What if you...

[Moomoo]

What if you were in charge of the development of an entirely new Wargame for GW.
How would that game play, big armies, tactics or luck, what kind of setting, you name it. Every aspect of the game.
What would YOUR game look like?

[Lord Cedric]

Well, aside from *really* wanting a table top model version of ASOIAF from GRRM, it would not be an original type setting. I would imagine it would be played similar to War of the Ring.

If I were to design a fresh new-style wargame, it would be with a campaign-style involvement without it having to be the length of one (but could be if the players wanted). It would be set up much like the Age of Empires II computer game with a mix of Stronghold and Total War in where you have the peasant workers finding and mining for resources. These could be "markers" of some type that players randomly face upsidedown on the battlefield. Only the working peasants could "discover" it and begin mining, so protecting your weakest unit would be paramount and flipping the marker right-side up (or placing the appropriate terrain piece there). These resources would be generated each turn by dice rolls and the resource "points" would allow for building of various in-game structures or universal unit upgrades which would not take affect until that players next turn (I would think that the more complex the upgrade, the more turns it would take to become in-effect with a max).

Of course there would be armies with various units. I really don't like mirrored armies. Though that is where a "perfect" balance may be acheived, it really makes a game less dynamic and 2 dimentional imo. So, there would be both army-wide and unit-wide differences of strengths and weaknesses. There would be no named characters aside from a General that could be equipped different ways. In many ways, I actually like the tree-style upgrades from the Age of Empires games, but would be purchased from resource points acquired from the game. I know that this doesn't allow much diversity, but what it does allow is a faster-game pace and some options as the game progresses.

The game would be able to be played from 2 or more players in the scale of either 15 or 10mm (though I am leaning more to 15mm). If more than 2 are playing, then a diplomacy action could be played - allowing markets to "sell" resource points, allying with team-play, and other functions.

Unlike the comptuer games listed, I would not introduce religion to the game, but allow "spies" and embassaries for both revealing certain things/stealing resources or entering in diplomatic barters.

Movement would be by tape/rulers so it could be played on any type of table (as opposed to a game mat or board). Civilizations could build certain structures depending on resource point allotment ranging from wood to stone. Also, the "peasant workers" would only be physically needed for the resources and not needed to building other structures as it would be assumed that they were working on it.

So.. anyways, it would be something like that with a max # of turns. This would also be based on a points scale as well for army building purposes. Each army would have a starter package but have a universal starting resource points where they could allocate them where they would like for upgrades or, if they have enough points, switch out units for others (think like stat point creation for D&D characters in where you have a base starting point, but allowed a random (or static) number of points to change/alter or in this case, exchange, if you have enough).

Well, that's about it I guess. This was all that just popped into my head and I'm sure I'd have it more refined if I thought about it longer. This is a fun and interesting thread. I'm looking forward to see what others would make.

- Lord Cedric

[Moomoo]

Well, aside from *really* wanting a table top model version of ASOIAF from GRRM, it would not be an original type setting. I would imagine it would be played similar to War of the Ring.

If I were to design a fresh new-style wargame, it would be with a campaign-style involvement without it having to be the length of one (but could be if the players wanted). It would be set up much like the Age of Empires II computer game with a mix of Stronghold and Total War in where you have the peasant workers finding and mining for resources. These could be "markers" of some type that players randomly face upsidedown on the battlefield. Only the working peasants could "discover" it and begin mining, so protecting your weakest unit would be paramount and flipping the marker right-side up (or placing the appropriate terrain piece there). These resources would be generated each turn by dice rolls and the resource "points" would allow for building of various in-game structures or universal unit upgrades which would not take affect until that players next turn (I would think that the more complex the upgrade, the more turns it would take to become in-effect with a max).

Of course there would be armies with various units. I really don't like mirrored armies. Though that is where a "perfect" balance may be acheived, it really makes a game less dynamic and 2 dimentional imo. So, there would be both army-wide and unit-wide differences of strengths and weaknesses. There would be no named characters aside from a General that could be equipped different ways. In many ways, I actually like the tree-style upgrades from the Age of Empires games, but would be purchased from resource points acquired from the game. I know that this doesn't allow much diversity, but what it does allow is a faster-game pace and some options as the game progresses.

The game would be able to be played from 2 or more players in the scale of either 15 or 10mm (though I am leaning more to 15mm). If more than 2 are playing, then a diplomacy action could be played - allowing markets to "sell" resource points, allying with team-play, and other functions.

Unlike the comptuer games listed, I would not introduce religion to the game, but allow "spies" and embassaries for both revealing certain things/stealing resources or entering in diplomatic barters.

Movement would be by tape/rulers so it could be played on any type of table (as opposed to a game mat or board). Civilizations could build certain structures depending on resource point allotment ranging from wood to stone. Also, the "peasant workers" would only be physically needed for the resources and not needed to building other structures as it would be assumed that they were working on it.

So.. anyways, it would be something like that with a max # of turns. This would also be based on a points scale as well for army building purposes. Each army would have a starter package but have a universal starting resource points where they could allocate them where they would like for upgrades or, if they have enough points, switch out units for others (think like stat point creation for D&D characters in where you have a base starting point, but allowed a random (or static) number of points to change/alter or in this case, exchange, if you have enough).

Well, that's about it I guess. This was all that just popped into my head and I'm sure I'd have it more refined if I thought about it longer. This is a fun and interesting thread. I'm looking forward to see what others would make.

- Lord Cedric

Very interesting setting! I think you really thought of something here, economy and progression as in the skill tree really is a good idea and I don't think there are any wargames with those elements! It's original to say at least! I hope there will be a lot of replies because it's quite interesting to read about the different points of view.

Thanks for the compliment! I will post my idea as soon as I thought of it!

Moomoo