Next Sets from Historical Board Gaming

@dsumner

Cool! I can’t wait! Keep going!

@LordPatrick thank you,
Also how do you do sieges and what benefits do forts give to defenders

@The-Janus said in "East & West" by Imp Games - Discussion:

On the topic of homebrews, would anyone be interested in my rules for playing an E&W scenario, using the RISK: Reinvention boardgame?
It’s definitely a lot more of an abstraction, but the idea was to keep some of the same feel as the original.

@The-Janus said in "East & West" by Imp Games - Discussion:

I really had fun with the version of E&W that I came up with for RISK: Reinvention

@The-Janus said in "East & West" by Imp Games - Discussion:

Honestly, if you feel the need to strip things down, but maintain the flavour of it, I can definitely give you some suggestions in that regard – I’ve written an E&W scenario for Risk.

…

So, as you can see, I’ve been threatening to do this for a while, and the YouTube algorithm recently bit me with the RISK bug again.

Sometime in the coming weeks, I’m going to do a writeup on this topic – an East & West mod, for RISK. Way back in the day, when I was first playing RISK (and E&W, for that matter) my friends owned the original, Parker Brothers-style version of the game. When I decided to pick up a copy to own for myself (probably around… 2010?) the “Reinvention” version of RISK is the one I ended up purchasing.

I still have some documentation of the rules for both the “classic” RISK and the “Reinvention” versions of the E&W mod, but I’m going to focus on the latter, since I think the additions of cities and capitols actually help with a lot of the mechanics/balance.

From my experience, this version of RISK actually makes for a really great marriage between the very specific cold war flavour of E&W, but with the speed and abstraction that are really RISK’s great strengths. Since it’s still a 3v1 scenario, there are some changes to the usual RISK formula, but it all still feels familiar.

Anyways, stay tuned for that to show up in this thread, sometime later this month.

@crusaderiv:

No. In fact i’m talking about historical accuracy battle.
If you make war you start with your strongest force.
Germany, USSR and later the Allies, used the tanks, planes and artillery to start the battle not with the infantry.

It really doesn’t make a difference as far as rules go. All defending units get to return fire regardless. If you’re assigning casualties i.e. tank vs tank etc. That would be incorrect. Except in the case of some naval units, the defender may assign hits to whatever unit they choose and may return fire.

I may not be understanding what your concept is. Please explain. If I am assuming you correctly you need to read through the rules again and it may give you a clearer idea of the combat sequence.

I’m not trying to be rude. I think your post could be a bit more descriptive. It will help people answer your question better.

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.)

@all-encompassing-goose said in New Superpowers Game:

I played it using the website, it wasnt very good. Wonder what happened with the creator and did they actually print the board game?

The creator did, indeed, print his game. He’s selling off the very last of his stock at this time. See the BGG information for the game for more information:

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/41546/superpowers

-Midnight_Reaper

I suppose it’s possbile that they play blind, but it sounded like you could shift alliances and such, which would mean you would have to have an extra board for every player, and I think they only used two.