Armchair Dragoons Interviews Designer Larry Pinkterton

Ian Brown, 25 February 2026

Larry Pinkerton is the designer of a new strategic-level game of the American Civil War, And The War Came.  He took some time to have a chat with the Dragoons.

What’s your background as a wargamer? Are there any aspects of your professional background that pulled you into wargaming as a hobby?

I was introduced to wargames in the late ’70s, just out of high school–I think Avalon Hill’s Afrika Korps was the first one for me. I was a member of a club, the Gem City Gamers (Dayton OH) and was of course exposed to a lot of the old classics. And I happened to pick up SPI’s Firefight, which was an introduction to modern combat systems, tactics and doctrine. This interest led me into enlisting into the Ohio Army National Guard, where I had a very rewarding 33+ year career, retiring as a brigade commander, and acquiring skills and knowledge that served my civilian career as well. Now I’m an old fat retired guy, doing a few part time contract gigs supporting military exercises and wargames. So my enjoyment of wargaming actually contributed greatly to my professional career!

Is this your first game design?

And The War Came (ATWC) is my first design. And it sure did take awhile.

click images to enlarge

Obviously there are many previously published wargames that examine the Civil War in different respects. What gaps in Civil War gaming did you see that you thought your design could fill?

Great question.

Gap 1: ATWC was originally designed as a block wargame. I had played Columbia’s Hammer of the Scots (HOTS), and realized that type of mechanic would lend itself to a strategic level American Civil War (ACW) game at the corps (rotatable, with variable subordinate division strength points) and army strategic level, so not a lot of counters, plus fog of war. It was a no brainer–there wasn’t another full war title of that type out there, although Columbia does offer some nice ACW campaign games.

Gap 2: Senior leaders and commanders. In my opinion, a strategic level ACW game must include a good portion of the historical commanders. And many games do; but they’re not usually dynamic on how they approach a given commander’s skill at the various points of his ACW service. Grant was a better Lieutenant General than Brigadier–that should be reflected in his game values for those ranks. And that holds for many commanders; most got better, but some got worse with senior command. A rotatable block (or in ATWC‘s case, rotatable counters) allows those values to change. In ATWC, commanders enter the game at about the time they became junior corps commanders or held independent commands. They must survive and work their way up to the rare air of army command. And ATWC has some optional leader rules to add variables and unknowns.

Let’s get into gameplay—how does a player win ATWC? What does a game turn look like? What are the key decisions that players need to make with the resources available to them?

To win, a player must achieve better results–usually by seizing and holding victory point areas–than their historical counterparts, Abraham Lincoln or Jefferson Davis. I felt that was the most reasonable metric for victory.

Game turns are not unlike other card driven wargames, the main sequence is this:

1. Card Step: deal cards to each player for that Seasonal Turn (Winter-1 card; Spring/Fall-2 cards; Summer-3 cards). Cards have number values (Orders) that define the number of corps or army level “commands” (a commanding general and troops, i.e. “Jackson’s Command”) in the Operations Step. Some cards may have bonus actions or special events (diplomatic incident, partisan activity, etc.).
2. Administration Step: determine Resource Points and recruit (“buy”) new units. Place new or returned-to-duty generals. Reassign and transfer generals that are already on the map.
3. Operations Step: play a card from your hand and determine initiative (which side issues orders and moves first). Both sides execute their movement orders and then resolve battles that occur due to movements. Repeat steps if there’s more than one card in a season, such as Spring, Summer or Fall.
4. Logistics Step: check supply lines, place recruited units from the Administration Step, and cross level or realign forces in a given area if desired.
5. Victory Check: check for immediate victory conductions (mid-term election of 1862, presidential election of 1864, Northern war weariness, southern loss of infrastructure, etc.). At the end of the scenario, tally up Area Victory Points and USA War Weariness Points, and compare totals to see if players have done better or worse than the historical outcome for that scenario.

Key decisions: for the North, where to strike, how to get the most out of your naval support, and how to hold territory tethered by long supply lines and fragile railroads.
For the South, how to get the most out of your diminishing resource pool, how to best use your two armies to block Union offensives, and if and where to possibly go on the offensive.

What are some of the design choices or gameplay mechanics that distinguish ATWC from other Civil War games?

Leader effects, recruitment strength, naval support and supply come to mind.

I designed the corps-level units with standard combat and movement values; there are no elite or militia units. The way to make units better is with better leaders (with their movement, initiative and tactical ratings). And since the North and South had different rank and organizational structures, I simplified things with this system: a 1-star general commands one corps unit, 2-stars command one or two corps units, and only 3-stars may command one of the five named armies. (Potomac, Cumberland & Tennessee for the North; Northern Virginia & Tennessee for the South). Only armies may include a specified number of subordinate corps as well as subordinate leaders. And since only the North used army groups, both Grant and Sherman may achieve 4-star rank. If a 3-star is relieved from army command, he is reduced in rank and there is a political (war weariness) cost to his removal. Remember, promotion to General Officer rank is literally an act of Congress. And of course commanders can also be killed, wounded or captured in ATWC.

Factoring in the recruitment strength was hard, trying to come close to the right historical force ratios of roughly 2:1, and still get an acceptable play balance. I used a simple variable recruitment process (fixed number plus a dice roll) which gets reasonably close to Thomas L. Livermore’s calculations in his Numbers & Losses in the Civil War in America, 1861-1865¹. The South with reduced numbers has a reasonable chance due to the slightly better early war generals, the vast territory to be fought over, and strung-out Northern forces.

In my opinion, the North had strategic naval dominance; an ironclad here and cottonclad gunboat flotilla there made no strategic difference. Early versions of the game had naval units and commanders, but I achieved the same effects by providing the North with naval support points for movement or combat support, which could be used for both river and ocean support. Southern forts still can impact rivers and coast lines–just assume they’ve got some small level of Confederate naval support and leave it at that. There are other games that do a great job of replicating tactical and operational naval actions; I had nothing more to add on my end.

Supply and blockade effects are built into the diminishing Southern recruitment rates, and I felt as long as units could trace unobstructed lines back to their blue or grey heartlands, they had adequate supply that generally aligns with historical outcomes. I played with, but ultimately rejected, detailed bean counting.

ATWC is naturally grounded in the real events of the Civil War. What aspects of command and conflict from the Civil War do you hope your game helps players gain a better appreciation for by playing it?

First, that effective leadership was the deciding factor in most cases. At the strategic level, Union and Confederate units were generally organized, equipped, trained similarly due to common traditions, etc. Formations that excelled under one commander often turned to mediocrity under another, and vice versa. Lincoln and Davis’ efforts focused on getting the right leadership for their formations–I doubt they cared much about who was on the left or right flank, or who was in reserve during a given battle. An ACW game that doesn’t factor in leadership at the appropriate level for the game may as well be an elaborate chess match with blue and grey pieces.

Second, the ACW was a political event. I attempted to factor in as much political impact as I could without overburdening playability–hence the USA War Weariness points. Lincoln had to prosecute the war while remaining focused on the political and public impacts of his actions. If the Northern player doesn’t pay attention to enemy actions which drive up war weariness, they’re at risk.

Any plans for a sequel or expansion if this game does well? Either way, do you have any other game designs in the works?

Hmmmm, maybe. I found out game design is pretty darn hard though! But I think a similar type of game on the American Revolution may be possible. Again, the political aspects would be complex, and very interesting. Scale would have to be reconsidered–probably brigade-sized units, even at the strategic/continental level. There would be British naval dominance but with limitations. And Britain had unique supply issues. Then there’s the question of how to realistically handle militias on both sides, Native nations, the French, etc. After I finish Rick Atkinson’s Revolution Trilogy I may get some more ideas and inspiration.

And of course the most important question: where can people buy your game?

Glad you asked! ATWC is currently available for $65 on Blue Panther’s site
And there may be a few more outlets offering the game in the US and Europe soon.

Don’t forget, there are bonus questions from all of our interviews that we set aside for our Patreon supporters – just one of the perks of joining our Patreon!  

Thank you for visiting the Regiment of Strategy Gaming and riding with The Armchair Dragoons.
Rather than list a bunch of social media links, the easiest thing to do is to check out our LinkTree, which connects you to all of our various locales around the web.
You can also support The Armchair Dragoons through our Patreon, and find us at a variety of conventions and other events.
Feel free to talk back to us either in our discussion forum, or in the comments below.

1. ed note: you can read more about Livermore here