Gaming Conventions

Gaming Conventions

Another new feature for, the Gaming Convention calendar will make it a snap to keep up with all the latest gaming conventions in your area. But we need your gaming convention information, so please contribute.

Gaming Clubs/Organizations

Gaming Clubs and Organizations

Please check out our new (and growing) database of gaming clubs and organizations world-wide. Please let us know of your gaming club, or any other clubs that you know about so we can make this a truly useful resource.

Spotlight Articles

Outstanding articles that are not necessarily linked to one particular game, but may have broad appeal to gamers.

Interview with John Poniske Designer of Flanks of Gettysburg from Compass Games

Spotlight Article Graphic

John Poniske is a prolific designer and we have enjoyed several of his games including Revolution Road from Compass Games, Plains Indian Wars from GMT Games (as yet unreleased but nearing completion), Bleeding Kansas from Decision Games, Hearts and Minds from Worthington Games and Maori Wars: The New Zealand Land Wars 1845-1872 from Legion Wargames. The Players Aid talk to him about his design philosophy and his upcoming game, Flanks of Gettysburg to be published by Compass Games.

Poster: Harvey M.
Post Date: 1/6/2021

Warlord Epic ACW - painting and comparing

Spotlight Article Graphic

"...this post is going to look at what it might mean to my wargames table...". Norm Smith, in his Battlefields & Warriors blog, checks out a sample of the new Epic Battles: American Civil War miniatures from Warlord Games. Check out why Norm feels he can give the product "…a big thumbs up, another area of choice for the customer and in our relatively small hobby…".

Poster: Doug Holt
Post Date: 1/6/2021

A Brief History of Naval Wargames

Spotlight Article Graphic

Kyle Mizokami gives a brief history behind the US Navy’s use of war games on the US Naval Institute’s News page. These games have played an important role in US Navy strategy and tactics. “After the war, Admiral Nimitz was to remark, “The war with Japan had been reenacted in the game rooms at the Naval War College by so many people and in so many different ways, that nothing that happened during the war was a surprise . . . absolutely nothing except the kamikaze tactics toward the end of the war; we had not visualized these.”…”

Poster: Pat L.
Post Date: 1/4/2021

Marengo 1800

Spotlight Article Graphic

"...Marengo, the putative victory that cemented Napoleon's hold on power." Jeff Berry, in his Obscure Battles blog, brings us another one of his exquisite battle illuminations. This time, an engagement with a role on the path of power: "Bonaparte realized that if he were to retain his dictatorial powers, he had to deliver victory and a satisfactory end to the war."

Poster: Doug Holt
Post Date: 1/1/2021

More Spotlight articles...

Grognard News

Grognard Game Plan

New Grognard Game Plan application is a free tool provided to registered site visitors to help organize convention play and other gaming sessions.

Gaming Conventions

New Gaming Conventions calendar. You can see all upcoming gaming conventions worldwide.

If you are sponsoring a board gaming convention of some type, or know of one that is not listed on, then please contact us and let us know!

Gaming Clubs/Organziations

New Gaming Clubs/Organizations listing. You can search for existing gaming clubs worldwide.

If you belong to a gaming club, or know of one, please drop us a line and let us know so we can get it listed on!

New Search Features

Now you can search for specific games (or games by publisher) using the new Game Search feature, located at the top right corner of the this page. In addition you can now harness the power of Google to search the entire site for any specific information you'd like. Just enter a search word or phrase into the Google box labeled "Search All of" and click magnifying glass button. Search features will continue to be improved and enhanced going forward so check back often to see the latest stuff.

Grognard Originals

In addition to our links to great content all around the internet, expect to see more "originals" in the future.

Higlanders - Scenario for Vietnam: 1965-1975

Experimental scenario for Vietnam: 1965-1975 created and shared by Mark D'Agosta.

Falling Sky - Perfect Opening Moves - Roman

Is there such a thing as a "Perfect Opening Move" in any of GMT's COIN Series games? Mark D. shares his idea of a "perfect" opening turn for the Romans in Falling Sky. Enjoy.

Battle for Russia - Game Turn Restrictions Summary

I'm finally getting to play this game, and am looking forward to it. There are a decent amount of "special rules" and restrictions that apply to either the Axis or Soviet player, depending on which turn it is. Rather than flipping back and forth in the rule book, I made a quick & dirty cheat sheet for myself which I have been using, and thought I'd share it. If anyone sees anything that's incorrect, please let me know via email at mark at grognard dot com. (updated 4/11/2020 to include rules for ignoring Rivers - Axis only on Turn 1; both sides on Turn 2)

French "Low Density" Blues in Ici c'est la France!

Brief strategy article written by Mark D. that explains the concept of "Troop Density" and examines how that level can have a big impact on French and FLN play in the early stages of the game. Ici c'est la France! was designed by Kim Kanger and published by Legion Wargames in 2009. Outstanding game!

More Grognard Originals...

Grognard Challenge

Latest Challenge

Have a look at the graphics for the latest Challenge and see past solutions and contest winners.

Recommended (archives)

Wargaming - General Info

Board Wargames

Miniatures Wargames

Computer Wargames

Academic Gaming

Board Games

Internet Based/PBEM Games

Individual Wargamer Blogs

Wargaming Magazines

Asst Software/Player Aides

In Memoriam

Grognards Lost

Vento Nuovo Games - please click here
Please support by supporting our site sponsor, Vento Nuovo Games

S T U V W X Y Z 0-9
Lance McMillan: Thunder in the East Developer exclusive interview with Lance McMillan, developer of Thunder in the East Hello, Lance; thank you for your time. Let’s go with the first question: You’ve been the developer for VPG’s edition of Battle for Moscow and its Winter Counteroffensive expansion kit, so it was natural for you to continue as Frank Chadwick began expanding that system with the Campaigns in Russia series games (The Arduous Beginning, Target: Leningrad, and Objective: Kiev). What were the essential gameplay aspects you were trying to develop/refine with the Campaigns in Russia series games?

Lance McMillan: The key aspect of the Campaigns in Russia series that I wanted to ensure was carried over to Thunder in the East was playability. There are dozens of other East Front games out there that will give you detailed history, but very few of those fall into a category that I would call "playable." Instead, those games tend to control the players rather than the other way around – that is, you spend most your time micro-managing petty details which a Theater or Army-Group commander would never concern himself with. I wanted TITE to keep players focused on the sorts of broad-brush strategic decisions that are appropriate to the level of command their roles represented and not worrying about whether the 143rd Independent Assault Engineer Company was committed to this or that stack to optimize the odds in that specific attack.

I have neither the patience nor time for longer games, so for me one of the great attractions of the Campaigns in Russia games was that you could get through a match in about 90-120 minutes. For that reason, paring Thunder in the East down to its essentials, so that the player spent most of his game time making critical decisions rather than getting bogged down in superfluous chrome, was an important aspect of development. I wouldn't categorize my philosophy here as "minimalist," but I'm hoping that I was able to get close to that.

Lance McMillan and Frank Chadwick at ConsSimExpo 2016 I understand that there is going to be a Battle for Moscow II game. How will that be different from the classic Battle for Moscow?

Lance McMillan: Battle for Moscow II (B4M2) is a condensed refinement of the Frank Chadwick’s ETO system. The goal is to make it a sort of showcase for Thunder in the East, so that players who aren't sure about whether TITE is something they'd enjoy can use B4M2 as a test platform to see whether it scratches their itch.

The biggest difference in B4M2 from its earlier fore-bearer is that it includes TITE's logistics and air system rules. Neither of these systems is necessarily a game changer, but they both add considerable depth to the game and give players a lot of insight into some of the whys and wherefores of the campaign that weren't previously evident. Additionally, the map has been expanded, providing both sides with different maneuver options that the tight confines of the older map didn't allow. I think that players will find the new B4M2 to be a considerable improvement to Battle for Moscow, while still retaining a lot of the original's usefulness and excitement as an introductory game. You were leading the whole team in alpha testing Thunder in the East at ConsimWorld 2016 in Tempe, Arizona. What did you learn after a week of intensive playtesting the very first version of that game?

Lance McMillan: For me, the most illuminating thing that came out in testing was how thoroughly logistics drive the operational train. It was delightfully refreshing to see players saying, "I really want to take Kiev, but my forward spearhead units are just beyond my supply radius... I'll just have to wait another turn to bring up supplies before launching the big drive." Yes!

Another thing that was (to me at least) surprising was how the Axis side's chances for victory seemed to significantly improve if they changed their strategy from a broad-front approach (which was used historically) and instead concentrated their efforts into just one or two key sectors -- yes, this often meant that one Army Group or another fell far behind its historical rate of advance, but the progress of the others was noticeably enhanced. Again, largely a matter of more focused logistics allowing the player to "drive the train" faster if he felt that met his objectives.

Lance McMillan, Frank Chadwick and Alan Emrich at ConsSimExpo 2016 What is the strategy for developing a game the size of Thunder in the East? During beta testing, will you be sending physical copies of the game out, or will this be a virtual (e.g., VASSAL) playtest because of its sheer size?

Lance McMillan: We will be using a combination of both hard-copy and electronic (VASSAL) versions as playtest kits. There are advantages to both: hard-copy allows testers to keep a game set up for long periods so they can study the entire map at leisure (rather than just screen-sized chunks), while electronic means testers can work on the game as time allows and allows us to easily make adjustments to components (charts, counters, and maps) as the need arises. Is there a guiding development philosophy that sets the Frank Chadwick’s ETO series apart from Frank’s earlier “monster-piece” (the Europa series) and other monster WWII games published since then? What are you doing that sets ETO apart from the competition?

Lance McMillan: As mentioned previously, it's all about distilling the essentials of decision making down to their core and keeping the player's attention locked in on the sorts of things that are appropriate to the role which he's filling (theater commander), rather than dealing with extraneous chrome and factor counting. I was a huge fan of Europa back in the day, but I've since come to realize that it is largely based on false premises: theater commanders don't (for the most part) deal with battalions, regiments, and brigades -- in fact, they rarely dealt with divisional movements. The appropriate focus for a player in the theater command role is with corps and armies. And with that in mind, it has been my goal to keep trying to pare as much of that sort of chrome out of the game as possible, retaining only the chrome that's absolutely necessary to "telling the story" of the war.

I'll give you an example: in a lot of East Front games, the designers have felt compelled to include the Spanish 250th Division and/or the Slovakian Mobile Group as separate and distinct units. Even if the smallest German unit in the game is a corps, those divisional and brigade level units, which were typically attached to some larger German corps, are given their own counters. While I appreciate that a lot of gamers like that sort of detail, the fact is that it gives the player far more operational flexibility (and those particular units far more importance) than his counterpart did in actual in historical terms. Thus the "false" lesson learned by making those units distinct is that they were somehow semi-elite formations that were critical to Axis fortunes, when in reality they were low quality units that were rather more of a liability than an asset. By amalgamating those type units into the larger context of the Axis force structure, the player gets a much clearer and more accurate sense of how things really were (albeit at the expense of some chrome-y flavor).

Thunder in the East Playtest Game Map A game developer is often in the middle of a tug-of-war between the designer’s vision and the publisher’s demands. I can imagine that situation might range from cordial to conflicting. How is it working with designer Frank Chadwick and publisher Alan Emrich? You’ve all worked together before and published some games, so that should help, but the scope of this project is enormous; is that straining things or all you “pulling together” through it? Is there a system you guys use to coordinate this project?

Lance McMillan: Frank, Alan and I get along extremely well. That's not to say that we don’t have our own ideas and agree on everything, and I'll admit to some (very small) degree of frustration when my preferences have had to take a back seat, but overall it has been an absolute delight working with the two of them.

We all agree on the guiding principles and philosophy of what we’re trying to achieve, so our basic approach in solving these types of conflicts is simply to talk things out and find a good common ground on which we can all agree. Occasionally one of us will draw a "line in the sand" over some point that they feel strongly about, and the others will acquiesce and help refine and develop that vision, but for the most part we tend to see eye-to-eye on things.

Thunder in the East Playtest Game Map Most developers have a contribution to make when gamer’s sit down and play the game, yet those players will never know what hand the developer had in actually bringing that new idea or clever change about. Is there anything in Thunder in the East that you feel you’ve really put your stamp on? Anything you look at and say, “Yeah, I chipped in something really cool right there”? Developers never get to toot their horn, so please share a toot if you have one!

Lance McMillan: Two particular items come to mind: logistics and airborne operations. While they've undergone considerable evolution since the early prototype concept was first put together, the basic concept for the game's supply rules were mine. One of my primary specialty areas during my military career was operational logistics, and I wanted to try to capture the essential elements of what I'd learned and experienced into a very simple set of rules for this game. My underlying idea was that supply needed to be the structure on which everything in the game ran -- it didn't matter how many troops (units) you had in a sector of the front, if you didn't have the logistical infrastructure to support them effectively, you simply weren't going to be able to accomplish much. At the same time, I also didn't want players to be forcibly demoted to acting as the supply sergeants for their side -- they needed to focus on broad-brush strategy, of which logistics were simply the critical enabler to allow them to do what they wanted to do. What we now have in place (again, modified from my original idea) achieves exactly that.

Airborne operations were a sort of pet peeve of mine (remember what I said before about a “line in the sand” issue; this one was mine). So many operational and strategic level games get them totally wrong (with paratroops primarily being used to block enemy retreat routes, which is something they were never used for historically), rather than as elements used to seize and open routes of advance for follow-on forces. I wanted to show these storied units in their correct capacity, rather than as providing some gamey mechanism that gives players completely misleading impression of their actual function. I think we have Airborne operations just right now. There’s a philosophy about games: if you don’t have fun making it, people won’t have fun playing it. Game development is a lot of work, but are you having fun bringing Thunder in the East and Battle for Moscow II to life? In what aspects of play will the gamers notice the love in your labor when they play?

Lance McMillan: It's a lot of work and I am having a lot fun, but the scope/scale of Thunder in the East and ETO (as opposed to Battle for Moscow II) really isn't a perfect match for my gaming preferences. As I mentioned earlier, the optimal game for me falls in a fairly narrow 90-120 minute timeframe, and the sheer size of TITE means that its playing time falls outside that window. However, because it's such a streamlined system, I'm still able to enjoy playing it. I'll be honest, I've created a couple of my own "small map" test scenarios from TITE which I have a great time with and that fit neatly within my comfort zone (e.g., when I test the Operation Uranus scenario, I only use a section of the map, one reaching from Rostov to Stalingrad, rather than the whole area from Warsaw to Baku). This, in turn, allowed me to dial in my development attention on the main "crisis" area of that operation, rather than looking at the entire Eastern Front.