RE: Wargames we would pay to see! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion



Message

shaddock -> RE: Wargames we would pay to see! (11/17/2017 1:32:23 PM)

I'd like to see GDW's Third World War - expanded to cover the whole world, naval units and rules, and expanded politics.



MagicMissile -> RE: Wargames we would pay to see! (11/17/2017 2:09:05 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Avalon Hill's Bismarck. Just imagine what they could do with that boardgame on computer....


I didn´t play it but I liked "Flat Top" which I also believe would be a decent computer game on a easier level then WitP for example.



MagicMissile -> RE: Wargames we would pay to see! (11/17/2017 2:09:40 PM)

Me too just need to win the lottery and it will be done [:D]



jack54 -> RE: Wargames we would pay to see! (11/17/2017 3:16:27 PM)

I may have misunderstood this thread and previously posted kind of a wish list; If we are talking board-game re-makes for the PC...

I'd pay for

* Bloody April 1917 - Air War of Arras France. (Terry Simo)

* Empire of the Sun - the Pacific War 1941-1945 (Mark Herman)

* Downtown- Air war over Hanoi 1965-1972 (Lee Brimmicombe-Wood)

and maybe *Elusive Victory- Air War over the Suez Canal 1967 to 1973 (Terry Simo)

All are board-games by GMT. I'm surprised by the number of air combat games I picked but I think the PC FOW would really work as opposed to using dummy counters.



Mobeer -> RE: Wargames we would pay to see! (11/17/2017 4:05:09 PM)

NWS's "Rule the Waves" with graphics fit for the 80s, or maybe even 90s.



jamespcrowley -> RE: Wargames we would pay to see! (11/17/2017 9:47:13 PM)

A game in which the AI can handle a half decent attack (yet to see one); where you have to give realistic military style orders that take time to change (Ditto); where there is a proper command and control system that imposes real limits as to who you can give orders to (ditto); that imposes sensible limits to casualties before units call off suicidal attacks (ditto).
One can dream.



toomutch -> RE: Wargames we would pay to see! (11/17/2017 10:02:03 PM)

quote:

I'd like to see GDW's Third World War - expanded to cover the whole world, naval units and rules, and expanded politics.


This is my first post on this forum, the above is definitely one I would love to see and play, there needs to be a good divisional level Third World War game.



Hexagon -> RE: Wargames we would pay to see! (11/19/2017 7:14:16 PM)

-A modernized version of "Age of Rifles"

-A modernized version of Steel Panthers (someday we are going to see a pic from Steel Tigers [:D])

-A modernized version of "Age of Sail II" (with luck we can see it in next years, part anounce of Age of Sail III and that i know a guy want work in a nap naval title after release his last ancient naval battles game hehehe).

-An operatinal-strategic game covering WWI air combat with research-production-creation of units-control over front use of air units, here i think in a mix of HPS "Defending the reich" with the turns like for RAF player, you give orders and turns are resolved in WEGO style but with level of detail of Gribsby air games.

I really want see the WWI title because the air operational-stragic wargames are rare for PC and if we talk about WWI...



mikkey -> RE: Wargames we would pay to see! (11/19/2017 9:21:36 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: James Taylor
Something in the realm of "Uncommon Valor". Starting with the Japanese invasion of the Bismarcks in early 1942 and continuing into 1944, like the time covered by "Fire in the Sky" before and after.
+1 for new versions of UV and Eagle Day to Bombing the Reich



gabeeg -> RE: Wargames we would pay to see! (11/26/2017 9:25:56 AM)

Since we have a new Steel Panthers remake coming up my next wishes would be Tactical Naval and Tactical Air combat games

Age of Sail, Russo-WWI, WWII naval warfare...I cannot get enough and we have an ancient title now in Mare Nostrum, we need to keep it going. I still play Age of Sail to get my fix...would love a remake. Real time is fine...but...I sure would like a system that would allow PBEM. NWS has done a great job but they are limited to one man developers with limited resources and time. Matrix is just the company we need to make a nice looking, detailed series of tactical naval simulations.

Tactical air war of the WWI and WWII periods is even less represented than naval warfare! I would think that it would lend itself really well to a computer simulation (not a 3D simulator...we have those). There are plenty of great board games that could be ported. Again, I would really like to see them PBEM capable as well.



Gilmer -> RE: Wargames we would pay to see! (11/27/2017 2:19:17 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MagicMissile


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Avalon Hill's Bismarck. Just imagine what they could do with that boardgame on computer....


I didn´t play it but I liked "Flat Top" which I also believe would be a decent computer game on a easier level then WitP for example.


I bought it as a 12 year old and never got to play it. I think my mother threw it out when I left for college. She threw away a lot of my stuff.



Gilmer -> RE: Wargames we would pay to see! (11/27/2017 2:21:14 AM)

A really large WiTp-AE type style game for D-Day. Something that is as big as that and takes as long to learn to play.

And a FUN Hundred Years War. I used to campaign for Ageod to build a HYW game, but I don't think their engine could do it. I don't know if any engine could do it. But that is what I want. It may be a pipe dream, but there you go.



PoorOldSpike -> RE: Wargames we would pay to see! (11/27/2017 4:30:56 AM)

The 'Starship Troopers' boardgame was quite popular 40 years ago (yes I'm THAT old and was just a callow youth back then), so maybe it could be re-done for modern computers?

[image]http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/starship-troops1_zpsgisudshr.jpg[/image]


PS- Here's a pic from the pre-home computer stone age, me (on right) and Gaz Newton with some of the boardgames we used to play in the 1970's/80's-

[image]http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/pzclub.jpg[/image]



Zap -> RE: Wargames we would pay to see! (11/27/2017 5:59:04 AM)

Ha, ha, great picture from your youth PoorOldspike thanks for sharing. Was the pistol used to mediate rule disagreements[:D]



Zecke -> RE: Wargames we would pay to see! (11/27/2017 6:54:26 AM)

will be great to have many many board-games of HPs SIMULATIONS

http://www.hpssims.com/

especially the Panzer Campaigns



goodwoodrw -> RE: Wargames we would pay to see! (11/27/2017 7:01:54 AM)

I would pay a good sum for war games that had really good supply rules. Make it important to defend supply routes such as sea convoys, Transit areas, Transit points, truck and rail routes. Be able to have real interdiction missions, TOAW comes close with interdiction of supplies, want more control not just theatre percentages. If units run out of supply they stop shooting or moving like in Panzer Corps. Don't like abstracted rules like out of supply, so units fight at half strength etc etc. I can vaguely recall in my reserve days in the early seventies being told for every soldier at the pointy end seven more are required to keep them there. I want to wage war on these guys, but not with abstract rules lets really shoot at them[:)]



Rising-Sun -> RE: Wargames we would pay to see! (11/27/2017 2:45:27 PM)

Great Naval Battles
War in the Pacific

Anything that related to WWII in the Pacific.



warspite1 -> RE: Wargames we would pay to see! (11/27/2017 5:52:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: goodwoodrw

I would pay a good sum for war games that had really good supply rules. Make it important to defend supply routes such as sea convoys, Transit areas, Transit points, truck and rail routes. Be able to have real interdiction missions, TOAW comes close with interdiction of supplies, want more control not just theatre percentages. If units run out of supply they stop shooting or moving like in Panzer Corps. Don't like abstracted rules like out of supply, so units fight at half strength etc etc. I can vaguely recall in my reserve days in the early seventies being told for every soldier at the pointy end seven more are required to keep them there. I want to wage war on these guys, but not with abstract rules lets really shoot at them[:)]
warspite1

Sounds like War in the Mediterranean June 1940 - May 1943 to me [;)]



goodwoodrw -> RE: Wargames we would pay to see! (11/27/2017 9:53:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: goodwoodrw

I would pay a good sum for war games that had really good supply rules. Make it important to defend supply routes such as sea convoys, Transit areas, Transit points, truck and rail routes. Be able to have real interdiction missions, TOAW comes close with interdiction of supplies, want more control not just theatre percentages. If units run out of supply they stop shooting or moving like in Panzer Corps. Don't like abstracted rules like out of supply, so units fight at half strength etc etc. I can vaguely recall in my reserve days in the early seventies being told for every soldier at the pointy end seven more are required to keep them there. I want to wage war on these guys, but not with abstract rules lets really shoot at them[:)]
warspite1

Sounds like War in the Mediterranean June 1940 - May 1943 to me [;)]



Not heard of that title, is it computer or board game?



warspite1 -> RE: Wargames we would pay to see! (11/28/2017 4:48:44 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: goodwoodrw


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: goodwoodrw

I would pay a good sum for war games that had really good supply rules. Make it important to defend supply routes such as sea convoys, Transit areas, Transit points, truck and rail routes. Be able to have real interdiction missions, TOAW comes close with interdiction of supplies, want more control not just theatre percentages. If units run out of supply they stop shooting or moving like in Panzer Corps. Don't like abstracted rules like out of supply, so units fight at half strength etc etc. I can vaguely recall in my reserve days in the early seventies being told for every soldier at the pointy end seven more are required to keep them there. I want to wage war on these guys, but not with abstract rules lets really shoot at them[:)]
warspite1

Sounds like War in the Mediterranean June 1940 - May 1943 to me [;)]



Not heard of that title, is it computer or board game?
warspite1

Sadly neither. This is a war game that, by almost any measure, by any definition, by any standard, should be made. Sadly the one measure it fails on is that its not the Pacific, The Bulge, The East Front. Therefore it fails on economics and you can't get around that.

So a theatre of war that is one of the most interesting of WWII, a war that could have gone either way, a war that would appeal to land and naval war players alike, will never get made. Such a shame.



wodin -> RE: Wargames we would pay to see! (11/28/2017 5:44:54 AM)

Streets of Stalingrad.

Two Hour Wargames NUTS and Expansions.

Wings of Glory

UpFront

Someone to get hold of Squad Battles source code and turn it into the best turn based tac game around.

Car Wars (not a wargame but still has combat)



PoorOldSpike -> RE: Wargames we would pay to see! (11/28/2017 2:13:35 PM)

There's certainly a gap in the market (as far as I know) for a Prehistoric Wargame where tribes struggle to survive in combat against rival tribes and dinosaurs.
Victory points could be scored on a scale of how dangerous a beast is, for example a T Rex kill would rack up big points-

"Ugh...me no like you...ugh"

[image]http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/one-million_zpsomvncwnx.jpg[/image]



Gilmer -> RE: Wargames we would pay to see! (11/28/2017 4:40:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: PoorOldSpike

There's certainly a gap in the market (as far as I know) for a Prehistoric Wargame where tribes struggle to survive in combat against rival tribes and dinosaurs.
Victory points could be scored on a scale of how dangerous a beast is, for example a T Rex kill would rack up big points-

"Ugh...me no like you...ugh"

[image]http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/one-million_zpsomvncwnx.jpg[/image]



I'd like a Civ type game of that from the earliest time, but it would be much much more detailed than Civ and even having said that would be simple still like Civ 1. A tech tree that was 10 times as big as Civ 1's. But without all the added crap they added in later versions.



Zecke -> RE: Wargames we would pay to see! (11/28/2017 5:09:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: KurtC


quote:

ORIGINAL: PoorOldSpike

There's certainly a gap in the market (as far as I know) for a Prehistoric Wargame where tribes struggle to survive in combat against rival tribes and dinosaurs.
Victory points could be scored on a scale of how dangerous a beast is, for example a T Rex kill would rack up big points-

"Ugh...me no like you...ugh"

[image]http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/one-million_zpsomvncwnx.jpg[/image]



I'd like a Civ type game of that from the earliest time, but it would be much much more detailed than Civ and even having said that would be simple still like Civ 1. A tech tree that was 10 times as big as Civ 1's. But without all the added crap they added in later versions.


CIV-1; is one of the greatest game EVER made; the three-tech dont mind too me wonderĄ but the WONDERS they could be more (thouse make you missile in XIX)



RFalvo69 -> RE: Wargames we would pay to see! (11/28/2017 5:18:45 PM)

A modernised version of Flight Commander 2, with a 1950-2020 roster.



Zecke -> RE: Wargames we would pay to see! (11/28/2017 6:01:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: RisingSun

Great Naval Battles
War in the Pacific

Anything that related to WWII in the Pacific.


GREAT NAVAL BATTLES (your right)..especially Guadalcanal on Floppys i have them like a treasure.



Zorch -> RE: Wargames we would pay to see! (11/28/2017 7:39:05 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zecke


quote:

ORIGINAL: KurtC


quote:

ORIGINAL: PoorOldSpike

There's certainly a gap in the market (as far as I know) for a Prehistoric Wargame where tribes struggle to survive in combat against rival tribes and dinosaurs.
Victory points could be scored on a scale of how dangerous a beast is, for example a T Rex kill would rack up big points-

"Ugh...me no like you...ugh"

[image]http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/one-million_zpsomvncwnx.jpg[/image]



I'd like a Civ type game of that from the earliest time, but it would be much much more detailed than Civ and even having said that would be simple still like Civ 1. A tech tree that was 10 times as big as Civ 1's. But without all the added crap they added in later versions.


CIV-1; is one of the greatest game EVER made; the three-tech dont mind too me wonderĄ but the WONDERS they could be more (thouse make you missile in XIX)

About 10 years ago Sid Meier tried to develop a Dinosaur game for his son; but abandoned it because it wasn't fun.



operating -> RE: Wargames we would pay to see! (11/29/2017 1:22:57 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: aaatoysandmore

Strategy game overlay American Civil War game on top of Norbsoft's Civil War series. Where you move and play diplomacy on top and have real time battles with built units from the top in tactical battles around the map. Kinda like Total War but with Norb's combat engine and the American Civil War.

I second this idea pus a CW naval component [:)]



m10bob -> RE: Wargames we would pay to see! (11/29/2017 2:41:58 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorch


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zecke


quote:

ORIGINAL: KurtC


quote:

ORIGINAL: PoorOldSpike

There's certainly a gap in the market (as far as I know) for a Prehistoric Wargame where tribes struggle to survive in combat against rival tribes and dinosaurs.
Victory points could be scored on a scale of how dangerous a beast is, for example a T Rex kill would rack up big points-

"Ugh...me no like you...ugh"

[image]http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/one-million_zpsomvncwnx.jpg[/image]



I'd like a Civ type game of that from the earliest time, but it would be much much more detailed than Civ and even having said that would be simple still like Civ 1. A tech tree that was 10 times as big as Civ 1's. But without all the added crap they added in later versions.


CIV-1; is one of the greatest game EVER made; the three-tech dont mind too me wonderĄ but the WONDERS they could be more (thouse make you missile in XIX)

About 10 years ago Sid Meier tried to develop a Dinosaur game for his son; but abandoned it because it wasn't fun.



"CRUSH,CRUMBLE and CHOMP" would be so awesome!!!(Had it on the Commodore 64 IIRC?)



Zorch -> RE: Wargames we would pay to see! (11/29/2017 4:01:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorch


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zecke


quote:

ORIGINAL: KurtC


quote:

ORIGINAL: PoorOldSpike

There's certainly a gap in the market (as far as I know) for a Prehistoric Wargame where tribes struggle to survive in combat against rival tribes and dinosaurs.
Victory points could be scored on a scale of how dangerous a beast is, for example a T Rex kill would rack up big points-

"Ugh...me no like you...ugh"

[image]http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/one-million_zpsomvncwnx.jpg[/image]



I'd like a Civ type game of that from the earliest time, but it would be much much more detailed than Civ and even having said that would be simple still like Civ 1. A tech tree that was 10 times as big as Civ 1's. But without all the added crap they added in later versions.


CIV-1; is one of the greatest game EVER made; the three-tech dont mind too me wonderĄ but the WONDERS they could be more (thouse make you missile in XIX)

About 10 years ago Sid Meier tried to develop a Dinosaur game for his son; but abandoned it because it wasn't fun.



"CRUSH,CRUMBLE and CHOMP" would be so awesome!!!(Had it on the Commodore 64 IIRC?)

+1 I had the boardgame.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.609375