1
0

[–] Tallest_Skil 1 point 0 points (+1|-1) ago 

Nationalist side gets a bunch of identical units that are weak alone but gain large power buffs when in proximity to one other. Have a couple different options for those, but the player only gets one kind to play with each game.

Globalist side gets a miasma of all the other groups of units (so no proximity buffs) and a tiny number of superpowered units. The latter, as one of their powers, can go behind enemy lines. The presence of the superpowered units in a region allows them to move their lesser units into that region. You could manage the superpower units as being “hidden” using a mechanic like Stratego’s. If you’re making a game that isn’t digital, you could have a grossly simplified format of “laws” whereupon the superpower units being in a region allow them to slowly revoke the unity powers of the opponent’s units in that region.

Seems pretty easy to make. It’ll never be published, though.

0
1

[–] AnotherGalaxy [S] 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

I think your answer might be the best one so far. If we can combine this with the metrics suggested above by @progressbin and the territorial properties of Go, we might be on the right track of solving this problem.

There are plenty of details, however, that need to be worked out, and a video simulation could help us a lot to understand the strategy better.

1
0

[–] MightoScrub 1 point 0 points (+1|-1) ago 

I think a territorial Go style game makes the most sense. It is, in essence a fight for territory. The openness of my plays in Go make for a "diverse" number of plays. While the diversity can lead to a players ruin. But with understanding patterns and some history of the game play becomes a bit more linear, and refined.

So while diversity is great and all, it really can cause a complete and utter loss in just the opening moves.

Kind of like reality.

0
0

[–] AnotherGalaxy [S] ago 

Go is a great game and a good point to start.

We can add several different colors for the pieces in order to represent different nations. But this means that we have to play by completely different rules.

0
2

[–] DeliciousOnions 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago  (edited ago)

I think it would be particularly eye-opening if all the players were nations, and globalism was the loss condition.

The nations would be able to get initial short term rewards by feeding into globalism (take out loans, outsource manufacturing, import Somalians) but each of these decisions should come with high costs that make it only seem worth it in the heat of battle.

The game should progress from nations fighting each other, into nations being throttled by the commands and restrictions placed upon them, into nations working together to remove the globalist forces.

Game boards and tiles are pretty easy to manufacture - a printing press, some cardboard, and a steel die cutter can pump them out by the thousands. Plastic pieces can be injection molded or 3D printed.

0
0

[–] AnotherGalaxy [S] ago 

In this case "nations" meaning a certain number of identical pieces that form homogeneous groups, I suppose.

Different pieces of different colors could mean different nations.

We can also ascribe different properties to different "nations"

0
1

[–] DeliciousOnions 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Exactly right - and these are already game concepts that people won't blink at. As long as we keep the nations fairly balanced and avoid direct references, this should fly under the radar.

  • The Loftstadt are an industrial nation with a strong economy backed by brilliant technical innovation, but they suffer from slow expansion due to the heavy investments required.
  • Miganda is a nation of kings and warriors, with a rapid expansion rate and renowned for their hit-and-run tactics but hampered by the lack of technological development.
  • The Remula is a seafaring nation that excels in trade and naval combat. They are skilled builders and explorers whose vessels can rest in any port they are not Hostile toward.

And so on and so forth. The point would be to introduce some race realism in the different nations' attributes.

0
0

[–] DichKurtz ago 

Game like Blitzkrieg 2. Definitely RTS.

0
0

[–] totallynotFBI ago 

Risk meets Monopoly

0
0

[–] AnotherGalaxy [S] ago 

I had a look at the Risk game and I find it a bit boring. The game is too long, and the ratio of educative vs time is just too big.

But I agree with including Monopoly in a combination with others games, such as, chess, Go, Mahjong, Rummy, and cards.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
0

[–] AnotherGalaxy [S] ago 

I never play video-games, but I got your point.

0
0

[–] 20398488? ago 

Wolfenstien

0
1

[–] zxcvzxcv 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Don't forget to include a nigger nation. it would have separate victory conditions. if the niggers can rape/replace all of the white nations, then the niggers win. The down-side to playing as the niggers is that you aren't ever allowed to build anything. You can only destroy stuff built by the white nations.

load more comments ▼ (4 remaining)