"Worlds" at War? An expansion?

Gary Grigsby's World At War gives you the chance to really run a world war. History is yours to write and things may turn out differently. The Western Allies may be conquered by Germany, or Japan may defeat China. With you at the controls, leading the fates of nations and alliances. Take command in this dynamic turn-based game and test strategies that long-past generals and world leaders could only dream of. Now anything is possible in this new strategic offering from Matrix Games and 2 by 3 Games.

Moderators: Joel Billings, JanSorensen

Post Reply
MantisMan
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 4:30 am

"Worlds" at War? An expansion?

Post by MantisMan »

You guys ever think of making an expansion; and calling it "Worlds at War"? It could be an inexpensive expansion ($9.99-$19.99). It could have randomized maps (no more Politically Frozen zones to memorize en-mass); or maye all the countries start Frozen except yours; Full TCPIP/LAN, interenet play (real time); 2-8 players; FULL diplomatic options (not ALWAYS 2vs3); Mabe a few new units, Tech sharing, even simultanious turn options???
User avatar
aletoledo
Posts: 827
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2005 6:51 pm
Contact:

RE: "Worlds" at War? An expansion?

Post by aletoledo »

or how about an h.g. wells war of the worlds!
User avatar
5cats
Posts: 291
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2005 7:17 am

RE: "Worlds" at War? An expansion?

Post by 5cats »

Play balance "might" be an issue :P
Of course you could just make your own world by fiddling with the .txt files.
No Will but Thy Will
No Law but the Laws You make
hakon
Posts: 298
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2005 12:55 pm

RE: "Worlds" at War? An expansion?

Post by hakon »

The only way to balance out a random map like that, is to make all factions independent. That would require a diplomacy element in the game, and is probably out of scope.

I think the diplomacy/alpha centauri type of game is better suited for these fantasy scenarios, anyway.
Scott_WAR
Posts: 1020
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 12:27 pm

RE: "Worlds" at War? An expansion?

Post by Scott_WAR »

What about a random start/ RISK like game, using GGWAW units and mechanics?
User avatar
aletoledo
Posts: 827
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2005 6:51 pm
Contact:

RE: "Worlds" at War? An expansion?

Post by aletoledo »

lol
MantisMan
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 4:30 am

RE: "Worlds" at War? An expansion?

Post by MantisMan »

Guys, there is already an etire forum dedicated to how "deterministic" GGWAW is, no variation; ANWAYS the exact same map, the exact same teams (2v3), same geography, same frozen areas, same tech starts, ect.

A random map expasion (or patch) would "cure" all of the above, and allow for a LOT more replayablity. Just think about it, the game starts, and you DON'T know that you are going to attack France first, and Russia second. You could be landlocked, or a nation of Islands. With a "Last man standing" diplomacy option, Diplomacy could be absoulutey incredible.

Just thought this idea would solve one of the few complaints people have against the game; increase replayabiltiy, and give Matrix even more profit from the game [:)]
User avatar
Barthheart
Posts: 3080
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 3:16 pm
Location: Nepean, Ontario

RE: "Worlds" at War? An expansion?

Post by Barthheart »

That sounds like a cross between HOI2 and Civ 4..... sssshhhhuuuuddddddeeeerrrr.....[X(][:'(]
Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty & well preserved body,
but rather to skid in broadside, totally worn out & proclaiming "WOW, what a ride!"
User avatar
5cats
Posts: 291
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2005 7:17 am

RE: "Worlds" at War? An expansion?

Post by 5cats »

Or Imperialism mixed with Master of Magic!! ( a great game btw!)
At least France would survive turn 1, lol!
So we'd need more sides then, Germany, Italy, France, UK, USA, Russia, China & Japan.
No Will but Thy Will
No Law but the Laws You make
MantisMan
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 4:30 am

RE: "Worlds" at War? An expansion?

Post by MantisMan »

Well the "default" names for countries could be like "Germany", but you could call your country "5Catsastan" if you wanted.

The game mechanics and rules would remain basically the same, but one of the main differences (and improvements in my opinion) would be getting rid of all the micro-rules memeroizing, like on pages 31-34, frozen states; my friends were all excited about the game until they got to those pages, and almost put the book down after that [X(]

Post Reply

Return to “Gary Grigsby's World at War”