Intuitively it may seem to be a step back, as I remember all those wargamers I knew who had played Spearhead (and there are a lot from pre-2000, as it is an old rule set and was very popular in its time), who had enjoyed it but bemoaned the simplicity of the d6, so guess what - they introduced their own rule modifications (using d10s and some form of variation of morale break rules to allow remnants [as opposed to battalions break and disappear] like DBM to survive, but dwindle away giving token resistance). In fact I know hybrid Spearhead and Command Decision rule-sets were devised for 20-30 player Mega Games, as I have good friends who participated in them during the early 2000's. For one reason or another I too seemed to have discounted it, but in my greying years I see complexity for the sake of it, over simplicity to be generally a bad thing now (increasing dice rolls and playing time for no real gain) and I am tending to go the other way, more focusing on decision making. I remember James Sterrett's quote, "All models are wrong, but some models are useful"). The above struck me as I was watching online some Nimitz games by Jom Owczarski and noticed he also did some Spearhead videos too (see below, the appealing bit being they are "double blind" with an umpire, which seems to be the magic ingredient and the secret sauce of success - let the players play):
I am intrigued to give it another go, in its basic form with an umpire (although sadly without the mechanical assistance of the Table Top Simulator magic). I also think it is best played below a divisional level, certainly with no more than two battalions per player. Watch this space ;)
