Even simultaneous turn based strategy games take hours. I cannot imagine the time commitment for non-computer managed strategy games. I also don’t understand the point unless it’s mostly about face to face interaction.
The alternative is to get together and play for a long day or weekend, but many games are much too long for that. I played one earlier this month with six other players (in two teams). We started in the morning and played til late in the evening, but we did not get halfway through the game. It was enough to see what side was likely to win. That is the usual outcome in my experience.
More common these days is to use a tool like VASSAL (https://vassalengine.org/) to play those games online.
From the article:
The real core mechanic is how dice are used in the game. The dice act as an instant adjudicator and the system uses different sizes of dice that can be adjusted during game play.
The map and counters also encode a lot of rapidly accessible state information. Using a computer would require all of this state info to be maintained in the computer, which would be a very different game, probably without the person to person interactions that make the game what it is.
A lot of the value of these games is the human interaction of several people working closely around the same table, not sat at separate screens interacting via the systems rather than each other. These sorts of games have real value for training senior decision makers whose day job is all about personal interactions, e.g. gold or silver commanders in a blue light emergency response scenario. They need to get into the syndicate room and immediately start to discuss how to respond to a crisis, not learn a new game interface.