brand new Wehrmacht campaign that will be in-between the original PC1 campaign and the Grand Campaign in terms of size. It will feature both the European and American theatres "in a single interconnected tree of scenarios" (See Note 1).
• There will be a day/night cycle, as well as dynamic weather that will change how the map looks. 
• The tech progression will be returning, and further to that they will add into the game the ability to 'prototype' upcoming new units. How these units perform and what you do with them could affect the final mass-production version.

Note 1: Our design goal is to make various historical and fictional branches well balanced in terms of length and interest, in order to improve campaign replayability. We hope that the new campaign will offer a sufficiently fresh and different gameplay experience.

Note: 2 With such a random generator in place, the next logical step will be to generate full-blown random campaigns, based on date range, number of scenarios and opposing factions selected by the player. Another possibility is to integrate a few random scenarios into a classic, human-designed campaign.

Land Combat

• Overrun - better reflects the role of tanks in WW2 by allowing these units to destroy severely damaged units (threshold unknown) without spending their movement or attack action.
• Encirclement - PC2 won’t have a full-on supply system like Order of Battle, but the dev team are keen to bring in the tactical implications of units being out of supply. A unit that’s surrounded by enemy units so that it can’t move onto any passable terrain hexes will be considered ‘out of supply’ and will start to suffer combat penalties over time.
• Unit Splitting - Units can now split into two, weaker versions of the same unit and recombine. This can be useful for encirclement & recon.
• Unique Hero Abilities - In Panzer Corps 2 Heroes will have many unique tactical abilities, and some of these abilities will be synergistic with your units. These can include things like extra attack power, enhanced defence or even command abilities.

Air & Naval Warfare

• The air-war rules from Panzer Corps 1 will largely remain in place, but in Panzer Corps 2 all air-units now operate from an airfield that has a physical location on the map.
• Air units return to their designate air-base at the beginning of the turn, and their effectiveness drops the further form the air base they are.
• You can attack and destroy the airfields to cause air units to run out of fuel and/or ammo, and Airfield hexes may be able to be repaired under certain circumstances.
• Because naval 'terrain' is largely boring, naval units will become more complex. Facing and the orientation/position of turrets will be important factors.
• There will be a more complex damage model inspired by Pacific General.
• Carrier and submarine classes will be much better fleshed out to represent their unique roles in naval war.
• There will be a more varied and historical roster of naval units, instead of generic 'Battleship', 'Submarine' units.
• The dev team hope that the improved Air/Naval mechanics will allow for some air or naval-only missions and that the naval mechanics will work for any theatre, including the pacific.

Source: Dev Diary #1, Dev Diary #2

Panzer Corps 2 Multiplayer

You will be able to play with up to 7 other people (so 8-players total) on the same map in both PvP AND PvE modes.

There will be a couple of different multiplayer options:

• Matrix's classic PBEM++ system will be available as standard.
• A 'live' system is also being offered for people who want an experience more in-line with modern games: "For these players we are adding a new Multiplayer mode which allows the players to be online at the same time, connect directly, and see each other’s moves in real time."
• The systems will not be separate; players can play on the live system, then take a few turns on the PBEM++ system, and back again etc... Game saves and data will transfer between the two modes without issue.

Source: Dev Diary #2

Panzer Corps 2 DLC Model

The specifics haven’t been talked about yet, but Matrix are able to share the basics:

• They mentioned they will be taking inspiration from the Paradox model.
• They mentioned they don’t want to simply replicate the ‘Grand Campaign’ model from Panzer Corps as that’s been done already and they doubt consumers would respond favourably to it.
• (Speculation) Despite the random map generator, they may still consider historical scenario content as they are designing a full historical campaign for launch (above).
• (Speculation) They are already including the majority of units that fought in WW2 at launch (see above), so whether there's any scope left for additional unit packs remains to be seen.

Panzer Corps 2 Trailers

Announcement Trailer

Faction & Unit Trailer

Panzer Corps 2 Price & Pre-Order Incentives

We have no information regarding price, game bundles or pre-order incentives at this time, but the game is likely to be sold on the Matrix/Slitherine store, as well as maybe Steam and/or GOG.com.

That’s everything we know about Panzer Corps 2 so far! Have you spotted any new information or want us to find out something specific? Let us know in the comments!

Military Operations takes the next step in its journey of self-discovery with the inclusion of a limited gameplay test within the Benchmarking tool. In an effort to test out the fundamentals of what gameplay could look like, the MilOps team have generated a small hypothetical scenario where you control a German Panzer Division tasked with taking some objectives in France.

More importantly, they’ve made this scenario playable on machines within only 2 GB of RAM – huzzah! The benchmark itself still requires 3GB, so you won’t be able to run that, but on the main menu you’ll see a ‘Test’ button at the end, which you can click on to start the scenario.

Here’s what the designers had to say about it:

The last MilOps version gave an impression of the scale of the game. It also helped us ironing-out driver support issues. In this latest version we introduce gameplay:

• Try to capture as many objectives as possible before time runs out
• Control your units by drawing orders on the terrain
• Inspect unit state in the detail-dialogue
• See how your occupied territory increases
• Watch your progress on the Status-screen

The main goal of this game-play experiment is to try-out basic unit-ordering by drawing on the terrain.

You get given a range of units, all motorised – an anti-tank brigade, several recon brigades – motorcycles, armoured etc… some motorised infantry, a couple of tank brigades… even some engineer and artillery brigades. There’s also a supply section, and the Divisions HQ to order about as well. The objectives are all based around towns, and the map will be dotted with enemy units to engage.

At the moment, there are only three orders you can give: ‘Move Cross Country’, ‘Front Order’ and ‘Halt’. The last one clears everything and brings the unit to a halt. Even though the team have put out an instructional video on the orders, there’s no real context as to what they do or what the purpose is.

‘Move Cross Country’ seems to be a basic move order – the unit will take the most direct route to the target point. Path-finding doesn’t seem fantastic right now, so use this order with care.

‘Front order’ seems a little more enigmatic – the unit will still move to the new position, it doesn’t seem to do it any faster or slower, or with any more care re: pathfinding, but you can define the frontage covered, which will determine the final position of the units within the brigade. The basic move order seems a bit of a free-for-all in terms of the sub-unit’s final positions.

I’ve taken it for a brief spin – it’s certainly cool, but not only is the game itself still in its early days, this scenario is incredibly basic. Moving an entire division in parts feels very satisfying, but also lacks a degree of finesses I suspect it’ll need to be engaging. Also, the tools on offer lack context when it comes to combat.

For example: After probing the front and taking an objective, I discovered there was an enemy tank brigade in my rear I needed to deal with. I swung a panzer brigade around and moved a couple of engineer brigades and my artillery closer to block the flanks. Given that there was also no information on unit capabilities (although each unit did come with a detailed stats display showcasing, ammo, men, equipment etc...), you're left using your best judgement as to what the various units are useful for. I did have an Anti-Tank brigade, but it was too far away to be useful.

Moving my tank brigade up close to the enemy unit did trigger combat, but it was a bit of a free-for-all and it’s very hard to tell what’s going on. I also couldn’t figure out the range of my artillery, or generally how to get them involved in the fight. It was messy, and when I closed down the tool to write up this report I still didn't really have a clear idea of whether I was winning or not - although most of a motorcycle brigade seemed to be on fire.

All in all, don’t get too excited – this test scenario seems incredibly limited In what it’s able to offer in terms of a gameplay experience. I suspect the MilOps team are looking for some very specific feedback and have only given the tools needed to do the testing they need, and no more.

It’s still a cool project though, and we’re enjoying keeping tabs on this project as it evolves.

OK, I’ll admit it, there are areas in which board wargames of the hex and counter variety still shine, and at Historicon recently I was able to purchase an example of just that. In this case the game is a 2018 release from GMT titled At Any Cost: Metz 1870, ripped from the headlines of the Franco-Prussian War (FPW). Weighing in at $50.00 Colonial, about the only issue I had was the name itself. At Any Cost (or for this little tome AAC): Metz 1870 implies an operational product on the siege of the great city from 19 August thru 27 October 1870. Nothing could be further from the truth.

AAC is a hybrid battle and mini-campaign game in the same vein as Kevin Zucker’s classic Napoleon’s Last Battles and its many descendants. Remember that one, where the four battles of the Waterloo fiasco could be fought as separate engagements, or a short campaign combining the four small battle maps? You can do the same thing here because, Hell, even the scale is the same. Each hex is 500 yards across and each turn represents one hour, with the entire game covering only three days, 16 – 18 August 1870. Units represent brigades or artillery groups, while the focus is the battles of Gravelotte-St Privat and Mars-la-Tour, fought just outside Metz. No, not the siege, explaining why the city isn’t even on the map.

Trust me, you’ll be so busy you won’t miss it.

Quartermaster’s Report

Game components are of GMT’s usual excellent quality. Outside the box, the game contains a 22 by 34-inch map, two 9/16 counter sheets with 400 + pieces, two sets of combat/movement charts, one set each of Prussian or French event charts, two scenario related charts, plus two white, one grey and one red 10-sided die. Completing the set is a 28-page rule book (although four pages are devoted to a detailed game turn example) and a 32-page scenario book. The latter contains a total of six scenarios of which two are small engagements, two the full battles mentioned above and two mini-campaign games. One of the two small battles is called Twilight of the Guards and is meant as a tutorial to learn the system, as well as hearty fun for suicidal churls who like seeing 6000 Prussian Royal Guardsmen shot dead in 15 minutes by French rifles used as mortars.

Everything in this product is full color, professionally printed on heavy weight glossy paper. The map is not only a faithful reproduction of the terrain but is designed in color and style similar to maps produced for the official military histories general staffs mandated for the FPW and other late 19^th century conflicts. It really looks classy and does convey a sort of Kriegsspiel type atmosphere for the many festivities that take place. Counters are equally colorful, but instead of NATO unit type symbology, use small soldier portraits instead. Thus, a brigade of French guards sports an 1870 Grumbler in bearskin while Prussian infantry shows a Pickelhauber shooting his Zundnadelgewehr. Heavy cavalry presents a Cuirassier, while light cavalry might be identified by a mounted Hussar or Uhlan. Personal preference here, but I’ve never been a fan of this style as it reminds me too much of the time SPI sold Heritage Napoleonette Miniatures to paste on their Napoleonic quad game counters. But a single figure does not a 3300-man (German, huge formations) regiment make, so it sorta looked like a corny attempt to make a counter game look like a miniatures game. It didn’t.

Otherwise, AAC offers scores of blazing color graphs and examples to explain not only how to play the game, but also how to not get yourself killed doing it. Everything is lavishly illustrated by famous military artists from the period, particularly the unchallenged Godfather of the genre, French academic painter Jean-Baptiste Édouard Detaille. This was the period of realism in military painting, with the pathos of the French soldier giving his all against insurmountable odds during the FPW a very popular subject. And nobody, but nobody, did it better than Detaille.

Vorwarts, der Kaiser ist Vatching!

In many respects, AAC is like any other counter and hex game. There are leader counters, status counters, unit counters with numbers for combat or movement, supported by movement, melee and fire charts with the usual suspects as die roll modifiers. Indeed, the so-called Activation Phase of the game’s sequence of play is nothing if not familiar. In order there is an HQ Command Step, Fire Combat Step, Movement Step, Assault Combat Step, Rally Step and Out of Command Step. If you think you can guess what happens in each, you’d be correct.

However, this is only the third phase of a four-phase control process running each turn. The other phases are 1) Planning Phase, 2) Chit Draw Phase and 4) End Turn Phase. Without question the most important are the first two as they convey the heart and soul of the game – friction, Clausewitz’s own recipe in particular. Prussian Chief of Staff Helmut Graf von Moltke described it when he said, “No battle plan ever survives first contact with the enemy.” Or to quote me, “The enemy always gets a vote, sometimes two.” It may be a frustrating way to play a game, but it is realistic, and Lord have mercy, AAC nails it.

AAC is part of Hermann Luttmann’s Blind Swords system, two previous offerings covering battles from the American Civil War. The system works the same way here using the following tools and procedure. Each side has a number of chit counters at their disposal, divided into Activation Chits, Event Chits and Fortunes of War (FOW) Chits. In Phase 1, each player selects one Event Chit of his choice, and both place it unseen in a container. This is the Planned Event Chit. Of the 10 Event Chits remaining to each player, five are drawn unseen at random, then placed in the same container. The remaining five are discarded for this turn. The players then determine from the scenario rules which Activation Chits are available for both sides and these are also placed into the same chit container. There is an Activation Chit provided for each French and German corps, though all may not be available each turn. Finally, the single FOW Chit is placed into the same cup.

At this point play moves into the second phase, Chit Draw. The Prussian player (on even numbered turns) or the French player (odd numbered) blindly draws a single chit from the cup. If the chit is an Activation Chit, the corps selected may perform all the steps in the Activation Phase noted above, and yes Virginia, you could see yourself drawing an enemy Activation Chit and having said enemy combat formation do evil, wicked, mean and nasty things to your army. If the chit drawn is an Event Chit, the side owning it must enact it by playing it, holding it or discarding it as directed by the chit itself. Event Chits include things like Bazaine’s Malaise, which allows the German player to place it on top of any French Corps HQ counter to prevent the unit from activating that turn. If a FOW Chit is drawn, the player rolls a die and consults a short table for results, including such jollies as Prussian Wayward Unit (allowing the French to move any Prussian unit he selects one hex in any direction; seriously, this one is a hoot). Chits from the cup are drawn blindly, one at a time, until all have been selected, thus going circuitously into Phase 4 and turn’s end.

Yes, this does make for very long turns (I tracked one hour, 15 minutes per when playing solitaire), but also for turns that are unpredictable and never played out in the same functional order from turn to turn. This will drive some people nuts, but I am not one of them. It is historically accurate and frankly I enjoy reacting to the unexpected as much as I do watching a detailed plan come to fruition. It makes sense of Napoleon’s (the smart one) statement preferring generals who are lucky, and besides, it’s a great excuse for Cognac or Schnapps to calm your nerves.

But don’t think that is all this game has to offer. While the similarities of AAC to the Zucker series will become evident, one of them is not firepower. In AAC weapons are deadlier and have really long ranges for a game this scale. You won’t find French muskets at Waterloo firing four hexes, or artillery lobbing rounds out to – I love Krupps – eight hexes, but you will here. Also, this game while grand tactical overall, has a lot more purely tactical chrome than I thought it would, a bunch with a distinctly miniature flair. Assault Combat, as one example, uses column shifts as modifiers and the list thereof runs a) thru t) for stuff like entrenchments or having an Auftragstaktik Event Chit played. There are also rules for Low on Ammo based on die rolls, cavalry opportunity and countercharges, defensive fire, weight classes for cavalry and so on. This gives a level of detail I don’t find a lot on paper but given one of AACs references is the 1870 Miniature Rules by my main squeeze and colleague Bruce Weigle, I suppose I should not have been surprised.

Taps

AAC shows why there is, at least for now, still a place for good hex and counter paper games. First, only here will you find such an esoteric yet egregiously overlooked topic as the FPW covered. Computers, not so much. Second, it’s a great platform for a miniatures campaign, in part because just like Napoleon’s Last Battles, the party only lasts a few days and is confined to a small piece of real estate. Third, for folks who have been contemplating moving into toy soldiers, this provides an excellent taste of what to expect.

At Any Cost: Metz 1870 is simply an excellent and innovative game in its own right, showing that the final word in game design has yet to be recorded. Sure, its disaster management, and as such will be an acquired taste for many. But remember what General de Division Francois Achille Bazaine said when boarding the train from Paris to Metz in August 1870, “Nous marchons à un désastre - We are walking into a disaster.” Who wouldn’t enjoy the challenge of proving him wrong?

Command Modern Air/Naval operations (CMANO) is a complex game, but it is one that rewards study and a bit of trial and error. I’ve spent hundreds of hours playing the game, but I still learn new things every single time I have a look on the forums. A big part of the infamous learning curve is finding the best way to use the mission planner to launch air strikes. In first in a short series of short articles, I will be looking at different parts of the overall strike plane.

To start with we’re going to look at something simple: delivering the weapons to a target. It’s much easier to demonstrate this than just talk about it, and so I’ve set up a simple scenario in the game editor.

In the scenario a flight of four Tornadoes from RAF Lossiemouth are making a simulated attack on RAF Leuchars. The primary targets for the strike are the eight aircraft hangars at the airfield (six on the west of the base and two on the north-east corner) and each Tornado is loaded with 8xM18 retarded bombs (these have airbrakes to let the aeroplane get away from the blast circle and so can be dropped from low altitude).

Now, it is possible to micro-manage strikes by manually setting courses, altitudes, speeds and weapon allocations, but this is pain in big scenarios and I kind of feel that it’s cheating a bit. I prefer to use the mission editor, spend a bit of time planning the strike and then letting it run its course. To set up the strike on the base I’ve selected the base and then chosen ‘Add a new mission’ from the ‘Missions and Ref Points’ menu. I’ve called the mission ‘Strike’, assigned all four Tornadoes to it and deleted all the targets I don’t want (everything other than the hangars) from the target list. The mission planner screen now looks like this:

As the strike approaches the target all four of the Tornadoes head for the same hangar (the first one in the target list). The lead two aeroplanes reach the launch point nearly at the same time and launch sixteen bombs at the first hangar:

The hangar is obliterated, and the third plane targets and destroys the other nearby hangar. The fourth aircraft, which has been trailing the others now has no target on its flight path as the other hangars are on the opposite side of the airbase. This aircraft now turns around the airbase on a big arc and then targets one of the hangars on the opposite side of the base.

Once again, the targeted hangar is destroyed, and the last Tornado joins the others on their way home. The total kills on the strike are three of the eight targets. Also, if the airbase had air defence it is virtually certain that the last aircraft would have been killed while making its second pass. This strike really hasn’t been well planned – let’s see if we can do better.

The first problem we have is in weapon allocation. The default setting is for ALL the planes to drop ALL their bombs on a single target – if the aircraft in the attack had been closer together then all 32 bombs would have been dropped on the first hangar.  This is obviously a bit of overkill. The target hangers have 600 damage points, and each bomb can deal 270 DPs. Not every bomb is going to hit, but in a low level attack the scatter isn’t going to be too large – four bombs per target should do the trick. We can fix this by setting the ‘Weapon Release Authorization’ for the 1000lb bombs in the mission doctrine. It’s also possible to set the authorization globally, but for strike planning it makes sense to adjust things to suit the targets. In this case I’ve set the ‘Weapons per Salvo’ for both soft and hardened land structures to 4 rounds:

The next thing we need to do is make sure that the aircraft have a flight path and target list that will allow them to hit things on a single pass. The six hangars on the western side of the base make a good target group and are in a line. The other two hangars are north-east, but should be reachable from a strike line that runs west to east. There is a problem with adding the two eastern hangars immediately after the mission is created however. If we do this the medium hangars are placed at the top of the target list and become the primary targets of the mission. This will cause the aircraft to head for those two hangars first and then double back to hit the western targets. There is, unfortunately, no way to reorder the targets on the list.

However, there is a ‘fix’ for this that seems to work. You need to set up a strike with only the western hangars as a target. The strike line is adjusted by moving the initial point (IP) and exit point to give a line over the western targets, and the mission is ‘fixed’ by running the simulation for a few seconds. You can see the strike fixing when the exit point moves onto the last target. The other two hangars can then be added as targets without affecting the bombing paths.

The ‘fix’ works, but isn’t ideal. It would be nice if the target order could be adjusted, but this isn’t possible at the moment. Another solution would be to create two missions: one for the group of hangars in the west and one (with a single aircraft) for the group in the north east.

This time the strike goes brilliantly. All eight hangars are destroyed and all of the aircraft make only a single pass over the target.

There might seem to be a lot of work involved in setting up a strike in the mission editor, but for me this is where a lot of the fun in the game lies. There is nothing better than watching a well-planned strike dealing simulated death and destruction!

Bruce is one of Wargamer.com's brand new contributors - we're reaching out to people through-out the digital wargaming community and offering them a platform to talk about their passions and expertise in war games.

A fairly by-the-numbers week, with a healthy dose of announcements and cool stuff happening in our corner of digital gaming. I've been jonsing to play something wargame-y or even just strategy game-y recently, as I haven't had much opportunity to game on my own time. Closest I've come is that me and my wife randomly decided to check out World of Warcraft. That counts, right?  

We’ve had a good range of content go up this week, from my quick breakdown of Military Operations new gameplay test, to Bill’s review of an excellent Hex-and-Counter wargame from GMT Games. We also launched the first part in a new mini-series from one of our new contributors. Bruce is a big fan of CMANO and a regular player and is going to be writing up some short & sweet guides looking at various aspects of Air Command in the game.

Meanwhile, in the world of wargaming…

Armored Brigade Beta

It’s a good thing we were paying attention as this doesn’t seem to have been advertised via Matrix Games’ RSS/News feed (although it was shared via Twitter, at least). Armored Brigade’s Beta is now live, and you can sign up to participate here.

We’re actually quite excited for this Close Combat-esque WW3 game. You should check out the official page If you want to know more, they’ve given it a serious face-life since the last time we checked.

Advanced Tactics Gold

Something that did go out over the Matrix news feed though is an announcement the Advanced Tactics Gold community is both awesome and ridiculous.

After years of hard work, a dedicated group of modders have finished the final release of their GD ’38 mod, which is a PBEM scenario that spans the entire globe, clocking in at 400 hexes.

It’s available for download here and has a 50+ page manual here.

Burden Yourself

… with Burden of Command’s latest ‘tactical teaser’ video, as well as a shiny new Steam page. If you’ve forgotten what this project is Burden of Command describes itself as a ‘tactical leadership RPG’. It’s less a wargame, and more an exploration of the trials of command via tactical scenarios. It’s set during WW2 and will cover plenty of historical battles from Morocco to Hitler’s Eagle’s Nest. As Company Captain, you have to try and lead your men to victory while keeping their morale up and your forces intact.

Now, if I were to put my game critic hat on for a second, this trailer does rely a little bit too much non-game footage to drive a sense of drama that may not actually be there. I did find myself wanting just more raw-gameplay, as opposed to a bunch of documentary clips that don’t actually have anything to do with the game. Still, it’s a teaser, it’s purpose is to generate hype and oh hey look, I got hype.

Victory at Sea: Pacific

The developers of Victory at Sea’s much anticipated sequel dropped another bombshell on us this week. They didn’t really announce anything specific per se, but they did publish a video showing off nearly an hour’s worth of gameplay.

It does a good job of showcasing various aspects of the game, although I don’t think it really showed off much of the land-based mechanics. Granted, this is a game about the naval war, but the main purpose of the Pacific theatre was to clear the Japanese off the Pacific islands, so they could threaten the mainland itself. Some more details as to how that stuff happens would be good to know.

Is Command & Colors: Ancients Out Yet?

OH SHI- No. 

And now for something completely different…

If you’re a member of the Quarter to Three forums, or generally know of/follow Bruce Geryk on his Wargame_[Spcace] blog, you may have seen he recently dug into a claim made regarding the number of physical wargames published in a year.

Admittedly, he only used BoardGamesGeek’s database as the data pool, but then the claim he was trying to debunk also used the same database, so it evens out. The full story, as well as Bruce’s workings and ultimate finds are detailed in this blog post. Tl;dr - the BoardGameGeek's 'wargame' category sucks, and there's not many wargame releases in a year (depending on your criteria).

It’s fascinating stuff, and it makes me wonder what the landscape is like for computer wargames. Probably not much better, If not worse.

That’s all for this week’s round-up, enjoy your weekends and happy wargaming!

Someone who truly loves tabletop wargaming is very likely enjoying the fact that we are in a golden age, spoiled for choice. It sometimes seems that new tabletop wargames from every period are seeing daylight every day. No matter what you’re into, you probably have a favorite game that you’re thinking about even while reading this paragraph.

Something that hasn’t become easier is getting everyone together at the same time, in the same place to play said games. Even when you do, you have to make sure that you have the right mini, or go sorting through the pile of chits, lay out a map on a sufficiently large table, and when everything’s done you have to pack it all right back up. If you want to play a particularly large game that takes all weekend – well, forget about it. Especially if you’re an adult with a family and possibly pets who like to jump up on tables.

Enter the digital tabletop.

There have been efforts to provide a virtual tabletop for wargamers just about as long as people have been writing game environments for computers, which was probably the second thing after Lotus 1-2-3. Many of them have been specifically tied to individual games and faithfully emulated those rules to allow people to play them.

In recent years, we’ve seen a number of digital tabletops be very successful. Roll20 is big among role-playing gamers. Vassal is a classic when it comes to tabletop wargaming. And as of mid-2015 we had a new contender on the field: Tabletop Simulator.

What is Tabletop Simulator? How does it compare to Vassal in terms of experience? Why would you want to use TS in the first place? How are other people using it?

Let’s work through this one at a time.

What is Tabletop Simulator?

Berserk Games, creators of TS, have a pretty succinct description of what the platform is and is intended to do:

Create your own original games, import custom assets, automate games with scripting, set up complete RPG dungeons, manipulate the physics, create hinges & joints, and of course flip the table when you are losing the game. All with an easy to use system integrated with Steam Workshop. You can do anything you want in Tabletop Simulator. The possibilities are endless!

They go on to drop some bullets which they think are the real selling points of the system.

• Endless Games
• Create Games
• Fun For All Ages
• VR Support

For the most part, you are almost never going to see or need a system which actually has a physics model, hinges and joints (unless you’re putting together one of those hinged measuring sticks that some wargames use), and you probably shouldn’t flip the table on a whim. What you get is an actual table, however, and when you put things on the table they act like… well, putting things on the table.

Vassalization

Not surprisingly, Vassal has been around a lot longer than TS. Originally released in 2003, it is a free, open-source, cross-platform solution for playing, very specifically, tabletop wargames with a focus on board games and wargames that don’t necessarily need 3D environments.

There are thousands of available modules for Vassal, making use of the built-in scripting language and engine to drive a portion of the mechanics.

Vassal has to make some careful choices when it comes to presentation. Being a cross-platform Java-based engine, all the presentation is going to be top down, 2D. If that’s all you need, this will do the job.

Why TS?

If Vassal has been around much longer, has the advantage of cross-platform play, and has a ton of modules available to allow and facilitate thousands of games, why would you choose Tabletop Simulator, which costs actual money?

That is a really good question.

The most obvious answer is “because TS creates a fully 3D environment which is a lot more immersive and allows play in which you stack tokens/miniatures/terrain in order to represent certain mechanics.” But that’s really dry.

A better answer might be:

“Because it’s fun, and really damn pretty. Being able to virtually pick up dice, shake them around, and roll them in front of your friends is fun. Having miniatures which actually look like miniatures is fun. Having terrain that looks like terrain is fun.”

On top of that TS is cross-platform for the most part, running on Windows, Mac OS, and the Steam box, along with compatibility with both the HTC Vive and the Oculus Rift. It has its own voice solution built right in, if you don’t have a Discord server that your friends hang out on already. And the price is often right, especially if you can catch it during one of the frequent 50% off sales when it comes down to $10 USD a seat.

Familiar DLC

If that doesn’t quite float your boat, You can buy fully playable, fully scripted modules for TS straight off of the Steam Workshop. These are all fully tested, fully endorsed, and fully supported and come with everything you need to set-up a ‘virtual’ version of your favourite game.

If you don’t necessarily need that level of support, however, there is a lot more material available in the workshop for free with somewhat less official status.

Lock ‘N Load Starter Kit Tabletop Edition

An easy first example: Do you love Lock’n Load hex-based wargames? There is an official but lightly supported module which provides all the tools that you might need to play your favorite LNL game right inside TS.

Twilight Imperium IV

If you’re willing to step off of the domain of the officially licensed, you can play Twilight Imperium 4th Edition with the errata in a virtual space.

Is it sanctioned? No. Is it available? Oh yes. And frankly I can’t think of a better gateway drug to playing complex space wargames on the tabletop than actually getting to play TI4 with other people in a shared space. Plus, you don’t have to shell out all that money for the physical box.

Advanced Squad Leader

Nothing beats the classics – and when we talk about classic tabletop wargames, we absolutely have to talk about what gave rise to Vassal in the first place: The granddaddy of complicated tabletop wargaming, Advanced Squad Leader.

Dice, maps, introductory scenarios – you have everything in the first Starter Kit, and in the description they give a link to where you can buy the actual ASL rules and expansions for yourself.

Bits and Bobs

But what if there’s nothing out right now for your favourite wargame? What if all you really want to do is throw some terrain on a table, whip out some dice, and play whatever game that you want with your friends, old-school?

You don’t need mechanical support, you don’t need integration, you just want to play a game. Well…

Terrain

Because the engine provides the ability for you to upload and use your own terrain, your own models, your own maps, you have effectively infinite options for putting your wargaming table together.

Dice

You can’t play most games without a good set of dice. Again, the ability to upload your own models means that you (and everybody else) are limited only by your imagination.

Need a 30 sided die with one through three replaced with pictures of giant flaming eyeballs? No problem. There are even tools which will help you create those images and get them onto the model for play.

What does it look like in motion?

If you’re anything like me, you’ve been burned by tools in the past. Lots of things have excellent descriptions but when you sit down to use them, they just don’t work, or they work in a way that isn’t comfortable for you or they simply don’t live up to the hype. It happens all the time.

We don’t recommend you buy anything without having seen someone else actually playing it or actually using the tool. You want to know TS works, how it feels, and how it can be part of the experience for wargaming on the digital tabletop.

Luckily, YouTube is surprisingly busy with TS content.

Warhammer 40k - Kill Team

While writing this article, I took a few moments to simply go search the Tube to see what people were playing and streaming, and immediately was struck by a live demo of the new Warhammer 40k — Kill Team skirmish game, and it served as both a demo of TS and exposure to Games Workshop’s new product. That’s a solid win no matter which side of that you’re interested in.

5150: Hammer & Anvil

Video isn’t the only way to see how TS can be used, because we don’t always play wargames with friends. Sometimes the solo experience is really what you want. In those situations, it can be just as helpful or useful to see the digital tabletop used for illustrative purposes as well as the game platform that you use to play the game.

If you’ve ever wanted to blog about your favorite tabletop wargame and really kind of fretted about how you can make the illustrations look good for the audience you’re trying to reach, TS can help you out. It’s easy to make your own tokens and chits, terrain is available everywhere, you can draw your own maps, and if you’re a blogger who’s writing about tabletop wargames a tool that can make it easier to present turn by turn gaming is absolutely invaluable.

Terminus

If you’ve never given pause as to whether or not a digital tabletop for playing wargames and boardgames could be useful to you, we hope we’ve left you with some food for thought.

Tabletop Simulator is a strong option for tabletop wargaming for anyone with a modern computer. The graphics are a nice bonus, the interface is intuitive, and there’s a great range of official and unofficial modules for you to try out. VASSAL’s low-frills simplicity will always keep it in our hearts and minds (especially for hex & counter games), but there’s no harm in wanting a little bit more.

Alexander is one of Wargamer.com's brand new contributors - we're reaching out to people through-out the digital wargaming community and offering them a platform to talk about their passions and expertise in war games.

Fort Sumter isn't the best-known name of the American Civil War. It can't rank with Gettysburg or Shiloh in the popular imagination, so it's a risky topic for any kind of media, let alone a game. But you can’t escape its importance: This eponymous title is a super-fast take on the card-driven wargame from GMT Games, with all the narrative and history that entails. So as well as a game, it's also has the incredible potential to be a learning experience as well as a gateway into one of the most popular topics in American wargaming.

Skimming the simple rules reveals an engine inspired by Twilight Struggle. Instead of the Cold War, players compete for public support in the escalating events that lead to conflict between Union and Confederacy. Each person gets a hand of four cards and must play three. If the card's colour ties in with your side, you can play it for the text event. Otherwise you get its numerical value. Both result in placing cubes onto board spaces which represent aspects of the crisis, like military forts or political bodies. 

Your goal is to have more cubes than your opponent in all three spaces of the same aspect, earning you a point. But there are catches to keep the game interesting. Most notably, it penalises players for adding too many cubes too fast. Historically this models the way that taking up extreme positions both attracts and repels aspects of public opinion. But it's also a clever route to game balance, like Twilight Struggle's "Defcon" track.

Shuffling cubes among board spaces doesn't sound like a historical game. And the first time you play, it's unlikely to feel like one. You'll read the cards, match some symbols on the board, and ride out the half-hour play time like a fanciful abstract. But you'll have a good time, because like any good abstract, Fort Sumter is full of fun decisions.

As well as controlling triptychs of board spaces, you get points for completing objectives. Each player gets to pick one, in secret, each round. And within each set of spaces, one is more important than the other two: control lets you move or remove cubes among the set. With just three cards to play across each of three turns, it's impossible to do everything you need. 

Instead, it's a game of competing priorities. You might not have the cards to get a majority in any set of spaces. Instead, you might manage it by controlling a pivotal space and shuffling cubes. Or focusing on your objective and denying your opponent any set. Or force them into taking too many cubes and triggering an escalation penalty.

And as you learn the cards over repeat sessions, further opportunities present themselves. Like guessing what objective your opponent has chosen, and gunning to control both, for instance. And you'll see repeat plays, because with its simple rules and speedy play, Fort Sumter manages something its bigger cousins can't. It is incredibly addictive.

Due to limited parameters and fixed decks, it’s easy to see the mistakes in your half hour game. So you want to play again, to learn and do better. And it's so fast that you can repeat that loop again and again, seeing more strategic nuance with every play. Before you know it, hours have passed.

During those hours, some of the cards and spaces that looked so abstract at first will start to seem more meaningful. You might pick out the name Major Anderson, recalled from a history lesson, and noted how his card effect links him to the Fort Sumter space. Or had your curiosity piqued by the ghoulish text of John Brown's Body and how it aids the Unionist cause in the Secessionist states.

My personal epiphany was the Plantation Class card. After slapping it down, it dawned on me what this abstract action represented in real life. It sends tens of thousands to war to defend their hideous ‘right’ to treat people as property. Fort Sumter pulls no punches regarding what it describes as the "national sin" of slavery. But it's one thing to know the history, quite another to understand its impact. Sitting in the Secessionist seat, playing that card, placing the cubes made it terrifyingly real. It made me feel sick.

Moments like this will send players to the included playbook, far thicker than the slim rules. This details some of the history, the design concepts and what the cards are supposed to represent. It's not all clear and satisfying. There's some obvious hand waving as to what victory in the game represents in the historical sense, for instance. Conversely, take the ‘final crisis’ mechanic, which uses blind play of the cards discard during the game. The playbook posits this represents the chaos of unfolding disaster, but it feels messy and random in practice.

Despite the odd misstep, Fort Sumter packs an astonishing amount of game and history into its tiny play time. It is rewarding and engaging, easy to play yet full of subtly interlocking elements to master. But it's also a cunning stepladder onto bigger, if not better, things. Any unsuspecting gamer might walk into this and get snagged on its brilliant mechanical barbs. By the time they've untangled themselves, they might walk away an amateur historian, too.

Aggressors: Ancient Rome (AAR), the newest Matrix/Slitherine offering, will soon be upon us: it is a grand strategy game, which B. H.  Liddell-Hart and others note not only involves coordinating and managing national military resources to obtain victory in war, but expands this process to include diplomatic, financial, economic, informational and other means. This includes concerns both internal and external to a country, and further is not only applicable during conflict, but likewise during times of peace to secure national objectives. Thus, the Western policy of containment during the Cold War against the Soviet Union was an example of grand strategy.

A game of this scope naturally reaches beyond the simple task of fighting wars, but the military components are still quite interesting on paper so I was asked to take up my Spatha for a detailed look thereof.

Getting to know you

The game begins in 278 BC and each turn represents one year of real time. The player can actually customize a unique world for play, but I imagine most will accept the option to play in the ancient Mediterranean. You can choose one of 20 different states to call your own, but the top three seem to be Republican Rome, Carthage and the Ptolemaic Alexandrian Successor Empire. These three are also the only states with an associated tutorial, a typical simplified version, as well as an advanced option which has less hand holding as you learn the ropes. In one of many unique twists presented by the game, not only can you adjust the difficulty level for play, but also the aggressiveness level for each of the 19 other countries challenging your supremacy. If you decide to play Rome, for example, you’ll find a trusted ally already in Massilia (as in Marseilles, France), so you can make them super nasty to keep the Celts at bay. You can also make the Seleucids a bunch of wimps to avoid all the Kataphraktoi on the planet from breathing down your neck.

Like most games of this ilk, the actual procedures and processes to play the game are really super simple, but not so the record keeping, calculations and decision making to support them. In general, the player each turn has two screens to make his moves for the year. The first is the off-map State Screen where military alliances can be made, trade routes can be established and so on. The second screen is on the very well rendered map itself where you will find any number of units, both mobile and non-mobile. In the latter category are things like towns or cities, farmland, mines and so forth. Mobile units on the other hand represent settlers, fleets and army formations. Each turn you simply click on a unit and tell it to move (if mobile) and/or perform some activity (either). Here we mean things like cultivate land, improve a harbor, build a road, recruit troops, build blacksmithing works ad infinitum. If your choice demands more than one turn to complete, say, moving the XVIII Legion from northern Italy to Sicily, the action simply carries over to the next several turns.

All the while you expend resources in terms of minerals, food plus as payment for each action. These commodities are collected each turn based on the properties held and how efficient they function, expending same as you stretch your empire to New Rome somewhere near Stockholm. Here cities seem to be key as they collect resources within so many tiles (what AAR calls the underlaying grid of squares that regulates movement and location) and then distribute these same items to mobile units within so many tiles as part of a logistics chain.

Simple, right? Just remember that everything you do in your turn costs economic resources to complete, and the results of those actions impacts how many resources you have in the credit union next turn to do it all over again. And while advisors do pop up in the game from time to time, there is no Proconsul for Agriculture to sluff off farming issues on while you take care of other matters. Its all on you because you are not only the absolute ruler of all you survey, you are expected to be one of the great ones such as Octavian or Aurelias, doing everything yourself down to the last olive grove. Seriously, ever think about building a bigger army by managing birthrates? Guess what, the game has an app for that.

Fortunately, the game also comes with a little bit of levity to ease the strain. When you finish doing everything, simply click the hour glass in the upper right corner to end the turn and let your 19 AI controlled competitors make their move. At this point portraits of the rulers in these lands flash by and, not kidding here folks, lo and behold here is Elizabeth Taylor as Cleopatra, a blue painted and tartan clad Mel Gibson as Braveheart doing temporary duty as chief of the Iberians, even Gerard “this IS Sparta” Butler as King Leonidas. Heck, when armies collide in AAR, they let out a hearty “AH-OO!”, very much 300 the Movie style. Nearly spit out my coffee laughing, but I like it!

Extending politics through Pila

In AAR the military forces of your empire will be one of five types – Roman, Greek, Carthaginian, Persian or Barbarian, differing in combat modifiers depending on terrain and other circumstances. For example, Romans marching thru the Teutoburger Wald will be at a disadvantage if Arminius and the lads stop by as uncivilized Germans do well in forests, but legionaries do not. Each force also has three types of infantry and three types of cavalry ranging in effectiveness from minimal to superior. For Roman infantry this would be Milites, Principes and Legionary. Naval forces weigh in with Boat, Galley and Trireme. There is only one so-called “Mechanical” unit, that being a wagon or logistics train to extend the supply distance from friendly turf.

With that baseline, these forces are used pretty much as you would expect. They march and move into enemy occupied tiles to do battle. The computer calculates the odds, runs the engagement then tells you the result, though seeing your soldier sprite become bloody and vanish is a pretty good indicator things did not go well. Military units draw supply from cities and can also retreat back into them for refit and reconstitution if mauled in combat. Cities can be besieged whereby controlling the surrounding tiles with, but one enemy army formation destroys its ability to supply friendly units in the field. Cities can also raise new military units and then there is the ubiquitous research tree whereby you can expend resources to improve your military posture by developing new weapons or, one that I am particularly fond of, devising new tactics that allows your Principes to attack an enemy twice in a single turn.

Now, hold that thought for just a moment or few. That double attack option is indicative of a bevy of small things that make combat in AAR unique and for me at least, quite enjoyable. There are not less than 24 specific improvements that can be researched for your military units, and what surprised me was not only the sheer number available, but how many were not hardware oriented. I’ve already described one, but another is one called Traveler, which allows the military force to increase its speed 50% when hauling down the Appian Way or other roads (and historically they didn’t call Legionary Quintus Agricola “Marius Mule” for nothing). And for the combat itself, each unit carries with it five military properties, modified by 11 bonuses or penalties, not including anything the surrounding terrain might convey. Certainly, the usual suspects are here, and by this, I mean loyalty, experience, readiness, improvements already discussed, and in a sneaky little add-on with not one, but two types of morale. One is Military Morale, as in how much you respect or fear your adversary, which if you’re Varus in certain German forests, is quite a lot. The second is General Morale which considers such things as whether the army is being properly fed, paid on time and so on.

It’s a lot to keep track of, but you’re Octavian, right? Not to worry, the game provides a little pop-up to give you an idea of the odds before you throw the first Ballista bolt downrange. This gives you various percentages that will impact your combat, as well as an overall chance of success. Moving within striking range of the enemy allows you information about your adversary such as strength, morale and loyalty.

The same goes for naval units, but I found them most useful in a reconnaissance role. Unless its your or an ally’s turf, all the real estate is obscured by a thick fog like blanket. However, remember this is the Mediterranean and most countries either mostly or in total hunker down close to the coast. Moving a fleet in proximity can clear those clouds away and allow you to explore things like why an army of those obnoxious little twits from Epirus had not joined their brethren attacking Rome. Truth be told is that they had also ticked off Carthage and were fighting tooth and nail to retain their part of Sicily. This meant I could stop looking over my shoulder, gather my legions and counterattack. Sweet.

But perhaps the biggest surprise was how well the designer integrated all this military stuff into an interlocking, mutually supporting process. Just drop that thought re: the double attack improvement from above. The game allows an enemy unit to be attacked in the same turn by TWO different, but adjacent, friendly forces. The idea is that after the first attack, the enemy would be so severely weakened he would certainly collapse during round two. Now remember the improvement discussed allows a SINGLE friendly unit to attack twice in a turn. Light bulb just clicked on, didn’t it?

Pax Romana

In closing and although grand strategy level of play is not my proverbial cup of tea, I have to admit I’m impressed with what they did with the military portion of this exercise. Its as well done as any I’ve seen, and some of the little period and historically related garnishments make it better than most. If you like managing armies in a grand strategy environment, I really think you will enjoy this game. I did.

OK, there is one thing. I’m just not too fond of the animated soldier graphics towering over the Hobbit hovels and halfling forests. It almost reminds me of another game called Field of Glory II and . . .  wait a minute. A blinding flash of the obvious just happened. What would happen if we link the two games so when there is a battle in AAR you could fight it out in Field of Glory, then input the results back into AAR?

Holy SPQR, I think I just found my next article.

Aggressors: Ancient Rome is due out on PC on August 30th. Our sister website Strategy Gamer will be posting a formal review next week, if you would like to know more.