War in Spain: engine choice makes sense — but I worry the theater choice may hurt the wrong conclusion
Posted: Tue Dec 23, 2025 2:18 pm
Hi everyone,
I want to start by saying I do understand (and actually appreciate) the logic behind starting with a smaller-scale theater to prove out a new system.
From the official description, War in Spain 1936–39 is the first title in a new series, using a new Land–Sea–Air engine inspired by War in the Pacific: Admiral’s Edition. That idea is honestly a dream for many of us: take the depth we love, modernize/polish the model, and make it work smoothly across land, air, and naval systems. (If the new logistics + AI improvements land well, that’s huge.)
So purely from a design/testing perspective, the Spanish Civil War is a neat “laboratory”:
• Land operations are central and varied.
• Air warfare matters and evolves quickly.
• Naval aspects exist (even if not the main show), so the engine can be exercised on all fronts.
• The overall scale is more discrete than the full Eastern Front / Western Front / full Pacific.
All of that makes sense.
That said, I still want to voice a concern: I think the theater selection is a commercial risk, and I worry about the interpretation of sales results.
My concern
In my experience (and in my circle of history-loving friends), the Spanish Civil War just isn’t as broadly “must-buy” for the average grognard as many other WWII / pre-WWII theaters. I’m sure there are dedicated Spanish Civil War fans (they absolutely exist), but I don’t think they’re as common as fans of other campaigns.
So my fear is this: if the game underperforms, the team might (understandably) conclude:
“This Grigsby-style formula / this level of depth doesn’t sell anymore.”
…when the more accurate conclusion could be:
“The engine is great, but the theater pick capped the potential audience.”
And I say this as someone who loves this entire lineage of games — I’m genuinely not 100% sure I will buy War in Spain day one, and that surprises even me.
Alternative “small but iconic” theaters that still test land/air/sea
If the goal is: smaller scope but rich combined-arms, there are a lot of options that (in my opinion) have a much bigger built-in audience:
Europe / Mediterranean
• Greece & Balkans 1941 (with Crete as an extension): compact, dramatic, multiple forces involved.
• North Africa (any slice: Compass → Crusader → Gazala → El Alamein, etc.): classic, popular, and perfect for operational maneuver + air + supply.
• Italy 1943–45 (Sicily/Salerno/Anzio/Gothic Line): smaller than the Eastern Front, still iconic, strong combined-arms.
• Norway 1940: landings, air, naval, geography—very “engine-testing” friendly.
Pre-WWII / early-war
• Winter War (1939–40): excellent for modeling weather, terrain, logistics, asymmetric force structure (and it’s a very recognizable “what if / study” conflict).
• Poland 1939: short, focused, immediately recognizable.
Early Pacific (if you ever want a compact maritime-heavy testbed)
• Malaya/Singapore, Philippines 1941–42, Dutch East Indies, Rabaul / early Solomons: smaller than the full Pacific monster, but still naval + air + ground in a very “WitP-like” way.
What I’m hoping for
I’m not trying to dunk on the Spanish Civil War as a topic — it’s historically important and absolutely interesting. I’m just worried the theater choice may mask the true market appetite for the engine and design philosophy you’re building.
Because if this new Land–Sea–Air engine is genuinely strong, it deserves a setting that gives it the best chance to succeed commercially, so the series can continue.
Curious what others think — especially people who are excited for the Spanish Civil War specifically. Would you have preferred a different “first” theater for the new engine?
Cheers.
I want to start by saying I do understand (and actually appreciate) the logic behind starting with a smaller-scale theater to prove out a new system.
From the official description, War in Spain 1936–39 is the first title in a new series, using a new Land–Sea–Air engine inspired by War in the Pacific: Admiral’s Edition. That idea is honestly a dream for many of us: take the depth we love, modernize/polish the model, and make it work smoothly across land, air, and naval systems. (If the new logistics + AI improvements land well, that’s huge.)
So purely from a design/testing perspective, the Spanish Civil War is a neat “laboratory”:
• Land operations are central and varied.
• Air warfare matters and evolves quickly.
• Naval aspects exist (even if not the main show), so the engine can be exercised on all fronts.
• The overall scale is more discrete than the full Eastern Front / Western Front / full Pacific.
All of that makes sense.
That said, I still want to voice a concern: I think the theater selection is a commercial risk, and I worry about the interpretation of sales results.
My concern
In my experience (and in my circle of history-loving friends), the Spanish Civil War just isn’t as broadly “must-buy” for the average grognard as many other WWII / pre-WWII theaters. I’m sure there are dedicated Spanish Civil War fans (they absolutely exist), but I don’t think they’re as common as fans of other campaigns.
So my fear is this: if the game underperforms, the team might (understandably) conclude:
“This Grigsby-style formula / this level of depth doesn’t sell anymore.”
…when the more accurate conclusion could be:
“The engine is great, but the theater pick capped the potential audience.”
And I say this as someone who loves this entire lineage of games — I’m genuinely not 100% sure I will buy War in Spain day one, and that surprises even me.
Alternative “small but iconic” theaters that still test land/air/sea
If the goal is: smaller scope but rich combined-arms, there are a lot of options that (in my opinion) have a much bigger built-in audience:
Europe / Mediterranean
• Greece & Balkans 1941 (with Crete as an extension): compact, dramatic, multiple forces involved.
• North Africa (any slice: Compass → Crusader → Gazala → El Alamein, etc.): classic, popular, and perfect for operational maneuver + air + supply.
• Italy 1943–45 (Sicily/Salerno/Anzio/Gothic Line): smaller than the Eastern Front, still iconic, strong combined-arms.
• Norway 1940: landings, air, naval, geography—very “engine-testing” friendly.
Pre-WWII / early-war
• Winter War (1939–40): excellent for modeling weather, terrain, logistics, asymmetric force structure (and it’s a very recognizable “what if / study” conflict).
• Poland 1939: short, focused, immediately recognizable.
Early Pacific (if you ever want a compact maritime-heavy testbed)
• Malaya/Singapore, Philippines 1941–42, Dutch East Indies, Rabaul / early Solomons: smaller than the full Pacific monster, but still naval + air + ground in a very “WitP-like” way.
What I’m hoping for
I’m not trying to dunk on the Spanish Civil War as a topic — it’s historically important and absolutely interesting. I’m just worried the theater choice may mask the true market appetite for the engine and design philosophy you’re building.
Because if this new Land–Sea–Air engine is genuinely strong, it deserves a setting that gives it the best chance to succeed commercially, so the series can continue.
Curious what others think — especially people who are excited for the Spanish Civil War specifically. Would you have preferred a different “first” theater for the new engine?
Cheers.