So for anyone who’s played E&W, what did you like about the game?
For me, what it comes down to is managing equipment. Like, it’s very much an IPM-style game, so keeping your tanks and aircraft safe while at the same time exerting force as effectively as possible, is the whole puzzle of E&W. The early attacks made by the Soviets are usually about reducing the number of front lines they have to fight on, but also destroying NATO’s equipment (particularly transports, but also armor and fighters.)
Imagine the world map cut up into regions a la the A&A game board. You take turns moving resources, units, buying technologies, etc towards the objective of capturing opponents’ capital cities set in WWII. However, instead of rolling dice to determine conflicts as in A&A - you jump onto the battlefield and use the resources that were moved into the territory of conflict to play out a RTS battle. Being an A&A board game nut from my high school days AND a RTS fan, I absolutely consider it the best of both worlds.
Took it from Atari board.
.SICK!!!,i always tought of doing that,nice job guys@ atari
Are we talking full-fledged rule changes or are we just changing the map around?
This particular thread is devoted to SIMPLE map changes (moving a border here or there) in order to make the OOB map more accurate to the actual borders at the time. No rules changes.
The size of Tunsia, Morroco, Gold coast, and Togoland should be increased.
Angola should connect to Kamerun. I know its historically accurate the way it is now, but it just feels so strange to have two territorys so close to each other, but have to spend an entire turn in Belgian Congo.
Munich border with Switzerland should be a bit more obvious.
Another SZ that splits up SZ 17. This new SZ is connected to Sicily, Naples, Rome, Tuscany, Piedmont, Sardinia, SZ 16, and the other SZ 17. This new SZ houses all of the Italian navy.
Probably Confederate infantry attire would strongly resemble British or French kit, to include either the Adrian, or, even more likely, the Brodie helmet.
One imagines that the Union would take its cues from the Germans, or, even more likely, the Russians, meaning either no helmet, or else some version of the stahlhlem. It’s also possible that one might see a distinctive steel hat more akin to the M1, or even a kind of “stovepipe” or “top hat” in steel.
I’m trying hard to think up certain National Advantages. Perhaps Confederate cavalry would be able to execute a kind of blitzkrieg. Would it be likely that a nation without much native automobile production, but having to cover a long border with a relatively small standing army, would develop a heavy emphasis on motorization?
As early as Bull Run, both armies were learning the military value of railroads.