RE: Is the game I was hoping for

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Is the game I was hoping for

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 >> RE: Is the game I was hoping for

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

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Is the game I was hoping for - 7/9/2004 8:41:30 AM

Moose 4075

Posts: 25
Joined: 6/6/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Platoonist

Me too! I'm camped out by the mailbox waiting. Then I can finally dump this stupid banner.

That banner is cool though. I really love the Fan Boy ones that I am seeing on the forum. But this one is almost as pretty, and is hilarious.

Anyhow, my two cents on the real topic here; I have never bought a Gary Grigsby game that I didn't like. Having said that I think his games could improve a little on making the details more manageable in the interface area. In something like WitP it might require changing the gameplay a little. 12 O'clock High for instance was pretty damn cool and covered a topic that is second in interest only to the Pacific War in my book. I played the game a great deal and enjoyed it, I felt there was room for improvement though in making it a little less laborious and more fun.

Hope I'm not sounding too critical I love these games, but I do feel they could be improved upon.

(in reply to Platoonist)

Post #: 31

RE: Is the game I was hoping for - 7/9/2004 12:53:11 PM

mjjhnim

Posts: 6
Joined: 7/1/2004
Status: offline

I had same feeling about WITP. Too much... for couple of days.

But as I get the hang of it. I feel the management level design is very nice.

I specialy liked the max range limit on the level bombers. I no longer have to see them get

creamed by going against full CAP with no escort.

The supply aspect of the Game is really well done. I now thing of logistics first...

and it isn't really that complicated.

I love the totall aspect of the game when I need so much for the troops but can

deliever only a little...

ONLY one complaint with WITP is that the turns take too long. I have P4 processor with 512KB ram...

but the turns go too slow. I was hoping for UV speed, but all these data is well~~~

Can matrix guys make a patch which will make reduntant calculations gone?

for exampel, I run the game on two day turn, and I don't want to see ship crew train message for

each day. That kind of calculation can be done once in two day interval or three day interval.

I thing that kind of streamlining will not hurt the game play.

(in reply to brisd)

Post #: 32

RE: Not the game I was hoping for - 7/9/2004 1:03:43 PM

Didz

Posts: 728
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob
If you are serious about a "WITP LITE",I strongly reccomend UV..It may also be considered a primer for WITP..I will take the time to play thru WITP and really doubt anybody can do it justice for another 6 months unless they are retired,etc..A turn or two a day will be just fine..

Lol: You can't suggest UV as an alternative to WiTP let alone PACWAR.

UV only covers an area about the equivalent of 'Carriers at War' and is even more anally-retentive than the description of WiTP. You get to spend hours pushing transport ships about whilst the omputer fights the battle.

What I don't understand is that I was assured WiTP was built on the same scale as PACWAR e.g. 60 miles per hex. So I don't understand why it has turned out so much more tedious to play. The only thing PACWAR needed was a face lift and better controls and it sounds instead like its been turned into an unplayable monster.

My understanding was that much of this detail can be ignored or switched over to computer management, so we human can get on with fighting the war instead of loading spam onto barges.

< Message edited by Didz -- 7/9/2004 11:08:38 AM >

_____________________________

Didz
Fortis balore et armis

(in reply to m10bob)

Post #: 33

RE: Not the game I was hoping for - 7/9/2004 1:40:05 PM

markbroughton

Posts: 15
Joined: 11/11/2003
From: Bedfordshire
Status: offline

quote:

You get to spend hours pushing transport ships about whilst the computer fights the battle.

I have to say that one of the things that I find that makes UV so great and hopefully WITP is exactly this, the management of resources. I like the fact that my operations are hampered by lack of supplies or that I can choose to build supply at one area at the expense of another.

Logistics is something that a lot of wargames choose to ignore or deal with in some abstract way. I think UV got it spot on.

(in reply to Didz)

Post #: 34

RE: Not the game I was hoping for - 7/9/2004 1:55:00 PM

Adnan Meshuggi

Posts: 2220
Joined: 8/2/2001
Status: offline

hm, the WitP is a HUGE game...

for me only the whole campagin is really interesting, but maybe more starts of it... and some alternate history campagins, too (like in UV)

The whole production issue is disapointing, cause of its complexity (with dayly/monthly things mixed up) and the kind of user friendlyness of it (why can�t i go to the next base with the Production screen on ? and similar things)

But, if you want to do it better as the historical guys, you have "the" pac war game... everything else to do it better could be only in grafic or online realtime gaming of it...

To learn the game, i made a 42er campagin, with ultimate ressources and HUGE stockpiles for the japanese, also make some (many) ships come into action much earlier for both sides and learn how it works. Cause everybody should know that we now are beta-2 testers. Such complex game need patches, and to make it stable, it need a restart. So everything we do now, is learning.
In a few months we could start seriously ( my opinion).

Also, playing both sides is good to learn some lessons you can�t know before... (like asw and experience curves, etc...)

esp. the production is still irritating for me and i suggest that an "if you enlarge this you need more of that"-warning should be enabled.... at last at the general information screens (like "Warning, you produce too much xy, so everything else will be NOT produced!)
Also, i think the chance to enlarge the allied production should be given.... if i want more bombers and do not care about recce, why not ? I think the allied side, too should have the chance to speed up the ship production.

But anyway, WitP could also be played half computerizised, even if auto convoi is looking strange for me.... so i NEED micromanagement.

The land war too should be optimized (a frontline should be IN the game, so units can not run around with no problems...

but, WitP IS Pac War in 2004-style. It could be in parts better, customerfriendly, but hell ! we want it, we could make suggests and we have a few years of gameplay !

have fun with it !

_____________________________

Don't tickle yourself with some moralist crap thinking we have some sort of obligation to help these people. We're there for our self-interest, and anything we do to be 'nice' should be considered a courtesy dweebespit

(in reply to markbroughton)

Post #: 35

RE: Not the game I was hoping for - 7/9/2004 2:49:25 PM

siRkid

Posts: 6650
Joined: 1/29/2002
From: Orland FL
Status: offline

If you could be more specific, on how to make production more user friendly I will be happy to add you sujestions to the list. They need to contain as much detail as possible. What should the button be called, what screen should it show up on, what haens when you select it.....

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Adnan Meshuggi)

Post #: 36

RE: Is the game I was hoping for - 7/9/2004 3:20:37 PM

ravinhood

Posts: 3891
Joined: 10/23/2003
Status: offline

quote:

This game is for people who have relatively few games and really play the wheels off the few that meet their preferences.

I think your statement should have said"

This game is for the FEW people who have relatively FEW games and really play the wheels off the FEW that meet their preferences. ;)

This is definitely going to be a FEW people game.

(in reply to mccavage)

Post #: 37

RE: Is the game I was hoping for - 7/9/2004 3:51:56 PM

wodin

Posts: 10762
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: offline

Iknow full well this game will be to much for me. However out of curiosity I have purchase UV at �9.99. IF I like it then I might buy WiTP. Howver I have a big doubt that the detail and resource/production side isnt for me. Though I can see that to some its a dream come true.

WHy anyone would spend so much money on a game which after reading the forums is obviously very detailed and time consuming is beyond me.

Why anyone would knock this game for being so detialed is beyond me too. If you dont like it dont buy it. There are plenty of games due out which will cater for those who dont want so much detail.

(in reply to ravinhood)

Post #: 38

RE: Not the game I was hoping for - 7/9/2004 4:03:10 PM

ZOOMIE1980

Posts: 1284
Joined: 4/9/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kharkov

First of all let me state that I loved Pac War, corny graphics and all! The complexity and depth of that gameplay perfectly complimented the scope of the pacific theatre. You could play a few hours a night and reach a conclusion to the war usually in a week or two. The complex stuff was hidden away from view, you concentrated on the strategic aspects of waging the war leaving the computer to work out the details. The game was fun!

Now we come to WITP....

What a chore! and Production? WTF! I need a maths degree to work out how to increase the production of Betty bombers! Going through several hundread bases (it certainly felt that) micro managing each one is not my idea of fun, more like a job and mind numbing boring one at that. It took me 3 hours just to do the first turn, then sat through 30 mins of gumph waiting for the computer to process it all. Guys, I have a life and cant afford to spend the next 5 years playing this.

Dont get me wrong, I WANT to like this game but hell, its trying its best to get uninstalled from my pc.

Its too much, I think thats the best way to say it. For such an epic war the level of detail is mind boggling and way too much to take in. Just looking at the Japanese homelands and the level of detail in the home islands gives me a headache never mind the other 90% of the map.

I realise that most of you guys here will love this game but for your average Jo on the street its a no no purchase.

Consider making a WITP lite version for us normal people along the same complexity of Pac War Not all of us have maths degrees, the memory of an elephant and the time available to play this game out.

Yes, it IS daunting, and many will find it overwhelming. I do kind of like the pace of PACWAR a bit better, but on the other hand, the one week turns made handing some details of big landings difficult. But the pace of this game is GLACIAL! It's a tradeoff. There are some things you can do to turn down the fire hose of a learning curve and melt the glacier a bit, though.

1) Go to three day turns

2) For your smaller bases that only need an occassional resupply, put them on the auto convoy system and the forget about them.

3) Put seldom played areas of the map under computer control

4) Forget about production as Japan. Once you have your auto convoy set up to move oil for resource bases, the default production pretty much follows historical patterns. Wait until you're done with your conquest phase and things settle down, then tweek with it. Also, wait for someone to post the specifics on increasing particular things, then copy them if that's also what you want.

(in reply to Kharkov)

Post #: 39

RE: Is the game I was hoping for - 7/9/2004 4:07:16 PM

Black Cat

Posts: 615
Joined: 7/4/2002
Status: offline

Anyone that complains about WITP hasn`t played it much or isn`t into logical thought processes.

This program is not just a evolution in War Games, it is a Revoultion in Computer Simulations, much like Pac War was when introduced years ago and compared to the simple toys available then....and like PW it really does work and work well ( so far

)

This Great Simulation can be whatever you want it to be in Game terms, play short scenarios, PBEM short scenarios, most areas on Computer Control, Auto Convoy or like me play the full Campaign on 1 day turns with all under human Control.

Make the Grand Stratigic decisions and then be the Area Commanders Staff putting the Operational Plans together, the men and ships and planes, and then step into the roll of Fleet Commander to implement the plan. Then take charge of a TF and sail into battle and win...or perhaps lose HMS Repulse and POW because the Area Commander ( you ) forgot to tell the Air Force commander ( you also

) to provide CAP for the use of ( you ) the Fleet Commander, who of course never thought of it on his own. ....emmm sounds somewhat like WW II in the Pacific to me.

(in reply to brisd)

Post #: 40

RE: Is the game I was hoping for - 7/9/2004 4:16:46 PM

ZOOMIE1980

Posts: 1284
Joined: 4/9/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Black Cat

Anyone that complains about WITP hasn`t played it much or isn`t into logical thought processes.

This program is not just a evolution in War Games, it is a Revoultion in Computer Simulations, much like Pac War was when introduced years ago and compared to the simple toys available then....and like PW it really does work and work well ( so far )

This Great Simulation can be whatever you want it to be in Game terms, play short scenarios, PBEM short scenarios, most areas on Computer Control, Auto Convoy or like me play the full Campaign on 1 day turns with all under human Control.

Make the Grand Stratigic decisions and then be the Area Commanders Staff putting the Operational Plans together, the men and ships and planes, and then step into the roll of Fleet Commander to implement the plan. Then take charge of a TF and sail into battle and win...or perhaps lose HMS Repulse and POW because the Area Commander ( you ) forgot to tell the Air Force commander ( you also ) to provide CAP for the use of ( you ) the Fleet Commander, who of course never thought of it on his own. ....emmm sounds somewhat like WW II in the Pacific to me.

Much of the logistical stuff can be put on computer control, though. You can have individual transport TF's on computer control and you have the autoconvoy system for all those smallish rear bases than man small garrisons. I think the thread author started right out playing Japan and immediately got overwhelmed, thinking he had to control EVERYTHING from the get-to! I would suggest, at least the first time through as the Japanese player, get the conquest done, first, even putting your least favorite areas on computer control. Get your auto-convoy set up once you have the SRA secured. THEN play with some production.

Agreed with some though, the Production system needs a major SIMPLIFICATION and overhaul.

(in reply to Black Cat)

Post #: 41

RE: Is the game I was hoping for - 7/9/2004 4:28:27 PM

jhdeerslayer

Posts: 1194
Joined: 5/25/2002
From: Michigan
Status: offline

Maybe a way to turn Japanese production on or off (AI controlled) instead of on for the large scenarios. Maybe it is already in essence (like US) as long as you just ship oil to Japan as somebody suggested. When I ever get the gonads to play Japan, that is all I will do.

(in reply to ZOOMIE1980)

Post #: 42

RE: Not the game I was hoping for - 7/9/2004 4:37:55 PM

ZOOMIE1980

Posts: 1284
Joined: 4/9/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kid

If you could be more specific, on how to make production more user friendly I will be happy to add you sujestions to the list. They need to contain as much detail as possible. What should the button be called, what screen should it show up on, what haens when you select it.....

I actually prefered the original War In Russia production system. Not the 1993 DOS version, but the Old 1985 vintage C64 and Apple II versions. It was simple, but still fun to work with. Add a little more detail and scope to that and you have a much simpler system. Basically

1) Three baseline industries. Heavy Industry that consumes "resources". Refineries that produce fuel from oil. Power plants that consume a combination of fuel and resources.

2) Heavy industry produces "construction points" and "consumption points".

3) Construction points are used to build factories and shipyards. You can choose to build more HI, light industry (for supplies), armament, aircraft, vehicles, more refineries and more power plants. The end product factories use consumption points created by Heavy Industry. All factories require power to run.

4) Things like Aircraft factories can be specialized into specific models. Shipyards product "ship building points" which can be used to generate a ship after a certain number of points are accumulated, or, you could use them like aircraft factories, devoting them to specific shipclasses....

And the calcs are all simple integer arithmatic. A power plant needs X resource points and Y oil to generate Z power points. HI needs X resources to produce Y construction points and Z consumption points. Each end product factory consumes X consumption points and Y power points per day and produces Z of whatever it makes....

No engines that require 18 or 36 or whatever to then go to aircraft, etc....., no (X.YYY + Z.WWWW) * (Rand() + 30/30) type nonsense....

< Message edited by ZOOMIE1980 -- 7/9/2004 2:40:50 PM >

(in reply to siRkid)

Post #: 43

RE: Is the game I was hoping for - 7/9/2004 4:39:54 PM

ZOOMIE1980

Posts: 1284
Joined: 4/9/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Deerslayer

Maybe a way to turn Japanese production on or off (AI controlled) instead of on for the large scenarios. Maybe it is already in essence (like US) as long as you just ship oil to Japan as somebody suggested. When I ever get the gonads to play Japan, that is all I will do.

Yes, the Japanse production system is something I'm putting off for a long while and is the last great learning curve I have to climb....I'm kind of hoping I can just ship oil and let the thing go on it's own....

(in reply to jhdeerslayer)

Post #: 44

RE: Not the game I was hoping for - 7/9/2004 4:41:55 PM

ZOOMIE1980

Posts: 1284
Joined: 4/9/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ZOOMIE1980

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kid

If you could be more specific, on how to make production more user friendly I will be happy to add you sujestions to the list. They need to contain as much detail as possible. What should the button be called, what screen should it show up on, what haens when you select it.....

I actually prefered the original War In Russia production system. Not the 1993 DOS version, but the Old 1985 vintage C64 and Apple II versions. It was simple, but still fun to work with. Add a little more detail and scope to that and you have a much simpler system. Basically

1) Three baseline industries. Heavy Industry that consumes "resources". Refineries that produce fuel from oil. Power plants that consume a combination of fuel and resources.

2) Heavy industry produces "construction points" and "consumption points".

3) Construction points are used to build factories and shipyards. You can choose to build more HI, light industry (for supplies), armament, aircraft, vehicles, more refineries and more power plants. The end product factories use consumption points created by Heavy Industry. All factories require power to run.

4) Things like Aircraft factories can be specialized into specific models. Shipyards produce "ship building points" which can be used to generate a ship after a certain number of points are accumulated, or, you could use them like aircraft factories, devoting them to specific shipclasses....

And the calcs are all simple integer arithmatic. A power plant needs X resource points and Y oil to generate Z power points. HI needs X resources to produce Y construction points and Z consumption points. Each end product factory consumes X consumption points and Y power points per day and produces Z of whatever it makes....

No engines that require 18 or 36 or whatever to then go to aircraft, etc....., no (X.YYY + Z.WWWW) * (Rand() + 30/30) type nonsense....

(in reply to ZOOMIE1980)

Post #: 45

RE: Is the game I was hoping for - 7/9/2004 4:42:44 PM

jhdeerslayer

Posts: 1194
Joined: 5/25/2002
From: Michigan
Status: offline

A nice matrix/chart that somebody is already working on would be helpful as well. Trying to sort this info out in text format in the manual adds to the confusion I think. I think if we didn't have to worry about engines and just build planes straight that would simplify as well.

Constructive criticism for a spectacular game.

(in reply to ZOOMIE1980)

Post #: 46

RE: Is the game I was hoping for - 7/9/2004 4:50:21 PM

ZOOMIE1980

Posts: 1284
Joined: 4/9/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Deerslayer

A nice matrix/chart that somebody is already working on would be helpful as well. Trying to sort this info out in text format in the manual adds to the confusion I think. I think if we didn't have to worry about engines and just build planes straight that would simplify as well.

Constructive criticism for a spectacular game.

Yea, if there is one thing to ditch, it's the engine silliness. Gross overkill. I can probably get my hands around the rest reasonably well, but that one component is a bit over the top....

(in reply to jhdeerslayer)

Post #: 47

RE: Not the game I was hoping for - 7/9/2004 4:57:49 PM

ZOOMIE1980

Posts: 1284
Joined: 4/9/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ZOOMIE1980

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kid

If you could be more specific, on how to make production more user friendly I will be happy to add you sujestions to the list. They need to contain as much detail as possible. What should the button be called, what screen should it show up on, what haens when you select it.....

I actually prefered the original War In Russia production system. Not the 1993 DOS version, but the Old 1985 vintage C64 and Apple II versions. It was simple, but still fun to work with. Add a little more detail and scope to that and you have a much simpler system. Basically

1) Three baseline industries. Heavy Industry that consumes "resources". Refineries that produce fuel from oil. Power plants that consume a combination of fuel and resources.

2) Heavy industry produces "construction points" and "consumption points".

3) Construction points are used to build factories and shipyards. You can choose to build more HI, light industry (for supplies), armament, aircraft, vehicles, more refineries and more power plants. The end product factories use consumption points created by Heavy Industry. All factories require power to run.

4) Things like Aircraft factories can be specialized into specific models. Shipyards product "ship building points" which can be used to generate a ship after a certain number of points are accumulated, or, you could use them like aircraft factories, devoting them to specific shipclasses....

And the calcs are all simple integer arithmatic. A power plant needs X resource points and Y oil to generate Z power points. HI needs X resources to produce Y construction points and Z consumption points. Each end product factory consumes X consumption points and Y power points per day and produces Z of whatever it makes....

No engines that require 18 or 36 or whatever to then go to aircraft, etc....., no (X.YYY + Z.WWWW) * (Rand() + 30/30) type nonsense....

Oh yea, drop the manpower stuff. Completely and totally UNNECESSARY. Troops available for combat reinforcements should be a function of solely population and national conscription rate, maybe modified by some sort of the national morale factor. And it should be a NATIONAL pool. Subract from the population figure the manpower needed to man the factories times a multiplier for providing essential civilian services (somebody has to man the checkout stand at the grociery store....).

< Message edited by ZOOMIE1980 -- 7/9/2004 2:59:03 PM >

(in reply to ZOOMIE1980)

Post #: 48

RE: Is the game I was hoping for - 7/9/2004 5:12:36 PM

mc3744

Posts: 1957
Joined: 3/9/2004
From: Italy
Status: offline

Another way to make it a bit 'easier' is PBEM team play (Grand Capaign).

We (3 of us) just started a PBEM game where the Allies split the effort against one IJN opponent.
The reason why we picked the Allies to split is because it would be very difficult to split the IJN without some 'game engine' help.

It would help a lot the availability of a system to allow us to play parallel, so that I don't have to wait for my Allies allied

buddy to finish his move, save and mail the file to me.

Are we the only one interested in teamplay btw?

(in reply to Moose 4075)

Post #: 49

RE: Is the game I was hoping for - 7/9/2004 5:21:16 PM

mavraam

Posts: 436
Joined: 5/11/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Black Cat

Anyone that complains about WITP hasn`t played it much or isn`t into logical thought processes.

This program is not just a evolution in War Games, it is a Revoultion in Computer Simulations, much like Pac War was when introduced years ago and compared to the simple toys available then....and like PW it really does work and work well ( so far )

This Great Simulation can be whatever you want it to be in Game terms, play short scenarios, PBEM short scenarios, most areas on Computer Control, Auto Convoy or like me play the full Campaign on 1 day turns with all under human Control.

Make the Grand Stratigic decisions and then be the Area Commanders Staff putting the Operational Plans together, the men and ships and planes, and then step into the roll of Fleet Commander to implement the plan. Then take charge of a TF and sail into battle and win...or perhaps lose HMS Repulse and POW because the Area Commander ( you ) forgot to tell the Air Force commander ( you also ) to provide CAP for the use of ( you ) the Fleet Commander, who of course never thought of it on his own. ....emmm sounds somewhat like WW II in the Pacific to me.

I agree. I've started thinking of this thing as not so much a war game, but as a naval combat simulation. And let's not forget the obvious that this was the largest and most complex naval war in human history by leaps and bounds. And I love the fact that they had the guts to model every single war ship in the war! It reminds me of a board game I saw years ago, it was called 'Dreadnoughts' I think. I could have that name wrong, it was a long time ago.

I truly don't understand what all the complaints are about! This game comes with so many 'training wheels' like auto convoy, auto production, computer controlled sectors, computer controlled sub patrols, etc. Heck you can even have the computer choose the ships for your task force if you want! I use that one for the 'boring' TF's like replenish or oil trans, but I choose my own ships for air combat and bombardment

.

I think people who are complaining are just a little intimidated about diving in and playing.

I think if the first thing you did was play the full camaign on complete human controll as the Japs you would be overwhelmed!!!

Here's a tip I found very usefull:

Print out the tutorial! On plain paper, b&w hopefully at your employer's expense

. Its practically impossible to alt-tab between the game and the online version. You're only going to need it once but it is really helpfull to play through the tut at least one time and maybe even make a few notes along the way. Then when the tut ends, I switched to Jap computer controll and played it out a couple of times. I learned a lot of tricks along the way (after nearly having my beloved Iowa sunk

).

I also had the manual itself printed at Kinko's although that wasn't cheap. But that's only because I already spend 10 hours / day in front of a terminal!

As for me, I will probably never play the full campaign under complete human control, I just don't have time. But that's just my choice, I prefer the smaller scenarios each one of which would justify being called a wargame in its own right!

I hope this thing ends up being like SPWAW with hundreds of user created scenarios.

Anyway, thanks to Matrix! We have enough mindless FPS's and RTS's out there.

_____________________________

(in reply to Black Cat)

Post #: 50

RE: Is the game I was hoping for - 7/9/2004 5:28:27 PM

ZOOMIE1980

Posts: 1284
Joined: 4/9/2004
Status: offline

The problem many are having is the time investment. With PACWAR we could devote 20hrs a week and play the entire major campaign in 6-8 weeks or so. Looks like that investment is going be 6-8 MONTHS now. Many of us have a life. I have other things (like getting my own game libraries done to start writing my own games) I'd eventually like to do. What I am afraid of is after six weeks or so of this game, I'm going to want to do something else for a while, and thus, probably NEVER finish a single campaign.

I love the game, so far, but I'm still not sold if the scope and pace is something I'm willing to live with in the long term...

(in reply to mavraam)

Post #: 51

RE: Is the game I was hoping for - 7/9/2004 5:30:33 PM

Toro

Posts: 578
Joined: 4/9/2002
From: 16 miles southeast of Hell (Michigan, i.e.), US
Status: offline

This game is daunting, no doubt. But I also found PacWar very daunting, so daunting that I could never get into it, and probably because of the level of control I could NOT have over my forces (sorry, misson-only orders were a pain to me). WitP is the new generation of gaming I was looking for, as it contains the level of detail I need to actually recreate the Pacific War (the REAL war, my Navy self says

).

And, despite what someone said above, UV DID prepare me (us?) for this game. Not saying UV was a prerequisite, but it definitely trained me on what to expect, how to control shipping, forces, etc, etc.

My goal (and recommendation) thus far: forget the production side, learn the (new) mechanics of using the fighting forces and general base supply. Skip auto-supply initially (me, mostly because I haven't gotten to that portion of the manual yet

). Playing the Rising Sun scen; I've already (after a few days playing) most of the new mechanics down. Next, tackle a larger scen, then play with production. I'm looking at the BIG scen in about a month, after I've mastered step-by-step the other aspects of the game, er, WitP.

Just my thoughts...

(in reply to mc3744)

Post #: 52

RE: Is the game I was hoping for - 7/9/2004 5:38:23 PM

ZOOMIE1980

Posts: 1284
Joined: 4/9/2004
Status: offline

At first I though auto-convoy was completely useless, wasted code.... But I'm starting to reconsider. I look at the small-garrison, small sized, rear bases, like Palamyra, Johnston Is, etc.... They consume supples each day and will eventually run short. I don't care to check these places each turn to see if they need something. Auto convoy to the rescue! I can devote a small number of ships in SF for this and thus when Canton Is makes a request, it will get a small TF of two or so AK's, loaded up and sent! I never have to bother with stuff again for the remainder of the war.... Will become increasingly useful as Allies start pushing the Japs back. You still have to maintain all those atolls you retake. PACWAR did this for you automatically. WiTP will do so as well, you just have to tell it too.

< Message edited by ZOOMIE1980 -- 7/9/2004 3:40:14 PM >

(in reply to Toro)

Post #: 53

RE: Is the game I was hoping for - 7/9/2004 5:40:59 PM

jhdeerslayer

Posts: 1194
Joined: 5/25/2002
From: Michigan
Status: offline

I agree Zoomie. That is the intent of these buggers and how I use them. A form of insurance me thinks and a smidgen less managing to do.

(in reply to ZOOMIE1980)

Post #: 54

RE: Not the game I was hoping for - 7/9/2004 6:49:31 PM

Kharkov

Posts: 33
Joined: 6/7/2003
From: Birmingham
Status: offline

I think Matrix and 2by3 have done a remarkable job in producing this
game, but some of the design decisions have impacted on my enjoyment of the
game.
All I wanted was an updated PacWar instead I got a monster that kind of
lost its head up its own arse.

For me the main campaign is the only scenario worth playing. Its not
fun when I take 30 mins to complete a turn only to have the game clock
progress another 24 hours. On a basis of taking 15 minutes to complete one game
turn, to play out 5 years game time would require someone playing 2
hours per night for 227 days!! My God, I could be dead of old age before I
finish this game.
This for me is the major drawback of WitP. With games taking so long to play, the thought of spending another year playing the other side quite frankly appalls me.
Give us the option of 1 turn = 1 weeks game time, that way at least
we'll have a fighting chance of finishing the main campaign and actually
getting some re-playability out of the game.

Its not fun reading the chapter on Production for the fifth time trying
to get to grips with the complexities of the system . Seriously guys, this
is way over the top, we're wargamers not economists. Something needs to be
done about it but since I cant understand what the hells going on
anyway I cant offer any suggestions to improve it. All I know is I want the
relevant information visible infront of me in a readable and easily understood
manner when I'm tinkering with factory production

A suggestion to speed up the turn processing would make would be an
option for the user to filter out phases he doesn't want to see. This could be
repeated to cover the various HQ areas. For example, I may I want to
view all the air combat in the SW pacific but would like to skip all the air
combat over China.

I would also suggest to Matrix that on the next game you develop you
involve beta testers that aren't all hardcore wargamers. Least that way
you have opinions on the game design from different perspective. As on
poster said earlier, sometimes less is more.

(in reply to Kharkov)

Post #: 55

RE: Is the game I was hoping for - 7/9/2004 7:11:39 PM

Nikademus

Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mc3744

Are we the only one interested in teamplay btw?

I might be interested in having a try at it. Sounds intriguing. Is there an overall commander who delegates resources? (i.e. an "Admiral King"?) heh....will there be email pleas for more ships and men for your area of command?

_____________________________

(in reply to mc3744)

Post #: 56

RE: Not the game I was hoping for - 7/9/2004 7:22:15 PM

Didz

Posts: 728
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kid
If you could be more specific, on how to make production more user friendly I will be happy to add you sujestions to the list. They need to contain as much detail as possible. What should the button be called, what screen should it show up on, what haens when you select it.....

In operational control terms I would expect to be able to request/demand production and research priorities and leave the computerised production managers to handle the re-allocation of resources that make it all happen.

So, if for instance I considered that my top priority had to be the development and replacement of my current decrepid fighter planes then I would allocate maximum priority to pushing for development ina research in that area. Bombarding the war office with memo demanding their attention until some desk jockey got off his backside and started reassigning production in that area.

I don't think for an operational wargame it has to be any more complicated than that, except perhaps that when the planes become available I might want a say in which squadrons get them first.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ZOOMIE1980
At first I though auto-convoy was completely useless, wasted code.... But I'm starting to reconsider. I look at the small-garrison, small sized, rear bases, like Palamyra, Johnston Is, etc.... They consume supples each day and will eventually run short. I don't care to check these places each turn to see if they need something.

Exactly. The big inconsistency I found in UV was that on the one hand we were being told 'this is an operational level wargame therefore you cannot expect to be able to dictate which squadrons are used to target what' and yet at the same time it seemed that there were no subordinate commanders anywhere with enough nounce to work out they were short of toilet paper and needed to requisition some fresh supplies.

The balance just seemed way out of whack.

< Message edited by Didz -- 7/9/2004 5:26:34 PM >

_____________________________

Didz
Fortis balore et armis

(in reply to siRkid)

Post #: 57

RE: Not the game I was hoping for - 7/9/2004 8:53:59 PM

EMO

Posts: 12
Joined: 6/30/2004
Status: offline

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: carnifex

Kharkov, are you aware that you can set everything to computer control? You don't need to manage anything. Go to the sector map, click Computer Control for all the zones, then go into the main map and you can individually set stuff to human control. If you set a base to human control all the units in the hex and task forces that call that base home become human controlled.

This way you can only control the 4th fleet if you want to (or any other force) and you don't have to worry about anything else.

That's my plan. I'll need the training wheels of computer control at first for the full campaign while I figure out about a million details of how everything works. I figure I'll take one sector and let the CPU handle the rest.

But I think this thing ROCKS! I'm still dickin around with the Tutorial scenario for the third time, I learn better that way.

I've never played a naval war game before, I've always been a land guy. The Navy has always existed for the explicit purpose of getting my troops and supplies to the battle so the 'real war' can begin. But this game has converted me.

I know it has its problems, unrealistic ASW possibly, and some other minor gitches but how could anyone expect anything else with a game this complex???

This is the best war game I've ever played. IMHO.

This is the 'beauty' of Matrix/Gary Grigsby games. The wealth of detail is there to enjoy or you can turn it over to your 'subordinates'-the computer AI and concentrate on being Nimitz instead of a logistics officer.

(in reply to mavraam)

Post #: 58

RE: Is the game I was hoping for - 7/9/2004 9:06:58 PM

UncleBuck

Posts: 633
Joined: 10/31/2003
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: offline

Hey Wodin, does the name Avalon Hill mean anything to you? The people that I believe are going to play this game are the ones like me. the ones that in the 70's and 80's played Squad Leader, Dawn Patrol, Panzer Leader and all of the other GIANT map and dice games. I once played Panzer Leader Invasion Normandy for 2 years, with the same friends on the same game. This had no cool animations, no pictures of real ships and planes. It was a bunch, and I mean a bunch of cardboard punch outs and a big paper, later I laminated it, map. I like the big logistics and maneuver war game. I like being the General and Admiral or if you play all of the sectors in the grand campaign, a mix of the Secretary of War, NAVY, and ARMY as well as Nimitz. I would hope you would try the game out. I hope that you find it enjoyable but, hey, it may not happen. If you are finding it to complex, or intimidating or whatever to run everything, try being a theater commander and let the AT run the rest of the map. I am doing this now. I am only playing the Allies in the grand campaign as Commander West Coast. I own everything from Alaska to Mexico and out to Wake. That�s it. The AI is doing the rest. I get to send supplies to my bases and such, I run my little portion of the ocean and that�s it. I figured that until I got a handle on how this thing works for sure, it was all I could handle. The nice part is as I feel I can control more of it I can self promote. Give it a try; see if scaling back how much you control helps. IF it doesn't then maybe you could sell off what you have on Ebay.

UB
TANSTAAFL!

(in reply to wodin)

Post #: 59

RE: Is the game I was hoping for - 7/9/2004 9:12:07 PM

mavraam

Posts: 436
Joined: 5/11/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ZOOMIE1980

I have other things (like getting my own game libraries done to start writing my own games) I'd eventually like to do.

I've been down that road a few times myself. You wana talk about time drag? That'll make WITP look like Tic-Tac-Toe!

Good luck though, I salute the effort!

< Message edited by mavraam -- 7/9/2004 7:12:31 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to ZOOMIE1980)

Post #: 60

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

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: Is the game I was hoping for