Why is Israel not on the map and why is North Korea under Soviet influence rather than Chinese influence? Portuguese borders are also inaccurate. Iran should be occupied by the Soviets.
World at War 2005 edition
I heard that this new boardgame (from Xeno Games) has come out recently in the USA. In Europe it will be available in the next few days.
Has anybody played it yet? Please post some opinions!
Could anybody make a screenshot of the map?
P.S.: If anybody in the USA could scan the rules and map so that we could offer it for online play at Flames-of-Europe as soon as possible, I would appreciate a PM.
Sorry old chap , but that is nothing more than the (4th?) incarnation of that same old game, the map as usual is horrific… For example, the grafics designer placed some silly drop shadow to raise the coastal territory borders instead of drawing a proper shoreline, so now it looks like the land is actually suspended above (in the air). Secondly, the lines that seperate the territories are way too think IMO, while those tired old “B.U.M. style” cheap soft plastic with heavy flashing that need to be cut from the bottom of nearly every destroyer and carrier ia again reissued in another foray of silly pastels. The player aids are printed on cheesy ink that runs if the slightest water stain gets on them. Those people should have folded the tent along time ago. The game has been out for 6 weeks now and its another proven abomination… Yes i own the rule set and map, (when their was a time last year when you could just buy the “update” kit)Â Â Any game that has to go into a 4th edition in 10 years has a quagmire of ongoing problems IMNSHO.
I’d have to disagree with Imperious Leader. Yes, the quality is very low, but I don’t spend hours playing and A&A game so I can whine about how ugly the pieces are. World at War is the best A&A variant there is, and 2005 seals the deal. www.xenogames.com
Hopefully, the online version will be out soon. When that happens, watch out! They are going all out and will have internet ratings and everything. Hope to see you there!
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?