Anybody play Xeno Europe at War or World at War?

Thanks! Will do.

Very nice rules and map!
What program did you use to create this map?

I have it, but am holding onto it for further playtesting on the set-ups.

Europe is being slightly changed in terms of the map, and there will be some minor additions to the rules.  These changes will probably be part of the map/rule package I am looking into producing.  Pacific would be released this way as well if all falls together.

Cheers

I got a say, though I have never played anything other than AArevised, and earlier addtions, (including expansions), people always did buy all tanks. But when tanks defended on a 2, and cost 3, buying all infantry swamped the tanks. I never bought all men with the guys I used to play regualary with, but just enough not to give it away. I was amazed they never realized the advantage of buying all men versus tanks. I always bought just enough men to not make it obvious. I have been playing for over 25 years. When they made tanks defend at a 3 on revised it became a close battle, but with the addition of artillery, again unless  you had to travel far and fast, infantry and artillery is far superior in strength. It always has been, so I curious what game was it advantageous to do all tanks.

In World at WAr (Expansion), since you can improve factories to produce 2 tanks per turn at a $1 reduce price, those became the only tanks I would ever buy.

Looking at some of the maps like AA40, being so big in terms of spaces it might make sense. But tanks costing now $6, the need for speed really must overcome the advantage of fire power. If I have $42, I would much rather have 6 men and 6 artillery versus 7 tanks. Its a no brainer.

In terms of pieces and map, it looks pretty much the same as what you get in Conquest of the Empire; I think the Eagle Games edition is still pretty widely available…

I play it like this:

Infantry attack at 2, defend at 3
Cavalry attack at 4, defend at 2 and have a 2 movement
Artillery attack at 3, defend at 5 and have a preemptive attack

Since I use CotE components, I use the income system from it, along with the cities, fortresses and roads and leaders

(and then I have 2 expansion levels beyond this by adding assorted other components)

Considering all the feedback I have received from my first public release of Global Conflict on this form and other outlets, **I have now released my third edition of Global Conflict. **

It is much more balanced than before. Minor changes to setup makes Germany be a more threatening adversary. The Allied economic dominance has been addressed with modified convoy rules and also the edition of supply tokens.  Long game play time has been addressed with a new turn sequence which should keep all players more involved with very little idle time. A close competitive game with five players can now be completed in less than six hours. (This does not including setup). Technology rules have also been modified. Three new units have been included. They are Mechanized Divisions, Air Transports, and Cruisers.  (If you don’t have these units, replace all cruisers in the setup with destroyers, and ignore mechanized devisions and air transports.  Play will still be balanced)

I hope all of you enjoy the game.  And as always all comments, suggestions, and game reviews are welcome.

This is the link to all the files you need
http://www.mediafire.com/?2gmbdgml0zy

Honestly, if you play the board game for the map and pieces, then you should avoid most of the board games out there.

As far as 4 revisions in 10 years, maybe that’s a bit high, granted, but….  I can tell you a fact that in 10 years, Dell has gone through more server revisions in those same 10 years.  Does that make their products (or substitute Apple, IBM, HP, etc) any worse?  That’s the worst comment I’ve ever heard.  Not only that, but revisions are there to help make the game better.

Ok, rant off.  Talking about World at War 2005 now.  The game is ok, but unfortunately when combining the latest rules from Axis & Allies (which this is based off of), the Allies has too much of an advantage.  Especially when comparing this version with the 3rd version.  There are now factories in India and Australia for Britain to use, you can still purchase infantry off of factory sites, but at a max of 1 per land and they cost 1 IPC more, which hurts Germany a ton since they can’t keep Africa.  Then again, Britain got a bump in Africa as well with the tank defending on a 3 now and they get an extra artillery piece, so you really have to commit in Africa to take it and hold it.

The technology rolls are interesting, but kind of confusing to understand at first.

I’m actually on this forum to see if anyone has brought up house rules or variants to make the game a little bit more balanced.  I believe the Allies should win about 60-65% to keep in line with history, but this version (and the previous ones as well) gives the allies about 80% chance to win.  This is assuming average dice rolls.  We’ve played around with giving Germany super subs and Japan get fighters to start, but it didn’t help all that much.  Japan usually never has a problem and the jet fighters were just the icing on the cake.  Super subs really didn’t help Germany as much as we had thought it would.

Anyone else try to do something different with this game?

Well you could have everyone roll a D6 and the highest one gets to move first that would make it hard to plan out the game for everyone.

Or you could take the number of battle victories that turn and use that as a basis of who goes first. The country that has the most victories has the combat initative and then gets to go first. In cases of a tie use the current IPC value to determine the tie-breaker.

Just a few thoughts.