To buy or not to buy...

[SheperdN7]

Thinking of buying this game, I've played WitP:AE and absolutely love it, its my favourite game of all-time hands down but after looking a board game called "A World at War" (which is essentially the evolved Avalon Hill Advanced Third Reich) and I have a craving for counters and hexes and of course grand strategy but I would like input from players on whether I should give this game a go.

[paulderynck]

Here's a couple similar threads from this year:

tm.asp?m=4093018

tm.asp?m=4033594

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: SheperdN7

Thinking of buying this game, I've played WitP:AE and absolutely love it, its my favourite game of all-time hands down but after looking a board game called "A World at War" (which is essentially the evolved Avalon Hill Advanced Third Reich) and I have a craving for counters and hexes and of course grand strategy but I would like input from players on whether I should give this game a go.

warspite1

It really depends on what you want from the game.

1. The game is not complete (optional rules missing), it is not completely stable (our current game is having issues which is delaying its progression) and there are one or two annoying areas (well, more than annoying actually - the convoy routing needs a complete re-work). In addition there is no AI and net play does not yet work.

2. Set against that, as can be seen from the AAR's that are going on (see above) the game is playable with some effort and perseverance (subject to the problems mentioned above) solo or by PBEM.

3. So the obvious question is, given point 1, why would anyone buy this - much less attempt to play this? Well simply because it is the best wargame - certainly strategic wargame - ever made. Without the computer version many people (myself included) would never be able to play this again because the boardgame requires so much space in addition to time and other real life concerns. MWIF at least enables the game to be played once more for many that otherwise can't.

4. Buying this game needs to be viewed I think as a long term project, but one that at least enables one to play the greatest game ever made. Sadly for those that never played the board game there is the added complication of having to learn the game with bug issues - and that is always frustrating. I would definitely recommend the hardback manuals if you were to get this game.

5. If you have the cash to spare (and accept you may never get your head round it and it become a waste of money) I would always recommend people to buy - because if you have the spare cash there is nothing to lose and everything to gain by playing such a rich, complex, beautiful - both in game mechanics and aesthetic terms, deeply rewarding game that is replayable to an almost infinitesimal degree thanks to the way the game is crafted. The game IS NOT accurate like say WITP-AE, but does not intend to be because it is a game winnable - and thus fun - for both sides. But despite the fact its not accurate, the feel of the game is 100% WWII because of the basic framework the designers installed. And where else are you going to play with every single ship from light cruiser up (plus tons of what-ifs - the British fast minelayers excepted) each with its own individual counter?

6. If you play WITP-AE then the complexity of this game shouldn't phase you. Just remember it is the board game ported to computer and that is smething of a shock for many people brought up only on computer games. And as for the problems, the bugs and the steep learning curve, you will also find plenty of support on this forum from the diehards that remain [:)]

[76mm]

warspite1 provides a good summary of the game. As a non-WiF player (prior to the game), I would like to add two other comments:
1) I've never had any interest in the War in the Pacific, so bought this game intending to play the "Europe only" scenarios. Three years after buying the game, neither this scenario nor the Pacific-only scenario have been released. To me, this is a huge disappointment.
2) While a lot of people seem to love it, I could never really get my head around, or come to like, the way turns work, in which you can generally only move ships, aircraft, or land units, but not all three. I just found it very frustrating.

[zakblood]

i'd buy today if i had the time to play another epic game, which even after retiring i still don't[:(]

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: 76mm

warspite1 provides a good summary of the game. As a non-WiF player (prior to the game), I would like to add two other comments:
1) I've never had any interest in the War in the Pacific, so bought this game intending to play the "Europe only" scenarios. Three years after buying the game, neither this scenario nor the Pacific-only scenario have been released. To me, this is a huge disappointment.
2) While a lot of people seem to love it, I could never really get my head around, or come to like, the way turns work, in which you can generally only move ships, aircraft, or land units, but not all three. I just found it very frustrating.

warspite1

I would add:

1) I completely agree - and have suggested this previously. Even though getting Net Play working is a big issue for Matrix, I think they are missing a major trick not getting the ETO and PTO playable as separate games. This is very shortsighted imo. Particularly so with the convoy system causing problems. By playing the ETO the effects are slightly lessened (not to mention its easier to learn playing these smaller scenarios - but more rewarding than Barb or Guadalcanal).

2. I note the word generally but "you can generally only move ships, aircraft, or land units, but not all three" makes things sound more limiting than is strictly true. Each turn is made up of a number of impulses. One can choose different actions - Land, Air, Naval, Combined - each impulse (so a variety within a turn). So in a turn you can get all things done (weather, turn length etc permitting). In addition, you can mix things up - as the name suggests, a combined action allows some movement of all three types in one impulse. In addition air units can move with a land or naval etc. Just putting that out there for clarity.

[Centuur]

The action system is indeed something which is totally different as compared to any other boardgame I know. But it is also the perfect way of forcing a nation to choose. A nation simply could not use all it's assets all at the same time during the war, due to logistic problems. To me, it is one of the best parts of this game, together with the weather and turn length system.

But I can understand that people who are used to always be able to use all their units in a turn (or impulse as they are called in MWIF) are somewhat baffled at first.

And mr. Warspite has given a complete overview of the state of the game IMHO.

[paulderynck]

ORIGINAL: 76mm
2) While a lot of people seem to love it, I could never really get my head around, or come to like, the way turns work, in which you can generally only move ships, aircraft, or land units, but not all three. I just found it very frustrating.

This is one of the game mechanics that separates WiF from all other wargames. (others are not knowing when the turn will end, the initiative system, the naval system, and to a lesser extent the weather system)

They all conspire to challenge the player to constantly make hard decisions. That's why so many players enjoy the game.

BTW there's also a "Combined" impulse where each major power has different limits as to how many land air and naval units they can move. Just to add another twist in trying to decide the best thing to do!...

[SheperdN7]

Well I would say the biggest reason why I'm licking my chops at this game is the sheer amount of choice and strategy involved and also the limitless options that a player has. It almost seems like (and forgive me if I'm wrong) but it seems like a WWII Sandbox game, a game where you can do anything as long as the rules allow it. If I, as Germany want to not help the Italians at all, I can do that. If I as the USA want to pursue a "Hirohito First" strategy instead of "Hitler First", I can do that. That is why it seems so dang tempting to me and the map is....... WOW


On the subject of the game being incomplete as of now I guess I have to ask- If the developers announced that they were halting the rest of progress on this game and just keeping it as is... Would you still be playing it as much and still loving it? Is it THAT good of a game that even if it was getting no more new updates/patches (even when incomplete), you would still love it?

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: SheperdN7
On the subject of the game being incomplete as of now I guess I have to ask- If the developers announced that they were halting the rest of progress on this game and just keeping it as is... Would you still be playing it as much and still loving it? Is it THAT good of a game that even if it was getting no more new updates/patches (even when incomplete), you would still love it?

Yes.

[paulderynck]

Yes. And I have often done a Japan-first with the USA. You can't attack your historical allies, but FREX you could have Italy stay neutral until one of the Allies declares war on it in 1945.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: SheperdN7

....a game where you can do anything as long as the rules allow it. If I, as Germany want to not help the Italians at all, I can do that. If I as the USA want to pursue a "Hirohito First" strategy instead of "Hitler First", I can do that.

On the subject of the game being incomplete as of now I guess I have to ask- If the developers announced that they were halting the rest of progress on this game and just keeping it as is... Would you still be playing it as much and still loving it? Is it THAT good of a game that even if it was getting no more new updates/patches (even when incomplete), you would still love it?

warspite1

In answer to the latter, the answer is a guarded yes - it would be a very big shame if the project wasn't followed through (but this is always a risk of course).

As regards the former, yes the choices are wide! But what keeps this a WWII game with a WWII feel is that there are a few hard and fast rules that give the game its basic framework, inc:

- The Axis (Italy, Japan and Germany) cannot declare war on each other
- The Allies (UK, France, USSR, USA and China) cannot declare war on each other
- The Germans and Soviets have a pact (that can be broken under certain circumstances) and there are decisions to be made around the various (these are not decision cards btw) changes in borders at the start of the war - inc Finland, the Baltics States, Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina

- Whilst outside of the small but key framework rules, players are free to declare war on pretty much anyone, the ability to do so is not free. Every action - both Axis and Allied - has an effect on US entry. Depending on which country is attacked and by whom this effect can be quite drastic.

Nothing - and I mean nothing - in this game is a given. Every rule, every facet of the game works toward unpredictability and thus replayability. This includes not just the weather rolls or turn length, but also the fact that you never quite know what units you are going to get e.g. you pick a fighter in 1940 - is it a 3-strength Defiant or a 6-strength Spitfire!

Have fun!!

[Jagdtiger14]

but after looking a board game called "A World at War" (which is essentially the evolved Avalon Hill Advanced Third Reich)

I used to be an avid A3R/Rising Sun player back in the 90's. WiF blows that away including A3R's latest incarnation (AWAW).

The new RAW8 board game version of WiF looks very interesting!

The only real problem I have with MWiF is the convoy issue. Otherwise its good enough for me.

[Dabrion]

Just be aware that you are pledging an early access version. They advertise a product.. but it is more like the vision of a product and a train wreck prototype.

[SheperdN7]

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14
I used to be an avid A3R/Rising Sun player back in the 90's. WiF blows that away including A3R's latest incarnation (AWAW).

Ok, that truly says a lot to me, I played A3R and EotRS with my dad, who is an avid war gamer himself, and those two games are all-time classics for me and this game is better?!?!?! I think I'm going to have to make an investment in this.

ORIGINAL: Dabrion
Just be aware that you are pledging an early access version. They advertise a product.. but it is more like the vision of a product and a train wreck prototype.

I am prepared for the best and the worst... If I can stomach many hours of the early access "Ark: Survival Evolved" on steam, I can stomach anything[8|]


Thank you all for the responses! I am glad to see this forum is helpful and insightful as well as honest.

[Neilster]

It appears to be on special at the moment [:)]

Cheers, Neilster

[Centuur]

ORIGINAL: SheperdN7

Well I would say the biggest reason why I'm licking my chops at this game is the sheer amount of choice and strategy involved and also the limitless options that a player has. It almost seems like (and forgive me if I'm wrong) but it seems like a WWII Sandbox game, a game where you can do anything as long as the rules allow it. If I, as Germany want to not help the Italians at all, I can do that. If I as the USA want to pursue a "Hirohito First" strategy instead of "Hitler First", I can do that. That is why it seems so dang tempting to me and the map is....... WOW


On the subject of the game being incomplete as of now I guess I have to ask- If the developers announced that they were halting the rest of progress on this game and just keeping it as is... Would you still be playing it as much and still loving it? Is it THAT good of a game that even if it was getting no more new updates/patches (even when incomplete), you would still love it?

Yes, I would still love it. Sure, it would be a disappointment if the development would stop (but I believe it will only stop when Steve isn't up to the job anymore. It's his baby by now). And I don't think there is any reason for Matrix to pull the plug for this game, since the costs of putting it on the market have already been spend three years ago. The only thing remaining for them is a little costs for sales and the Netplay server.

[SheperdN7]

Well all of you have presented a very fair argument. Thank you all for this!

[Viktor_Kormel_slith]

An now it is at 50% discount! I´ll buy it [:D]

[AlbertN]

I would like to underline WiF is far from being sandbox.

There are an amount of choices to be made but they're of operational level.
The macro-choices are very few - or better - there are many but some are simply discarded unless you want to play dumb (ie- Sure Germany can attack Hungary but why to do so if you can align it?).

By Macro-Choices I refer to when attack Russia, potential Sea-Lion (not very viable depending which optional rules are used), etc.