Wow! Who needs Cornwallis to flank? You just need lot’s of luck while making a frontal assault across the creek!
Washington had to move first. My artillery barrage sent Nash’s North Carolina running -exposing the continental artillery! So Vaugh over-ran them. Grant and the Highlanders rolled well too.
Washington’s line is trashed!
We had a fun game last weekend. Some interesting rules issues came up I’d like to clarify. I posted these on the rules page also which is another great resource to check on how things are supposed to work.
Here is another interesting situation that came up. Japan invaded Taiwan. They succeeded but left Japan vulnerable to invasion. China took advantage and conquered Japan. Japan didn’t have enough remaining strength to take it back.
The US came to the rescue. The US Navy sailed over the Sea of Japan and destroyed the Chinese navy. They then attacked and destroyed the Chinese armies in Japan with their fleet. They didn’t actually have to land US armies there, just clear out the Chinese.
This resulted in saving Japan. Conquest happens at the end of Combat. What was the situation then? Japan was vacant. No forces at all. This means control of Japan reverts back to the Japanese player because it is an unoccupied home area. Japan was able to build new armies there and is back in the game.
The Chinese player (Curt) was not happy but used the same tactic when Russia (me) almost conquered him the next turn. China counter attacked my forces in Shanghai with his navies. With all my armies destroyed, control of Shanghai reverts back to China.
This is where an ICBM comes in handy. I didn’t have one yet but the US (clint) did! 😉
A big change in the new Supremacy is how you determine victory. Once you have ICBMs, it’s easy to nuke a player out of the game but is that your best option? Often times now, this can make you lose.
Recently, I was the CW in a game. As it turned out, lots of players ended up with cards in the Middle East. I based most of my forces in India. On turn 1 I invaded, capturing 95% of the worlds oil production. The only player in a position to do anything about it was Russia (Clint) but I turned them into an ally by protecting one of his companies.
On turn 2, I was at total war with the US (Gabe), Japan (god) and the EU (Curt). The US conquered Canada. The EU conquered Britain. They each had 1 ICBM and planned to nuke my last to cities: Delhi and Canberra. That would have put me out of the game but in Supremacy 2020, that doesn’t mean I lose.
What?! Yes, actually that would have almost insured my victory. In Supremacy 2020, victory is not based on the last man standing, it’s based on points. You get points for cash, armies, navies and companies. If you have no cities left at the end of the Attack phase, you total and record your points. Yes, I’m “out of the game” but I can still win.
In fact, my points would be locked in and guaranteed. At this point in the game, I had tons of cards. I just seized them from everybody! I also had lots of cash and forces. They took my cities but they did not destroy my forces in the field. Nobody could get to me remember?
In spite of pointing this fact out to them, the coalition decided to nuke me out anyways. Just for the satisfaction! I have a way of bringing that out in people. 😉
My Russian ally came to the rescue by shooting down the ICBM targeting Delhi. Hmmmmm….. Now was he doing that to ‘help’ me or to allow my enemies more time to reduce my score before taking me out? Clint is pretty cagey that way. :/
So, can you build up a huge nuclear arsenal and destroy the entire globe on turn 2? Yes. It’s possible. It will very likely cause you to lose. The path to victory is to acquire lots of forces, companies and cash. -at least as relative to what other players have.
If you are going to take a player out, be sure to grind them down to a pulp the old fashioned way first. Or even better yet, get your ‘allies’ to do it for you.
We have met with several IT / software developers in the last few weeks and have contacts to meet with 3 more this week. This has the potential to be very cool. There are many pitfalls to avoid here. Lots of software people want to turn this into Farmville or Civilization. I don’t think that is what Supremacy is about. The nukes are fun but this game is mostly about negotiating and diplomacy. They want to make it a 1 player game with AI. I’ve never seen a computer strategy AI that actually works. I don’t think a computer is capable of being a good Supremacy opponent. I have seen many good games that totally suck in computer version. We’re determined not to let that happen.
The best model I can see for an online version is WSOP online poker. I think this has to be multiplayer and accessible to many people around the world. It has to have live online chat during the game so that players can posture, haggle, threaten and ally during the turn.
They want to make Supremacy into something they know. Supremacy is completely different from all the other digital games out there. I think that is what’s going to make it big!!
I’d like to get a dialogue going on this with the fans. More brains are better than 1 and Supremacy players are very smart. I’ve turned on the comments. Usually we have them turned off because of spamers. If this doesn’t work, send me an email and I’ll post it on here for you.
What kinds of things should online Supremacy include? What should not be there? Ideas of what you would like to see? Let us know!
Rachel Maddow mentioned us on her MSNBC show the other day! Apparently it was ISIS that took down our site. We were targeted because of our new expansion Rising Crescent that allows you to play as a terrorist and build an Islamic superpower. We have had continued attacks but have been able to keep our site up so far. Amazing.
Help us send THEM a message with our new Cyber Attack promotion and SAVE! For a limited time, save at our Shop checkout with this secret Coupon Code: isis
This will only be good for so many customers so don’t delay.
It sounds kind of silly. Am I overstating this? Supremacy is just a game right? What difference can a game make. That’s just kid stuff.
My little brother-in-law grew up in a bad neighborhood going to a bad school. It was a shame because he was a very smart kid surrounded by drugs and gangs. I showed and played Supremacy with him when he was about 12. He loved it!! It sounds silly to say but it truly transformed his life. I couldn’t get him out of the ghetto but Supremacy showed him that there are other things in life. Things like: business, profit, trading, millions of dollars trading hands, budgets, international political conflict. He learned good communication skills, negotiating, how to resolve conflicts and managing money. How do you balance today’s needs with long term investment? Where else could he be exposed to these ideas and learn about them? He certainly not in his school or community.
Mark stayed out of gangs and drugs. In spite of his background, he was inspired to go to college and build a career. I watched him grow up. He went on to get a bachelor’s in business. He built a career in management at UPS. He bought a home and started a family. Yes, I really do credit much of his success to Supremacy. It was his ‘gateway drug’ to success. It opened his eyes to possibilities he would not have otherwise seen.
Supremacy touched my life. It was huge to Mark. If you are a real fan, then it’s touched you also. Want to have a life changing impact on a kid? Play Supremacy with them.
THEY tried to shut us down.
THEY failed.
The Command Post is back on line!
(We strongly suspect grey aliens are involved too but we can’t prove it, ….yet.)
Help us send THEM a message with our new Cyber Attack promotion and SAVE! For a limited time, save at our Shop checkout with this secret Coupon Code: greys
This will only be good for so many customers so don’t delay.
It just so happens, we are working with a real Cyber War specialist! He works with the Pentagon and the CIA. He is also helping us develop an all new expansion deck: Cyber Supremacy 2020. This deck will allow players to launch and defend against cyber, chem and bio attacks. We have some very exciting ideas going into this. Let me know if you are interested in helping us play test it. We won’t really get cranking on this until after the first print run is shipped.
We get this question from time to time. Strangely enough, we also get: Are ABMs too weak? I guess it depends how you look at it. First of all, how much does it cost to build them?
Before you can build them, they have to be researched. I count 4 ABM cards out of a 100 card deck. You have to pay $200BL per card you turn over. That sounds really expensive but keep in mind that many of the cards are already dealt out to players. How much do you have to spend on research on average? (help me out here math geeks) I’m not exactly sure of the math but from playing experience it’s expensive. You better plan spending at least $2-5TL on research. I’ve seen desperate players spend as much as $10-15TL.
That’s not all. You still have to pay for 2 minerals. If they are worth an average $500BL each, that is an extra $1TL. So let’s say you spend $6TL on ABMs. Are you protected? No. This is where the ABMs are ‘weak’. $6TL is a lot of cash. What do you get for all this? You can shoot down 1 incoming ICBM. If a player launches 5 at you at once, you are still out of the game.
Ok, so what did we spend all that cash for? It’s the follow up builds. Let’s say next turn, you build 4 more. Now you can shoot down 5 incoming ICBMs at once. A player would have to launch 9 at you to take you out. Let’s say the turn after that, you build 4 more. Now you have a total of 9 ABMs. The most ICBMs a player can launch at you is 12. You shoot down 9. Only 3 get through. You are still in the game.
Lets look at the economics. How much did it cost that player to launch 12 ICBMs at you? $6TL for missiles plus the cost of 6 minerals. Worse than that is the VP cost! It’s double: $12TL (+value of minerals). The kicker here is that the ABMs are not consumed when fired. They are reusable. Your stockpile of ABMs still count big for VPs. Again, this is double value. Your 9 ABMs are worth $18TL in VPs.
In addition, having the most ABMs also gives you the high tech advantage in combat: 3 re-rolls. A nice bonus but after building 9 ABMs, you aren’t likely to have a big conventional force.
So, what is the final conclusion? Are they too weak or too strong? They are very expensive. That expense is countered by the huge VP value. If you have only a few, they are weak. If you can build many, they become very strong. Too strong? Well, look at all the cash you had to pay for them! Would you spend that much effort on something that wasn’t very strong?
Also consider your opportunity cost here. What did you not build by choosing to build a huge ABM stockpile? How are you hurting and behind in those areas? Yes, a massive ABM force can be extremely strong. Considering the costs to build one, it seems just about right.
My daughter Emily heard about the budget battles in congress on the news and the ensuing government shutdown. “Why do the republicans want to shut down the government?”, she asked.
“Well, I think they are worried that the national debt is getting too high.” I answered.
“Oh, is that like in Supremacy?”, she asked.
“Yes”, I answered “Exactly.”
“What is our debt?”, she asked.
“I think it’s around $16-17 TL.”, I answered.
“Oh my,” responded Emily, “That’s high. We aren’t bankrupt yet?”
“Well, not yet but we are getting close. That’s what congress is worried about.”
“How can we even afford the interest payment on that much debt?”, she asked.
“Well, that’s a big problem for us now. Our payments on debt is a big part of our budget and it’s growing. That leaves us with less money to pay for other things.”, I responded.
“We have to pay all that money to the bank?”, she inquired.
“No, we pay it to our bond holders. China holds a lot of it.”, I answered.
“Oh, just like in Supremacy! So we have lots of debt and China has lots of bonds. So each turn they make a bunch of money and we pay it?”, she clarified.
“Yes”, I said, “That’s mostly it.”
“Do they have a big navy?”, she asked.
“Not yet”, I said, “but they are trying to build one.”
“That’s not good.”, she said, “Do they have lots of ICBMs?”
“Yes”, I answered, “but so do we.”
“Ah, so there is no point in attacking us. We’d just obliterate each other.” She said, “What about North Korea? I heard they were threatening to nuke us?”
“Yeah, but they only have like 1 or 2 and they aren’t long range or very reliable.”, I answered.
“Do we have ABMs?”, she asked.
“Sort of”, I answered, “It’s not full proof but we can shoot down some.”
“So it’s like we only have a couple ABMs in Supremacy but the North Koreans only have 1 ICBM?”, she surmised.
“Yeah,” I answered, “More or less.”
A surprising conversation considering that Emily is a 10 year old. What?! What is she?! Some sort of international/political genius? Nope. Just a regular kid. A regular kid that has played Supremacy!
Pretty sophisticated knowledge for a 10 year old. Unlike most of her peers, she knows where Burma, Afghanistan and Argentina are and she can point them out on a map. She understands the basics of global trade, conflict, negotiation and politics.
Well, that’s all good but what about nuclear war? Doesn’t playing games like this make kids violent? Nuclear war is horrific. It shouldn’t be made into a fun game. It may seem that way at first. A closer look actually reveals the opposite: Studies show that wargamers tend to be more pacifistic than the general public. It makes sense if you think about it. People that play wargames understand better than anyone else how devastating and destructive war can be. They see how it starts. They know why it’s best to avoid it and how. The world would be a much better and safer place if more people played Supremacy.