World At War - Official Thread

  • Moderators

    If this game ever gets a new version released, I would change or I suggest changing the name of "Mech.Inf" to "Mech.Art", in both games of this game's map, because this is what it is (it is exactly the same as an "Artillery", but faster). Just keep the old named images in the folders too, for backwards compatibility.

  • Moderators

    Also, how about the S.Submarine transporting Infantry to a sea borne assault, or any offloads, from a hostile sea zone?

    Personally I would think that a S.Submarine that submerged shouldn't be able to offload in any case (same as when naval units retreat), but the program allows you to do this.

    Also, I've no idea if this is a wanted behaviour (guess not), or how the players are supposed to know about it, since it is not covered by the referenced ruleset nor by anything in notes. So, either ways, this should be documented in "Rules Clarifications".

    Another similar matter is that the program allows you to use a Cruiser to offload in a territory and bombard another one. I think Cruisers should be restricted to bombard only the territory they offloaded to, if they offload any units (can bombard freely if they don't offload any). It really doesn't make sense that the rules restrict you to offload to only 1 territory, but then you can go bombarding another one. Probably this should be documented too, anyways.

    Regarding documentation, nobody said anything about my previous remark on the fact that the altered turn order is effectively a rules changer relatively to spending saved income captured from other players while not controlling an own capital (you may be able to spend it on the same round you took back your capital).

  • It is offical threat and changing somethings without taking approves of majority of WaW players looks like unimaginable for me. I am not really WaW player but the original game should not be changed but all mods are welcomed. Yes there are somethings that in WaW I dislike but also there are people who like these features.

    What kind of mod would I make?

    1. Reducing all incomes, starting armies, Pus
    2. Dividing USA into two separate countries
    3. Making USA more close to Europe
    4. Adding Upkeep system
    5. Techology
    6. Implementing v3 rules, costs

  • Moderators

    In this savegame, other people were playing in an automated host today, the game should have ended on Anzac round 12, if not before, by reaching the victory condition, with the liberation of Banjarmasin:
    0_1539464838321_BugReportCernel_World At War_1.9.0.0_20181013_01.tsvg

    The savegame linked above has been taken at the moment the game ended, by personal surrender of the Axis player (also, this game has been played by two of the best TripleA players).

    I tested it under similar conditions, but using TripleA, and it correctly gave the notification:
    Players: Americans, Anzac, British, Chinese, Dutch, French and Russians have just won the game, with this victory: Allies achieve Unconditional Surrender Victory by reducing the enemy under 6 Capitals!

    So, I don't understand where is the problem, and I don't know what engine they were running when they should have got the victory notification, but it would be good if someone takes a look at this. It could be that a side already won at some time beforehand (but strange they both didn't notice the notification, as I asked them), and a victory notification is buried somewhere in the history log. Otherwise, this is a bug, but I think not in the map.

  • @schulz i wish they didnt change all those things too. it feels like they changed stuff based on personal opinion or opinion of a small group of players.

    the original should still be available and all other changes be available as a mod/another file.

  • Donators

    Great job on this map. Learning this map has been a refreshing experience after playing NWO for a long time. I look forward to improving and exploring variations.

    Overall thoughts:

    • The round 1 battles are more volatile compared to NWO. This isn't bad; in fact, the extra volatility is useful to accelerate the game outcome, considering the map is huge.
    • Infantry, transports, and battleships are strong
    • There is substantial variation in the purchases among even strong players. over the first 5 rounds. This is in contrast to NWO where the top 5-10 players have very similar play the first 4 rounds. I'm unsure whether there is true variety, or that the map's optimal play hasn't been well explored yet. I suspect the latter.
    • People seem to prefer playing axis, but I've seen allies do better in most cases. I'm reserving judgment on map balance with perfect play on both sides.

  • Moderators

    @Boston said in World At War - Official Thread:

    People seem to prefer playing axis, but I've seen allies do better in most cases. I'm reserving judgment on map balance with perfect play on both sides

    Japan's opening moves are really difficult. My experience with this map is that it favors the allies really heavily for newer players, largely because the allies can really mess up Japan (or Italy) during the first few turns.

    If Japan executes their opening well, its a different story. I find that a Japan that goes really hard at Russia with mobile units does really well. I'd be curious to see if an expert allied player could overcome this. I have a feeling that what a person does with the USA separates good players from great players.