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.
From what I have read, if I'm playing the Allied powers, then I will not know what Germany or Japan will be researching. Is there any way to discover what they may be researching? Are there spies/intelligence in the game? What about secret codes/Enigma, etc?
I also understand there is an option for a FoW. With this option turned on, how much does it limit your intel about the enemy's forces, deployments, research, etc?
In HoI, Allied landings on beaches (in the Pacific) and in Europe (at Normandy) were almost non-existant. From what you have seen is the AI more than capable of conducting amphibious invasions with lots of troops?
Thanks for the insight into this greatly anticipated game. Since I'm a devout of SC I have a few questions and a suggestion that you guys dwell into the SC forums, like I mean go all the way back. There were some great discussions about what could be incorporated into a game of this scale and after all why try and reinvent the wheel. First question is about the aspects of naval search, will there be a chance that opposing task forces could miss each other in the same sea zone? Will submarines be able to move about undetected? As far as population constraints, will there be the opportunity to use conquered populations for the manpower pool. What if the Germans had treated the people of the USSR with more dignity? Will research afford the opportunity to change military doctrines, like the Germans researching strategic air capabilities, or the French developing a mobile warfare doctrine? I can imagine that the Air war will be quite dominating, how will intercepts be handled, how about spotting, intelligence (opposing unit disclosure)? And one last thing, the sharing or capture of technology, espionage, will alliances have a chance to learn from a more advanced member or a more advanced enemy, costing them less time and resources? Thanks in advance.
From what I have read, if I'm playing the Allied powers, then I will not know what Germany or Japan will be researching. Is there any way to discover what they may be researching? Are there spies/intelligence in the game? What about secret codes/Enigma, etc?
I also understand there is an option for a FoW. With this option turned on, how much does it limit your intel about the enemy's forces, deployments, research, etc?
In HoI, Allied landings on beaches (in the Pacific) and in Europe (at Normandy) were almost non-existant. From what you have seen is the AI more than capable of conducting amphibious invasions with lots of troops?
Cheers!
Exactly how Fog of War will impact what players know about other player's construction and research is one of the areas we haven't settled on (currently with FOW you get no info on what production and research is underway, although you do see weapon improvements when they happen). We expect to toy with this during playtesting. We have discussed the idea of various ways to get intel as well. I can't tell you on this where we will end up, and/or any of these items will be preference items or tied directly to FOW. Some things only get finalized after we get into active outside testing.
Yes, our AI is able to pull off large scale amphibious invasions. I used to like playing A&A on the computer, but was disgusted by the US AI that would buy tons of infantry but never ship it anywhere or use it offensively. We expect that our AI will play a competant game, although without help, good players will beat up on it. I've enjoyed playing one major power and watching the computer play all other powers. It makes for a challenging game as my computer Allies aren't as good as I am, so I have to help them out, but they don't play so incompetantly that I get frustrated with them.
All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard
Thanks for the insight into this greatly anticipated game. Since I'm a devout of SC I have a few questions and a suggestion that you guys dwell into the SC forums, like I mean go all the way back. There were some great discussions about what could be incorporated into a game of this scale and after all why try and reinvent the wheel. First question is about the aspects of naval search, will there be a chance that opposing task forces could miss each other in the same sea zone? Will submarines be able to move about undetected? As far as population constraints, will there be the opportunity to use conquered populations for the manpower pool. What if the Germans had treated the people of the USSR with more dignity? Will research afford the opportunity to change military doctrines, like the Germans researching strategic air capabilities, or the French developing a mobile warfare doctrine? I can imagine that the Air war will be quite dominating, how will intercepts be handled, how about spotting, intelligence (opposing unit disclosure)? And one last thing, the sharing or capture of technology, espionage, will alliances have a chance to learn from a more advanced member or a more advanced enemy, costing them less time and resources? Thanks in advance.
I have only played a demo of SC, but I played a lot of the old Clash of Steel by SSI, and from what I could tell the games were very similar. At this point we are 95% set on our design, with just some items (like the intel and FOW issues I just mentioned in my previous post) left to be played with. Not all ships in an area will fight (you can't guarantee that Jutland will happen just because the ships are in the area). Units in adjacent areas are spotted, so subs are not invisible unless they stay away from enemy units, however subs can coexist in an area with enemy units (unlike other units). As for your other questions, it would take a lot to explain how some of the items we have deal with some but not all of your items mentioned.
All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard
Agreed, looks like an excellent strategy game with lots of options for players.
Hopefully, the AI will be able to access a wide variety of strategies to make each game different. Take Germany/Italy for example, will they focus on a SeaLion or Russia or conquering the Med or perhaps even taking Sweden or Turkey. Will they launch a submarine war or not spend any resources on submarines. One of the biggest problems I have seen in wargame AI's is that the opponent becomes too predictable. I would really like to see the AI have a strategy that it will use only 1 in 20 games to really surprise me. In fact, I would like to see the AI keep track of the Wins and losses for each strategy and the human's research preferences, and use that saved history file infomation to impact the strategy selected for the next game. If the human never invests in Anti-Sub Research or forces then the AI would be more likely to launch a submarine warfare. If the Human invests a lot in this area then the AI would be less likely to adopt a submarine warfare strategy.
I wonder if the game system will allow players to write own "simplified" AI routines that can be traded or posted on a web site for download.
1) I'm curious how the Battle of the Atlantic will be modelled.
This was a furious battle for control over the sea lanes and for disrupting convoy supplies to Britain.
In other words, will the Axis player be able to devote time and resources to building U-boats, and will these submarines have an impact on the supply levels going to Britain?
In turn, to counter this threat, the Allies should be forced to devote resources to building ASW units.
Also, when the USA enters the war, will U-boats be able to operate in the North American waters?
How abstract will this system be? Will U-boat counters be visible (and movable) on the map?
2) How will the strategic Bombing campaign be implemented?
Will this be abstract? Will the player be able to define the areas to be bombed? Will there be a limit to the amount of resources the player can devote to this area? What type of damage can be inflicted on German-controlled territory? Can the German player counter this threat with new and better fighters and AA?
V1 rocket stratedgy, japan submarine carrier, kamikaze strategy, advanced
sea mine or rocket for anti-beach attack and other non-desiel submarine etc...
For my interesting, there must be some event or trigger items in which may increase the negotation chance in order to let evil side axis to minor victory with drawing
peace treaty with other major allied.
It must be fun and much more 'What if' situation like reading a self-writing novel!!!
That would be Strategic Command by Battlefront/Fury. It is a simple, hex-based grand strategy game of WWII-European Theatre. I think it is very good considering it is the only GS wargame on the market for the PC. It has limitations, but it is definitely worth buying. PBEM works great and there are plenty of people to play (just look on the Battlefront forum). What else are we gonna play until GGWaW and CWiF come out?
I am assuming that research for this should be very expensive and hard to do. Anyone venturing down this road should be prepared to consume a lot of resources to research it.
In HoI the USA has the atomic bomb by 1942 [8|]
Once the atomic bomb is obtained, how will its use be implemented in the game?
The Battle of the Atlantic and the Heavy Bomber campaign are part of the game. Subs and Heavy Bombers are units that can be built, and they can be researched to have better attack or defense capabilities. ASW can also be researched, so the Allies can improve their ASW on their aircraft, fleets or transports depending on their preference. The sub war is both a war of production (of sub fleets, transports and light fleets and aircraft), but also a war of research. If one side spends on research, and the other doesn't, the battle will go to the player with the better weapons. As for Heavy Bombers vs flak and fighters, similar things apply. The bombers can elect to bomb infrastructure, in which case they can damage factories, resource centers, rail capacity and flak units. Supplies must be spent to repair the damaged items to get them back into operation. Air units can also elect to attack only enemy airfields, or enemy ports, or conduct a normal attack against ground units. So you have control over how you use your planes.
We haven't decided for sure how to handle nuclear technology yet, but it will probably be tied into research on the ground attack ability of Heavy Bomber units.
As for the AI, it does have different strategies it uses for certain players, and we hope to work on this some more before release. The AI is not programmable, although the AI research tendencies are driven by a datafile so it is possible to try to alter the datafile in order to create different research strategies (although this is failry complex and I'm not expecting people to do this very much).
All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard
Well.....there is High Command from 1993......the AI was not very good, but the ideas behind the game were good IMHO,.....a player can actually attempt to basically bribe other countries to join their side......it does open up some interesting possibilities that SC I don't think has......one could wait to invade Poland, bribe the Dutch and Belgians to join the Axis, then invade France and Britain without invading Russia.
Of course a big problem is that HC does not have PBEM support, so its on the honor system.
This game sounds great. It is far more detailed than I originally thought.
I am glad you guys are open and flexible about game design.
If possible keep it as open, flexible and moddable as possible with as many options as possible.
Have you decided on what the unit icons will look like? Will they be counter-based? Or will they look more like those in A&A?
Cheers!
They will be little 3-d looking models of tanks, infantry, ships, planes, etc.
Great.
Can we expect some new screenshots soon?
Cheers!
Sometime in the next month I'd expect. We're working on the weapons and the some of the ineterface screens now but it may be the end of March before we can take a break and post something.
All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard
They will be little 3-d looking models of tanks, infantry, ships, planes, etc.
Great.
Can we expect some new screenshots soon?
Cheers!
Sometime in the next month I'd expect. We're working on the weapons and the some of the ineterface screens now but it may be the end of March before we can take a break and post something.
There's no rush.
Just glad to hear that a new WWII grand strategy game is in the works.
Leave it to Matrix and you guys to give us the wargames we have been hoping for. . .
