Matrix Games Forums

Bart Koehler is in charge of assigning playtesters to GGWaW for Matrix. In the thread about call for playtesters Bart said the following (and more so check out that thread):

1) Send me an Email to bartk@matrixgames.com...

VOICE INSIDE HEAD: no greyshaft... you are too busy with Flashpoint Germany... ignore the pretty graphics... you need to finish rewriting the Flashpoint Tutorials... close this thread... do not look on the temptation...

MY VOICE: (loud and demanding) But I wanna play this one also!!!

<sudden cringe as I realise that everyone else in the office in now looking at me strangely>

Soviets here again. With US workers getting into war gear, our own production stepping up, and US CVs ruling the North Sea, things start to move for the Allied war machine. But we're still semi surrounded by Fascist beasts, errr, I mean our German allies.

Japanese forces in the Far East do not seem all that strong - it's going to be tempting to take "Japan first" approach together with our US Allies - once we get into the war proper.

Oleg

Just want to remind the Western Allied play he can send Lend Lease to Russia and/or China with the L key. Can't remember the simple supply rules on whether a link of some kind needs to be established (I think so). With advanced supply rules you have to move physically move the supplies. Just thought I'd mention it given what you said about China and supplies.

Is there the ability to have DOW on Turkey, Sweden, Spain, Portugal ect. or do they remain neutral?

ORIGINAL: J P Falcon

Is there the ability to have DOW on Turkey, Sweden, Spain, Portugal ect. or do they remain neutral?

You can attack them (no DOW necessary [8D]) and once attacked, they automatically join your opponent's side (Axis or Allies).

Quote:
Any neutral country attacked by the Western Allies or Russia joins the German player (except Siam and Tibet which join Japan). Any neutral country attacked by Germany or Japan joins the Western allies. End quote.

But in case of Switzerland, Sweden and Spain prospects seem discouraging. They have rather substantial forces, and you'd have to have very good reason to attack them (historical).

Also thing to remember is: "Neutral countries send a portion of their resources to player countries as long as they have a strategic movement link to an area adjacent to that country" etc.

O.

Very good....it's an available option but you need to weigh the gains and losses....especially regarding the extra resources

I tend to agree

ORIGINAL: neuromancer

ORIGINAL: MButtazoni
it's 3 month turns because it was designed that way [:D], no impulses either.

I'd like to say at this juncture that I would have liked more territories (map is a little to Axis and allies for my tastes - Europe Engulfed has a nice scale for territories) and turns to be a tad shorter, say 1 or 2 months (again similar to EE).

But, what the hey. Its what we got.

What factor does Gilbralta play in acces to the Med?

ORIGINAL: DoomedMantis

What factor does Gilbralta play in acces to the Med?

In game terms Gibraltar is "narrows". There are other narrows as well - depicted by two small yellow arrows on the map: Kattegat, English Channel, Persian Gulf, passages between some Japanese islands, Malacca straits etc.

Without going into too much detail (NDA, alpha etc.), narrows offer some benefits to the side that controls them. For instance - automatic aerial and coastal op fire at any enemy naval units passing through the narrows. To put it short - you won't be sailing your naval units thru enemy controlled narrows too often, if they happen to be occupied by air and coastal artillery units [:D]

O.

Question: is there any significance to the capital cities on the map, or are they just eye candy?

as far as i can tell the only purpose Capitals are to provide a sense of emotional loss when they are captured [:D]

(they don't appear to serve any game purpose)

ORIGINAL: MButtazoni

as far as i can tell the only purpose Capitals are to provide a sense of emotional loss when they are captured [:D]

Heh, well, you would be the expert on that this game! [:D]

KIDDING!!!!!



BTW, I checked out the game linked in your sig. Is it really friendly to solitaire play? I've been wanting to pick up a good non-computer wargame, but solitaire play is a must.

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko


In game terms Gibraltar is "narrows". There are other narrows as well - depicted by two small yellow arrows on the map: Kattegat, English Channel, Persian Gulf, passages between some Japanese islands, Malacca straits etc.

O.

I like that rule. Good representation of how these natural bottlenecks affect naval operations.

Is that how the Panama Canal is handled, as a "narrows" or are canals treated differently and if so how?

ORIGINAL: mavraam

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko


In game terms Gibraltar is "narrows". There are other narrows as well - depicted by two small yellow arrows on the map: Kattegat, English Channel, Persian Gulf, passages between some Japanese islands, Malacca straits etc.

O.

I like that rule. Good representation of how these natural bottlenecks affect naval operations.

Is that how the Panama Canal is handled, as a "narrows" or are canals treated differently and if so how?

Indeed, canals are something altogether different!

There is no MP cost for moving through the canal but this is only allowed if the canal area is owned by the moving country or an ally.

Canals are represented on the map with a dotted blue lines (see examples of the Kiel canal and Dardanelles on the map screenshots above - yes, Dardanelles are "canal", not "narrows" for obvious reasons).

That means you can "force" your passage thru enemy controlled Kattegat or Malacca strait or Gibraltar, if you're ready to accept serious losses (if the enemy has air units in adjacent land area) but you can't go thru Dardanelles or Kiel canal unless you own the adjacent land mass - which all seems perfecty OK to me.

Oleg

Yes, a canal is very different from a strait.

You MUST own the land region that the canal goes through to us naval movement between sea areas connected by canal (Kiel,Panama, Suez). The land region the canal is in does not cost any naval movement points.


Becket: A World at War (in my sig) is not very suited to solitaire play. It is a monster game with 4 maps, 2800 counters, and a 196 page rule book, and it is the most enjoyable war game i've ever played. i enjoyed it so much i offered to create and manage their website and magazine publications.

this might be interesting to some of you. In the current game of AWAW (not GGWAW) here is a picture of England in Winter 1942. Black is GE, Tan is BR, and Green is US:

(it's kinda sad, but i'm the Western Allies in this game too[:o])

Maurice,

Did you send your fleets away and invite the Germans over the channel for some tea in AWAW also? [:D]

I own a copy of AWAW and have yet to punch a single counter. Everytime I think about attempting to play a game my head starts to hurt thinking about the enormity of it.

Oh, by the way, I think you need to work on your overall "Defend England" strategy a little more....

[:D]

It's clear to me he's just trying to lull the Germans into a false sense of security before he springs his Cunning Trap! [:D]

That's a seriously cool looking game. Thanks for the photo.

As to the similarity of your tactical situation, um, if we're ever in a PBEM together, you get China.

[:D]

ORIGINAL: MButtazoni

this might be interesting to some of you. In the current game of AWAW (not GGWAW) here is a picture of England in Winter 1942. Black is GE, Tan is BR, and Green is US:

(it's kinda sad, but i'm the Western Allies in this game too[:o])

Look at it from the bright side: You will never run out of people who want to play with you!

Fall 1941, Western Allies.

huge fight in Algiers, the Germans held on to the area though...