Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Monster Game !?!

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Monster Game !?! Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Monster Game !?! - 8/5/2002 10:03:20 PM   
mariovalleemtl


Posts: 360
Joined: 8/9/2000
From: Montreal
Status: offline 		Do you have any idea how long it will take to do a single turn in this colossus game? In U.V. , it take some 10 to15 min most of the time. This new game is , what?, 20 time bigger?.

Like usual, after a few games with the AI, you will nead to PBEM. Do you imagine how long will be those games? A grand strategic game with micro-management tactic operation. I don't like to be the Admiral in chief AND the guys who fuel the ships at the same time in the same game. I am curious to see how many grognards maniac players will have time to play this masterpiece.

I am sure it will be a great game but I will prefer must less details at this scale. It is so big I am sure the A.I. will be poor and so long, human will get tired.

Of cause now in this forum, only super maniac gamer will read me and think I must be a lazy gamer. I am not. Actually I have experiance in long term game and thas why I said that. I is very hard to find reliable parteners.

I hope I will be wrong and good luck to the braves!

mario :)
Post #: 1
Re: Monster Game !?! - 8/5/2002 10:32:23 PM   
U2


Posts: 3332
Joined: 7/17/2001
From: Västerås,Sweden
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mario Vallée
[B]
I is very hard to find reliable parteners.!

mario :) [/B][/QUOTE]

Hi

You are right about that but luckily I have been gaming UV PBEM like crazy and now know people I can trust and some of them wants to move on to WITP when it comes. I am sure the rest too but I have not asked them yet.

Its a huge game for sure and I am very happy about that.

Dan

_____________________________


(in reply to mariovalleemtl)
Post #: 2
strategic vs operational - 8/7/2002 12:44:52 PM   
brisd


Posts: 614
Joined: 5/20/2000
From: San Diego, CA
Status: offline 		Personally, I was hoping for a strategic level game, an up-to-date Pacific War with one week turns and many of the features automated as in that game. My experience with the operational game UV, coupled with the description of WITP on its homepage as an "operational level" game has me disappointed. WITP looks so far as a bigger UV and UV takes a great deal of micro-managing to play. This thing will be a monster, loved by single, independantly-wealthy grognards. Who else will have the time and resourses to play a campaign game???!!!

(in reply to mariovalleemtl)
Post #: 3
- 8/7/2002 4:54:35 PM   
Jupo

 

Posts: 32
Joined: 5/28/2002
From: Finland
Status: offline 		I want to control everything and everyday.. It doesn't mather that if one turn is taking time 1 min to 1 hour, I have many years time to play ;)

(in reply to mariovalleemtl)
Post #: 4
- 8/7/2002 6:50:02 PM   
John Carney

 

Posts: 66
Joined: 7/1/2002
From: Tampa FL
Status: offline 		Try settinig UV to 7 day turns in Coral Sea Scenario, place an aggressive commander for US CV TF, he will wonder towards Rebaul to hit the enemy. Then try placing a very cautious commander in Charge and see where he patrols. Using week turns, large TF, and setting Computer controls you can play a more strategic game. But be prepared to relieve those commanders for stupidity.
But I agree with Jupo, I WANT TOTAL CONTROL. It may take me 2-6 hours to set up an offensive, and a week to play a game month. It will definetly be worth the time. Takes me about a week to play a Month of VG Pacific War.
I am sure that their will be many small scenarios and limited theater scenarios generated by the grognards to keep any player happy.

(in reply to mariovalleemtl)
Post #: 5
Very Big - 8/7/2002 9:13:47 PM   
mariovalleemtl


Posts: 360
Joined: 8/9/2000
From: Montreal
Status: offline 		In UV, I check "most" of my bases and task forces every turns. I could just imagine the job it will take in this new games. How many bases in 41-45 ? + China and India. Ouf! I would prefer areas instaid of hexes at this scale.

mario

(in reply to mariovalleemtl)
Post #: 6
oh well - 8/10/2002 9:51:12 AM   
brisd


Posts: 614
Joined: 5/20/2000
From: San Diego, CA
Status: offline 		Guess there will those of us playing with 7 day turns and having a life. I live for the campaign game, looking forward to spreading the Pax Nippon from Ceylon to Diamond Head to Tasmania. Should be a challenge.

(in reply to mariovalleemtl)
Post #: 7
Re: oh well - 8/10/2002 6:18:41 PM   
Raverdave


Posts: 6520
Joined: 2/8/2002
From: Melb. Australia
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by brisd
[B].............................................looking forward to spreading the Pax Nippon from Ceylon to Diamond Head to Tasmania. Should be a challenge. [/B][/QUOTE]

That will never happen, or at least not while I am on the other end of the PBEM.;)

_____________________________




Never argue with an idiot, he will only drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

(in reply to mariovalleemtl)
Post #: 8
Re: strategic vs operational - 8/10/2002 11:01:59 PM   
emorbius44

 

Posts: 97
Joined: 5/15/2002
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by brisd
[B]Personally, I was hoping for a strategic level game, an up-to-date Pacific War with one week turns and many of the features automated as in that game. My experience with the operational game UV, coupled with the description of WITP on its homepage as an "operational level" game has me disappointed. WITP looks so far as a bigger UV and UV takes a great deal of micro-managing to play. This thing will be a monster, loved by single, independantly-wealthy grognards. Who else will have the time and resourses to play a campaign game???!!! [/B][/QUOTE]


It states quite clearly (and can be done in UV right now) that turns CAN be set to one week intervals. Also many functions can be automated in UV and I assume will be the same in WITP. Frankly I don't see the problem. The beauty of UV and the upcoming WITP is it gives the game player the option to set the level of detail in terms of time scale and micromagement.

Bob

(in reply to mariovalleemtl)
Post #: 9
- 8/12/2002 8:29:59 PM   
zed

 

Posts: 268
Joined: 5/20/2002
Status: offline 		I like getting down to the nitty-gritty, ships planes, etc. UV is just right and I hope the same approach comes to WITP. EG, when I see the ship AOBA, i now think, oh, that was GOTOs flag ship that was shot up at Guadalcanal. Same with pilots Nakajima, Oda, Sakai. It really makes history come to life.

(in reply to mariovalleemtl)
Post #: 10
Re: strategic vs operational - 8/16/2002 6:21:11 PM   
shark

 

Posts: 58
Joined: 7/1/2002
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by brisd
[B]Personally, I was hoping for a strategic level game, an up-to-date Pacific War with one week turns and many of the features automated as in that game

I agree, but a UV type system can be used as long as it is designed to operate well with a 7 day cycle.
It needs extra TF waypoints, reaction ranges etc.
the only thing that really needs dumping is altitude selection for air missions.
Instead you need to have a selection to enable low level ops (skip bombing),and an setting to tell the boys" how hard to push it" eg Max Effort etc

(in reply to mariovalleemtl)
Post #: 11
Re: Monster Game !?! - 8/19/2002 3:19:27 AM   
Yamamoto

 

Posts: 743
Joined: 11/21/2001
From: Miami, Fl. U.S.A.
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mario Vallée
[B]

Like usual, after a few games with the AI, you will nead to PBEM. mario :) [/B][/QUOTE]

Forget PBEM. It will be DOA because this game will support TCP/IP. No more waiting for turns. You can play turns as fast as you and your opponenet can enter them.

Yamamoto

(in reply to mariovalleemtl)
Post #: 12
Re: Re: Monster Game !?! - 8/19/2002 3:20:16 PM   
shark

 

Posts: 58
Joined: 7/1/2002
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Yamamoto
[B]

Forget PBEM. It will be DOA because this game will support TCP/IP. No more waiting for turns. You can play turns as fast as you and your opponenet can enter them.

Yamamoto [/B][/QUOTE]

I find it preferable to do Pbem turns and return them at leisure than be tied down to Tcpip.
Strategy games work best this way in my view.

(in reply to mariovalleemtl)
Post #: 13
Re: Re: Monster Game !?! - 8/22/2002 11:07:30 PM   
siRkid


Posts: 6650
Joined: 1/29/2002
From: Orland FL
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Yamamoto
[B]

Forget PBEM. It will be DOA because this game will support TCP/IP. No more waiting for turns. You can play turns as fast as you and your opponenet can enter them.

Yamamoto [/B][/QUOTE]

PBEM Dead? NEVER! I could never convince my family to let me spend an entire day playing and tying up all the computers. PBEM fits my life stile perfect. One or two turns a day and one a rare occasion as many as 10.
Rick

_____________________________

Former War in the Pacific Test Team Manager and Beta Tester for War in the East.


(in reply to mariovalleemtl)
Post #: 14
Re: Re: Monster Game !?! - 8/23/2002 1:52:00 AM   
Sonny

 

Posts: 2008
Joined: 4/3/2002
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Yamamoto
[B]

Forget PBEM. It will be DOA because this game will support TCP/IP. No more waiting for turns. You can play turns as fast as you and your opponenet can enter them.

Yamamoto [/B][/QUOTE]

As long as you and your opponent are online at the same time which means probably not being more than one or two time zones away.

I play several PBEM games of UV and it works nicely. Send a turn to a few folks - go do what I need to do (according to my wife and/or kid) - come back to the replay and fire off another turn. Works well.

Maybe TCP/IP on a weekend if things are planned in advance.:)

(in reply to mariovalleemtl)
Post #: 15
Cant wait - 9/2/2002 10:47:18 AM   
herbieh

 

Posts: 804
Joined: 8/30/2002
From: Sydney Australia
Status: offline 		Personally, after just a few days of playing UV, if they can transfer the same game play to the entire pacific(and Indian )oceans, I will have died and gone to heaven. The possibilities are endless. I will also be happy to start Dec 7, everything historical, with this Admiral in charge, the Imperial flag will never set! Bring it on:D

(in reply to mariovalleemtl)
Post #: 16
Re: Cant wait - 9/2/2002 11:54:09 AM   
pasternakski


Posts: 6565
Joined: 6/29/2002
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by herbieh
[B]Personally, after just a few days of playing UV, if they can transfer the same game play to the entire pacific(and Indian )oceans, I will have died and gone to heaven. The possibilities are endless. I will also be happy to start Dec 7, everything historical, with this Admiral in charge, the Imperial flag will never set! Bring it on:D [/B][/QUOTE]

A-freakin'-MEN! As soon as I kick Hub Kimmell's scrawny little butt out of CINCPAC, I'm ready to rock!

_____________________________

Put my faith in the people
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.

(in reply to mariovalleemtl)
Post #: 17
Kimmel - 9/2/2002 11:15:44 PM   
mogami


Posts: 12789
Joined: 8/23/2000
From: You can't get here from there
Status: offline 		Greetings, I like to use Chester as Cen Pac and Kimmel as South Pac. I think any US commander would have been caught at PH
(since they all seemed to follow the same procedures) Mac had warning of the PH stirkes and still allowed his aircraft to be caught on the ground all clumped together and he was awarded the MOH for his "defense" of PI. (I don't hold this against Mac, only use it to point out the double standard used for the 2 leaders caught by the first suprise attack and the the ones caught later (who certainly should have been ready to fight).

Kimmel was certainly better then some of the men who retained commanded and should have shared the blame.

_____________________________






I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!

(in reply to mariovalleemtl)
Post #: 18
Go figure - 9/3/2002 2:56:57 PM   
Luskan

 

Posts: 1897
Joined: 7/11/2002
From: Down Under
Status: offline 		Kimmel (and his command network I suppose) got most of their ships sunk and lived to tell the tale at PH. His ships were sunk without inflicting any serious loss upon the enemy. This was half because of the good japanese execution of the raid, and half because of the lax attitude/preparation status of Kimmel's command. Kimmel's career was over and he was basically shunned and blamed, treated like it was his fault (to some extent it was).

Admiral Karl Doorman got most of his ships sunk and didn't live to tell the tale (died on the bridge of his flagship) in the battle of the Java sea. Doorman's ships were sunk without inflicting serious loss upon the enemy. This was half because of good japanese training/preparations/intelligence, and half because of Doorman's poor plan (basically he didn't have one) and ignorance of the japanese aircraft that were shadowing his ships day and night, lighting off flares every time they changed course (!). Doorman's career was over because he was dead, but he was revered as a hero and an example to all who would stand against the japs etc.

If Kimmel had died at Pearl Harbour - would he have been a hero? If Doorman had lived after java sea (although that would mean he had to be on board one of the very few surviving allied ships) would he be a nithing?

Go figure.

_____________________________

With dancing Bananas and Storm Troopers who needs BBs?

(in reply to mariovalleemtl)
Post #: 19
not that bad - 9/11/2002 2:56:14 PM   
Chiteng

 

Posts: 7666
Joined: 2/20/2001
From: Raleigh,nc,usa
Status: offline 		No worse than War in the Pacific board game.
Which I have played, many times, to the end.

(in reply to mariovalleemtl)
Post #: 20
- 9/11/2002 11:48:38 PM   
Frank W.

 

Posts: 1958
Joined: 10/18/2001
From: Siegen + Essen / W. Germany
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by John Carney
[B]Try settinig UV to 7 day turns in Coral Sea Scenario, place an aggressive commander for US CV TF, he will wonder towards Rebaul to hit the enemy. Then try placing a very cautious commander in Charge and see where he patrols. Using week turns, large TF, and setting Computer controls you can play a more strategic game. But be prepared to relieve those commanders for stupidity.
But I agree with Jupo, I WANT TOTAL CONTROL. It may take me 2-6 hours to set up an offensive, and a week to play a game month. It will definetly be worth the time. Takes me about a week to play a Month of VG Pacific War.
I am sure that their will be many small scenarios and limited theater scenarios generated by the grognards to keep any player happy. [/B][/QUOTE]

i prefer "micromanagement" un terms of combat and units. same as controlling combat + battles. but in logistics and transports there should be some good "automatic routines" to chose. because i think it bores moving supplies around and looking for each base if it has enough stuff. perhaps there could be a kind of "alarm" if any base or fleet got low on supply so you can react manually if automatic supply is in effect.

(in reply to mariovalleemtl)
Post #: 21
Pac War??? - 9/11/2002 11:52:17 PM   
Chiteng

 

Posts: 7666
Joined: 2/20/2001
From: Raleigh,nc,usa
Status: offline 		I never even managed to figure out how to use 'shoestring' supply in that game.

(in reply to mariovalleemtl)
Post #: 22
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Monster Game !?! Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.828