I mentioned, preceded by quite a bit of exposition, that I gave Lock ‘n Load Tactical Digital a whirl following a summer Steam sale -induced purchase. I was inspired to do so by a post that I saw online.
Lock ‘n Load is a daunting game, especially if you are coming into it fresh. Lock ‘n Load Publishing has 165 titles listed on BoardGameGeek. Even accounting for the excess titles among that number, there is a lot to it. When I try to limit my count to the ASL-style games that I’ve discussed here, I get at least 50 – and probably more if you know how to do the query correctly.
Even the digital version, out now for a little more than three years, boasts 29* DLCs plus the “core” module. Do I need to drop almost $300 to figure out whether this is a worthwhile game? Of course not.
That suggestion that I found online was – start with just buying the digital core module and then one of the most interesting (to you) DLCs. At full price, this would be $15 for the pair, which isn’t entirely unreasonable (so they said, YMMV). They may have even suggested watching for a sale to get the price down further.
In this most recent Steam summer sale, the asking price for Lock ‘n Load Tactical Digital: Core Game was 50 cents. That is all-but free. As I posted before, that includes four scenarios plus the ability to play any DLC. It’s almost a “free demo,” unless of course you really think there should be a free demo, in which case it is something of an insult, isn’t it? In any case, 50 cents made sense to me and so now I’m a Lock n’ Load customer.
I remember when Lock ‘n Load was new. The first game of the franchise came out of Shrapnel Games in 2003. Like with Squad Battles, this is a game system that would seem to have its roots firmly planted in World War II and yet kicked itself off with the Vietnam Era with the title Lock ‘n Load: Forgotten Heroes – Vietnam. The pitch was that this was a much simpler, intuitive system (compared certainly to Advanced Squad Leader) which would satisfy a need in tactical gaming. Reading some of the 20-year-old postings, it may not have completely lived up to all the marketing pitch – but it did what it did well enough to be a success.
The original release was quickly followed by an expansion/follow-on ANZAC Attack. This, too, was set in Vietnam and was also a quick success. The next release, Lock ‘n Load: Band of Heroes, moved the venue to the Second World War, while at the same time switching publishers from Shrapnel Games to Matrix Games.
While I was interested in all of this at the time, 20 years is a little too far back to remember all the details. What I do recollect is some politicking involving the publishers and their owners. This was still a time when computer wargaming was going strong and was supported by vibrant discussion and online publications like Wargamer and Armchair General. Among its other innovations, Lock ‘n Load went for its publishing to the established software publishers rather than the established boardgame publishers, which generated some interest on its own merits. Thus it was a little more relevant when publishing moved three times within as many years. Something was going on behind the scenes but I’d rather not try to dredge it up right now.
What I also recall, though, was that from its get-go Lock ‘n Load worked a little harder to protect its proprietary intellectual property than… well, than suited me at the time. Compare and contrast with GMT. A newly released (or, sometimes, pre-release) game from GMT has most of its contents open on the internet for examination. A potential customer can get a full feel for the game and its play without ever investing a penny or touching cardboard. While there is usually something held back to discourage wanton free-riding, a person could probably enjoy much GMT content without actually owning** a GMT game.
The next out the door was a hypothetical World War III game set in 1985, World at War: Eisenbach Gap. This came after Lock ‘n Load reformed itself as its own publisher (2006). This was followed by a flood of games – a handful of titles being released each year. The torrent of content caused me to lose track. I wasn’t really keen on buying more boxes for my gaming shelf and I was deterred by the fact that I couldn’t get my virtual hands on the mechanics.
Was Lock ‘n Load an improvement on Squad Leader? Short of buying the game, I didn’t know how to evaluate that. The blame is probably more with me as with the game’s creator – the system is full of demos, tutorials, and teaching systems – but I put the game out of my mind. Until…
![](https://ettubluto.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/als21.jpg?w=1024)
The software version of Lock ‘n Load appeared in Spring of 2020. Although, at least initially, this fresh availability did not spark my interest. Maybe there was just too much existing Lock ‘n Load content for me to discern what I was looking at. Maybe something in the marketing made me think it was aimed towards owners of the tabletop game (which it almost certainly is, although not exclusively). Whatever the reason, I didn’t really get interested until I read that suggestion I told you about at the beginning.
As I write this pair of posts, I haven’t gotten into this game very deeply. I’ve played the tutorials as well as the four “demo” scenarios that come with the “core” game. I also paid for Lock ‘n Load Tactical Digital: Day of Heroes Battlepack 1 which covers the U.S. missteps in Somalia in 1993. With my Summer Sale discount, I paid $7 for it (applying a 30% discount on the DLC.) I suppose I chose this particular module because I was less than satisfied with my prior gaming foray into that battle. As of today’s writing, I’ve tried out just two of the scenarios included in that package. Is it enough to be able to judge the game and decide whether I’ll be buying more of it? Not yet. Is it enough to sound off with an opinion? Well, obviously.
First of all, just getting back into this gaming-in-the-style-of- Squad Leader brought back the fond memories of long-ago adventures (see prior post). It isn’t Squad Leader, nor really do I want it to be, but some of the key parts are there. See the screen above demonstrating the hidden sniper, the separate counter for the crew-served weaponry, and the squad/individual counters. For reference, that screenshot is from the demo scenario Rejoining the Regiment, a hypothetical encounter taking place just after D-Day. Playing as the Americans, I am there to spoil the attempted movement of the German platoon. I was effectively able to scare him off what would have been the better route for getting past me by employing a sniper. Fear funneled him through the gauntlet of my paratrooper squad and its machine gun (i.e. the highlighted hex).
![](https://ettubluto.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/als22.jpg?w=1024)
In my play so far, I’ve had some easy wins, some dramatic losses, and a scenario or two that I just couldn’t seem to get a grip on despite repeated attempts. I am so far pleased with how the programmed opponent is able to keep me entertained. I’d be surprised if it provides a challenge for long-time veterans of the table-top game but I can’t really speak to the issue – I’ve not even tried to read up on others opinions of the game. Lock ‘n Load Tactical Digital does offer several settings to tilt the game for-or-against the solo player and so, presumably, those who are using a digital version as training tool for upcoming human-v-human play could find satisfaction. The game also provides an in-game opponent finder and I’d expect that many use the game for remote, online play almost exclusively.
For me, I like the fact that I DON’T have to be a master of the Lock ‘n Load system to run with it. I could read the manuals, yes, or I could just jump right in and figure it out by trial and error. I’ve talked about my play style before but my feeling in playing semi-realistic wargames is that you should be able to play the simulated battle, not the gaming system. Yes, I can calculate the added +1 advantage of a concrete building over a wooden structure – or I can just use my innate understanding that if someone is going to be shooting at me, I’d rather have a cement wall between us than one made of wood.
I’m impressed with, as illustrated in the second screenshot, the ability to shift from hexes to squares within the system, if the nature of the fighting requires it. Sometimes hexes don’t work and sometimes squares don’t work. Nice to see a system that does either-or.
I mentioned in the last post that I like the enhanced fog-of-war options that the game provides and, in fact, I always play with it turned on fully. Similarly, all of the fiddly tracking that would accompany a table-top game is automatic. The program tells you which units can do what and when and calculates all the odds, lines-of-sight, and ancillary effects for you. The game can show you pre-calculate odds tables or not, depending on whether you want to reproduce the feel of an in-person game. In this case, I do like to show the percentages even if I can’t always find them when I’d want them.
On the down side, I find the scenarios, at least so far, to be on the small side. The compare and contrast with Squad Battles is probably most apt here – from the standpoint of computer gaming. For the most part, Lock ‘n Load seems to get more things right than Squad Battles did but I am remembering that it was those very big, very long scenarios that shone the brightest in Squad Battles. This gripe flies directly in the face of my other initial complaint – that turn resolutions take too long and, more importantly, longer than they need to be.
Despite the fact that everything from the table lookups to the die rolls are done for you, the “attacks” are still conducted as would be done if you were playing in person with physical components. Digital dice roll across the screen, modifiers are applied, and (finally) results are displayed. In some cases, this can result in several sequential, intermediate displays. For example, on the above Mogadishu map, a squad of Somalis might first fire an RPG or two before unloading with their AK-47s. This requires separate to-hit rolls for the RPGs followed by damage rolls if they hit. Then the squad rifle fire must have its rolls along with, when appropriate, damage calculated separately for each target. It really takes a while to get through a process where the player has no ability to affect the outcome. This is all, I can imagine, very meaningful for the tabletop player who wants to see the steps that take place, as they take place. But for the digital-only player, I’d think, it could all be summarized in one results screen. The excess information is especially apparent when the half-a-dozen-or-so rolls all result in “no effect” – a pretty common result when Somali militia are firing on elite U.S. units.
So that’s my “brief” (ha ha?) first impression. More to come as a play more and, perhaps, a future Steam sale allows me to pick up some other, interesting modules.
*Not all of them are out yet. Some are “coming soon.”