New Superpowers Game

[CaptRick]

I am offering a sale on this new total world war board game that ends in a week. Only $25!

This game is similar to Axis & Allies but with new pieces, new rules, more technologies and diplomacy rules. The play is fantanstic. Any A&A fan should have this game.

Online version is available as well.

http://www.superpowersgame.com/

[Adlertag]

now that was some ugly colors

[Guest]

This game looks like a cross between risk, axis and allies, and supremacy(RIP).

[Emperor_Taiki]

I apperciate the idea of Modern A&A, I really would like a good one. But id dont like you colors and five of those nation seem too unrealistic so it loses the modern feel for me. You have the US, EU, and Russia, those are good countires, now add China instead of that commi dynasty crap, as well as India player, also add in the diego garcia inland in the Indian ocean(today it is a major US base), split up korea, slit up central asia. Give the game a modern feel. Your peices dont realy look or feel that modern either. I like the stealth bombers, but where are the B-52s and Tu-160. You need more modern weapons so its not just like normal A&A, add in UAVs, IFVs, Helicopters, SAMs, special forces, corvettes for the navies. How about adding in oil pipelines to imporve IPCs between allies or consumer goods markets that drain the military production of other players. You have to make the game MODERN; it dosnt work to have almost identical rules to A&A and countries that have never exsited and never will exist, and then label it “near future”.

i am not trying to be negative, I like what your doing in attempting to expand the A&A genre, i just am saying what you need to do in order to get me to buy your game.

I mean why dont you have rules for stuff like terrorism, cyber warfare, and options for militarizing space? because that is what modern warfare is and/or will have in the future.

[Guest]

Is CaptRick the designer of the game? or is it just a coincidence thaat the designers name is Rick Medved.

[CWO Marc]

@Brain:

Is CaptRick the designer of the game?

Yes.

CWO Marc

[Emperor_Taiki]

You should have drawn the map the smae way Larry Harris has always had it, if you did you wouldn’t of had to misplace australia and all the other pacfic inlands.

[Guest]

Rick - I applaud your efforts. I will save my critique until I get a chance to play your game. We are thinking about trying to design a boardgame under the topic AA14 Lets make it happen in this forum. I for one would like your input since you have alrerady gone through all the steps of designing a boardgame.

[CaptRick]

I agree (to a degree) with those who don’t like the color schemes. I didn’t want exact copies of the axis & allies colors and instead with with the most contrasting colors possible. If I do another version of the game it will be with slightly different colored pieces.

As for the superpower nations you will probably notice the world has been fairly evenly broken into 8 regions. Built for maximum playability. Having India alone be one of the superpowers wouldn’t make for a very playable game.

Also, I didn’t do the Larry Harris map view for 2 reasons: 1) Didn’t want an exact replica of a&a board. And 2) The reason for the larry harris map is because the ocean battles are a big part of the game and pretty much no fighting at all happening in north or south america. In my version there is plenty of fighting that takes place in the americas so its better to not wrap the map there.

Brain Damaged - I would be happy to hear about your thoughts on this.

[Guest]

Brain Damaged - I would be happy to hear about your thoughts on this.

Like I said I have never played your game before and You can never fully judge a game by appearance only. But it’s kind of like women you might find an attractive one only to find out she is not for you and the girl who might be right for you will never meet because you are not attracted to her. I have bought plenty of games that I thought looked good but just didn’t play well, and I have probably missed out on good games because they did not attract me. One of the big reasons for the success of Axis and Allies is because people including myself are attracted to all the plastic pieces. Do plastic pieces alone make a successful game? Hell no! If they did, then all of the Milton Bradley GameMaster games woould have been a success. Unfortunately, the other games just weren’t that good.
  In the case of your game I understand why you chose the colors you did as the contrast makes it easier to see which pieces belongs to which player. I also think because the target audience is teenagers and adults who are interested in military history, they do not want to see brightly colored pieces as they see these as childish and would rather see more military colors as they fit the theme better.
  As far as your mapboard design I completely agree with your reasoning for splitting it the way you did, I used to play Risk as a kid and there was a lot more action in the Americas than there is Axis and Allies, and so for Risk that board layout worked.
  Your production looks first rate but I am afraid if you are losing sales, it is probably because the colors you chose are not enticing people to want to buy your game. I will probably pickup a copy of your game in the futre and I will let you know what I think of the gameplay.

[Emperor_Taiki]

@CaptRick:

I agree (to a degree) with those who don’t like the color schemes. I didn’t want exact copies of the axis & allies colors and instead with with the most contrasting colors possible. If I do another version of the game it will be with slightly different colored pieces.

As for the superpower nations you will probably notice the world has been fairly evenly broken into 8 regions. Built for maximum playability. Having India alone be one of the superpowers wouldn’t make for a very playable game.

Also, I didn’t do the Larry Harris map view for 2 reasons: 1) Didn’t want an exact replica of a&a board. And 2) The reason for the larry harris map is because the ocean battles are a big part of the game and pretty much no fighting at all happening in north or south america. In my version there is plenty of fighting that takes place in the americas so its better to not wrap the map there.

Brain Damaged - I would be happy to hear about your thoughts on this.

Well you are more or less  are playing with a board based of a World War 2 game  put then advitising it as a modern war game. Thats a problem because while the Pacfic and Europe were important in World War 2, and still are today, geostrategy is also concerened with regionas like central asia and the indian ocean. So if you want your game to be unique in terms of gameplay(having your board displayed the normal way maps are displayed makes your game less unique, you can have the A&A projection if you also expand the genre in terms of gameplay while also paying respect to the games roots) you should make sure the board/map if fits the era. You should make more territories in Asia, divide India into four or five territories and then give them an inland in the indian ocean.

I understand that you want a game that promotes playability, but i dont play A&A because it is the most playable game ever, i play it because it has a cool world war 2 theme, likewise i would only buy your game if it accauly had a ture to life Modern Warfare theme. Right now it dosnt, it just seems really random and unrealistic.

Are you intersted in making a Modern Warfare A&A? because then your game should reflect the different weapons of today and their implications on the battlefeild aswell as modern technology and econamics. You should also have beleiveable countries. FYI i would be extremly attracted to this type of game and have many suggestions for a relitivly simple game of this nature i just dont have the resources to produce it myself.

[CaptRick]

You guys should try playing the online version of it and then see what you think.

it does have modern weapons like cruise missiles, nuclear weapons, anthrax bombs, stealth planes and more. Check out the technology tree.

But one of the mian goals of this game was to have each player start out relatively equal. So the superpowers are intentially balanced and not meant to look like current affairs.

The country names are all modern so its a great geography lesson when you play it.

[Emperor_Taiki]

@CaptRick:

The country names are all modern so its a great geography lesson when you play it.

Give me a break, just glancing at your map i see you have called what should be Russia’s capital region Chenchnya and almost half of those pacfic inlands are out of place.
And as usual Moscow is placed in asia.

I have looked at your online version, and i do see a large varity of units, but many of them are weapons that are not used in modern warfare and/or outdated or they are from very unrealistc video games like C&C which does not capture the feel of modern combat.  Even the weapons that are legitmate weapons to have in an A&A Modern Warfare game dont have the most realistc rules. The course of your game should start out as the low-intesity wars of today but as powers build up their weapons it leads to semi-realistic and remotly possible World War 3 scenario.

Right now you game appears as if its just a reogranization of world war 2 A&A plus a bunch of random units that dont reflect modern militaries or econamies.

Also, making a modern A&A game with realistic countries does not limit you to making an unbalancded game.

This is just off the top of my head, set the game 10 years into the future, and the story goes that the Indian and the Chinese econamies have cuaght up to the Unites States and European Union, and Russia has aquired an oil and natural gas monopoly. This allows each country to start with simialr IPCs and it represents a situation that is not all too unlikly either.

I realize you give background on each country in the rulebook, but each country seems very seperate  from each other like they were formed on different planets and then suddenly transported to earth. Right now you  story seems very random and not based on anything.

One of the reasons A&A is so great is that it is based on the rich story of world war 2.
You should give your game a good story that is based on the modern world.

[CaptRick]

thanks for responding, but i think you are missing the important aspects of this game. The board is seperated into 8 regional areas similar to the game of Risk. This is based for the most part on geography and not politics.

Also some of the islands and a few borders are also changed for playability. For example Russia is a very hard country to divide into regions because it would take up too much of the map as a single country but has no regonal borders. Most likely out of the communist style thinking that everyone is part of the central government and they don’t want people to get regional identities. I included the names chechnya and georgia just because they are in the news, but had to make up the borders cause they needed to be the right size for the map.

But this game is a huge improvement over A&A for the following reasons:

1. The board does not start pre-arrainged, so every game is totally different.
2. Allies are made through the course of the game
3. New pieces like generals and national rulers.
4. Improved technology tree
5. Faster game play
6. Better combat and movement rules

People comment on the colors or names of the superpowers, but if you actually played the game, you would see how well it plays.

[Imperious Leader]

Its not a nice thing to blast the game . Give this man his props that he has the courage to put his money on the table as an individual and make a very expensive investment.

What you should do instead is offer constructive criticism so that he can make it better next time if you feel he missed the mark.

What is important is if the game is playable rather than historical. AA is not historical but you play it, so why does this have to be the exception?

[LuckyDay]

@Emperor_Taiki:

Give me a break, just glancing at your map i see you have called what should be Russia’s capital region Chenchnya and almost half of those pacfic inlands are out of place.
And as usual Moscow is placed in asia.

actually Moscow is in Asia…  you are thinking as to a more modern delineation of Asia Pacific, but the general understanding of Asia is Dardanelles north generally speaking…

@Emperor_Taiki:

Also, making a modern A&A game with realistic countries does not limit you to making an unbalancded game.

actually it’s not an AA game, that would be WoTC, this is a Superpowers, a new global game that is similar to AA, but not AA and made by CaptRick…

Good on ya CaptRick!

[Guest]

CaptRick,

Just try to remember that you can’t please everyone.

[Emperor_Taiki]

Im sorry, Im being a jerk

Its just that I would realy enjoy if their was a Modern Warfare A&A that tried to reflect todays militaries and geopolitics in a smoewhat realistic way. A&A is of course not historical but it at least trys to be and it does represent some aspects of the war rather well. I think you could mkae a pretty good A&A variant out of Modern times and if you look at my posts i have offered a number of suggestions to accomplish that.

[Lucifer]

@Emperor_Taiki:

Im sorry, Im being a jerk

Its just that I would realy enjoy if their was a Modern Warfare A&A that tried to reflect todays militaries and geopolitics in a smoewhat realistic way. A&A is of course not historical but it at least trys to be and it does represent some aspects of the war rather well. I think you could mkae a pretty good A&A variant out of Modern times and if you look at my posts i have offered a number of suggestions to accomplish that.

I mostly agree with you, but if the game is too complex, it will not be fun, unless in a software version. Some of the suggestions of units, rules etc, would not work for a boardgame, at least only a few can be included. Also, the reason why A&A is so successful is that the main versions, Classic, Revised, AA42 are “fairly” simple, there are not too many units and rules. For AA50 you have to be very dedicated unless you have played a lot of Revised, then the rules would be easier too learn.
But I doubt that a game in this genre which are more complex than AA50 will sell many copies as a boardgame, a boardgame can only be so advanced/complex, but a PC game can include extremely much more, b/c you don’t have to know the rules, only the strats and the tactics.

I would also like a modern A&A if it is fun to play, but only for a software version.

[Imperious Leader]

I own this game and its not complicated at all. Its right along MB AA except a few more units. I have loosely played a game but only to understand how it works.