Nobody in their right mind would ever say that wargamers do not have political viewpoints. That said, in my experience most members of the wargaming community try to make “polite” company and do not trumpet their politics. Admittedly, some wargame publishers wade into politics—which they are free to do—with some of their titles. Sometimes that works out for them…and other times it can be troublesome. In my experience, I see most wargame publishers try to avoid controversy (and damage to sales) and toe an apolitical line.
As I was reading this month’s GMT Games update, for some reason my eyes focused on a section I usually skim over and what I read…surprised me.
The above is from the same publisher that is printing this game for release in the near-future.
The flagging of this particular YouTube channel appears to be a new add this month for it was not there in the June 2026 newsletter.
Why am I highlighting this single callout? Well, like I said above, wargame publishers are welcome to express their opinions. In this case the company may be trying to show they are a “big tent” publisher. It is totally possible that they are more than wiling to support the people which they see as distinct from the government. This is why some style guides recommend using the People’s Republic of China (PRC) as the name of the government and reserve the word Chinese to refer to the people outside of politics.
As far as I am really concerned, all wargame publishers are free to support whoever they want.
I just worry about NAFO blowback.
Feature image: “Demonstrators march with a banner that reads “Ukraine—Peace, Russia—Freedom,” in Moscow on 24 February 2022 after Russia’s attack on Ukraine. Many large antiwar protests were organized in the immediate aftermath of Russia’s invasion, but the Russian government has subsequently stymied large-scale street protests and closed down the opposition’s access to Russian media. (Photo by Dmitry Serebryakov, Associated Press)“
The opinions and views expressed in this blog are those of the author alone and are presented in a personal capacity. They do not necessarily represent the views of U.S. Navy or any other U.S. government Department, Service, Agency, Office, or employer.
RockyMountainNavy.com © 2007-2026 by Ian B is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0
Rocky Mountain Navy Gamer 
They are showing who is promoting their games. Is GMT or the USA at war with Russia?
No.
Congrats to them. I can’t even get my logo on the Youtuber channel section.
Maybe I should start a war?
Hm!
I admit that the Stern mention slid right by me too – the GMT newsletters are very long and 90% of the content is not relevant to me.
I think it is probably going to slide right by a lot of people, including the Fellas. I’m not sure just what the problem is.
Customers are distinct from the publishers they buy games from, just as people are distinct from the regime they live under… even more so, because the former is a voluntary relationship moderated by money. Stern Wargames is not an official organ of the Russian state and GMT engaging with them to spread the wargaming gospel is not an endorsement of the Russian state, no more than it is a condemnation of the acts of that state.
It is a choice, sure, and political in the sense that all choices are in some way small-p political, but it’s driven primarily by reasons of commerce. As far as I know importation of American-produced wargames into Russia is not sanctioned or hindered so it’s not as if anyone is being inveigled into some illicit activity. I’m willing to bet that the great majority of the users of Stern Wargames are as disengaged from current events as American gamers (I’ve long since come to the conclusion that while wargamers are all interested in history, they don’t seem to have any more interest in current affairs than non-wargamers). So it’s likely a null issue.
I can’t answer for the thoughts and opinions of the designers of Defiance, nor for the designers of Next War: Hereandthereasitmightbe. Certainly they have political positions and value judgements about the conflicts they have designed on and GMT may have considered this in deciding whether or not to publish, so they have already passed whatever kind of test GMT would have applied there. To me, it’s all fair game as it fits in with my notion of board wargames on contemporary conflicts as a form of citizen journalism, and like all journalistic products you do have to acknowledge the author’s sources, inclinations and interpretations.
I would add a couple of eurocents… I know the channel for several reasons (more on that later…) and from what I have seen, they are also linked to Russian publishers who localize wargames in russian, so it may be a way to support these publishers. On the other hand I discovered the channel sometime ago while doing a internet search on my name… they have a VK channel where they freely distribute PDF copies of games still in print (I ended there for Blackhorse!). On the other hand the people behind it do also some nice TTS modules.
Best,
Arrigo
Oh Arrigo, I’m jealous!
They haven’t bothered to pirate my work at all, even my “Ukrainian Crisis” game.
I guess if it’s free there is no thrill in it.