War in the West

[Sir Slash]

Gary Grigsby lives! Maybe many of you have already see this but GG's War in the East will have a new little brother in December-- War in the West. Who's ready for a new monster in their life?

   It's here... http://matrixgames.com/products/507/details/Gary.Grigsby's.War.in.the.West
   

[JudgeDredd]

Probably not this time.

They wanted monster money for the last one and I don't see why they would change their historical charging model.

I never got my £80(?) worth out of WitE. Actually it was more like £100+ because I bought the addon.

Not that it was a bad game - I just never got my monies worth out of it...so I think I'll pass unless for some bizarre reason Matrix and Slitherine have adopted a different pricing policy - in which case, never say never.

[Sir Slash]

That was going to be my next question. What do think they'll charge for this one. WitE was what $80? But still if they've gotten a real workable air and naval component then they've got my loins moistening.

[JasonPratt]

Completely aside from buying it (which in my case probably won't happen for a long, long time, as I'd rather support the Decisive Campaigns crew, though I respect GG's games), I'm curious about whether they'll be releasing it on Steam (and related sites like Gamersgate), which seems to have been standard for all their new releases over the past yearish.

I mean, they started way back with Pride of Nations, i.e. the single most uber AGEOD game ever made, so one of the Grigsby monster games would be the only limit beyond that. But aside from new AGEOD games (like To End All Wars and ACW2, no slouches either one), and a few which like Pr0N had already been released through other venues (notably through Paradox), they haven't tried to put up the back catalog of monsters. If WitW launches on Steam -- which at the moment I suspect it will -- that would open the door for practically all the older catalog, including not-so-old titles that could benefit from wider exposure. Like for example the Decisive Campaign series, the newest of which didn't release on Steam (much less the older ones yet).

[chemkid]

to steam or not to steam...
a question: why does it look like they (slitherine? the lordz games studio? steam?!) just pulled commander - the great war off steam?
can't find the game in the steam library anymore...
back on topic - i really wish this game all the best. what else would you wish such a 'monster'?!

cheers!
chem!

[Con]

I never got my monies worth out of WitE either so I am fine passing on WitW

Not there fault just never put the time in to learn the game (pre kids) and now with so little time left for gaming (post 3 year old twins) I either have to go with something that I already know (Command Ops etc) or something that has a lot less of a learning curve.

Con

[Rayfer]

to steam or not to steam...
a question: why does it look like they (slitherine? the lordz games studio? steam?!) just pulled commander - the great war off steam?
can't find the game in the steam library anymore...
back on topic - i really wish this game all the best. what else would you wish such a 'monster'?!

cheers!
chem!

You're right..I just looked, Commander: The Great War is still in my library but it is no longer available in the store?  But back to War in the West....pricing will decide it for me, if it's like War in the East then I'll pass.  I bought War in the East used on eBay and really enjoyed it so I do have an interest in the West version, just not for East pricing.

[jomni]

Never mentioned if they changed the surrender mechanics.
And I suppose the 3 unit stacking rule is still in place.

[jomni]

So...
The 3 unit stacking limit is still there.

[Great Ajax]

Yes, but brigade and regimental units can be made into support units instead of on map combat units if the player chooses.

Trey

So...
The 3 unit stacking limit is still there.

[JudgeDredd]

Anyone care to explain to a novice why a 3 unit stack limitation was a bad idea?

I presume it's a game mechanic used for balance. I also presume, perhaps, that they used it because of fitting x number of divisions into an xxKM hex grid no? In which case, are those not fair reasons for a limit on stacking?

Or - does it mean you end up with a wall of units you can't out manoeuvre but have to batter your way through?

[smittyohio]

Anyone care to explain to a novice why a 3 unit stack limitation was a bad idea?

I presume it's a game mechanic used for balance. I also presume, perhaps, that they used it because of fitting x number of divisions into an xxKM hex grid no? In which case, are those not fair reasons for a limit on stacking?

Or - does it mean you end up with a wall of units you can't out manoeuvre but have to batter your way through?

It's not so much the fact that there is a stacking limit, it's that it doesn't matter what size the units are.   So, say I have a division in a hex.  Two other division sized units could enter that hex no problem.  However, if I broke that division down into 3 regiments in that hex, no other units (even HQ or Air) could enter that hex.  So, the same hex that couple happily accommodate 3 division sized units can now only handle 3 regiments.  A wild ass guess is that it is to help keep the stacks small so that they don't overlap into another hex, which can be a pain to handle graphics-wise.

[JudgeDredd]

Ok. Thanks.

[TacticalWargames]

I just wish he went  on and made a new monster tactical wargame.

[JasonPratt]

Good grief, that thing is also WitE! -- the map covers the same area plus the Western Front!