Opinions? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Carriers At War



Message

JudgeDredd -> Opinions? (6/8/2007 10:36:36 AM)

I'd like to know what's so special about this? I'm intrigued about it and it may be something I'd like to add to my list. I had UV and liked it. I have WitP and it's a bit daunting at the moment.

I've read people saying they've had "years" of playing the original...how so with only a half dozen scenarios? I ask because a half dozen scenarios is fine if the AI is programmed in such a way as to not be predictable...different starting positions, different approaches etc.

How much "game" is in here?

Why this instead of War in the Pacific or Uncommon Valour or, indeed, Warplan Orange?

Thx for the replies?



Adam Parker -> RE: Opinions? (6/8/2007 10:52:10 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

I've read people saying they've had "years" of playing the original...how so with only a half dozen scenarios?


Well Judge, to me (not having played the original either) this is a different kettle of fish to SSG's Battlefront in terms of numbers of scens and value for dollar:

a) Battlefront had a benchmark to compete against in scale, in the form of HPS's Panzer Campaigns. Battlefront's 4 scenarios just didn't cut it in terms of value against an average PzC title of 25-30 scens and campaigns.

b) Carriers at War however has no such competition. HPS's Guadalcanal is a different kettle of fish being surface-surface oriented.

c) Further, in the boardgame world many an operational/tactical naval game has focused on just one battle - "Midway", "Jutland", "Bismark" come to mind. So CaW's spread is quite appealing.

d) It appears (from what I've seen) that with each CaW scenario, variations are offered and able to be selected pre-scen start.

e) The AI from all reports, does not present the same strategy twice. I've yet to verify this.

CaW right now is appearing to be a solid thinking man's beer and pretzels game and that is just what I need for my gaming time. I want something to fire up, think about and have immediate fun. I've always been fascinated by the history of naval search and destroy. Get's the heat pumping! I just wish I could print the damn rules.

My .02.
Adam.



mattyb -> RE: Opinions? (6/8/2007 11:43:12 AM)

I havent played any of the other titles buy this company or any of this games predecessors. ive gone thru the tutorial and played the coral sea scenario so far and im loving it ,it definetly is beer and pretzels and fills a gap . witp i have to and you cant sit down for and hour and play to switch off after work with this you definetly can 2 thumbs up.



CTB123 -> RE: Opinions? (6/8/2007 4:21:33 PM)

The Scenario Editor will add much to the game's longevity.  Just about any carrier battle of the war, even hypothetical ones, can be created.  Battles in other theaters could be done, such as Italy vs Britain.  You could do something based on the never completed German carriers.  All it takes is some research, data entry, and some art work.

Tony



LitFuel -> RE: Opinions? (6/8/2007 5:11:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd


Why this instead of War in the Pacific or Uncommon Valour or, indeed, Warplan Orange?

Thx for the replies?


Because this is actually fun as compared to WITP or UV where I feel like I'm figuring out my tax return.



Axeking -> RE: Opinions? (6/8/2007 5:11:53 PM)

If its anything like the predecessors, it is definitely not a beer and pretzels game. It will play very easily and relatively intuitively, but if you play with beer and pretz attitude - you will be slaughtered every time by the AI... :-)



tedhealy -> RE: Opinions? (6/8/2007 6:50:00 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

I'd like to know what's so special about this? I'm intrigued about it and it may be something I'd like to add to my list. I had UV and liked it. I have WitP and it's a bit daunting at the moment.

I've read people saying they've had "years" of playing the original...how so with only a half dozen scenarios? I ask because a half dozen scenarios is fine if the AI is programmed in such a way as to not be predictable...different starting positions, different approaches etc.

How much "game" is in here?

Why this instead of War in the Pacific or Uncommon Valour or, indeed, Warplan Orange?

Thx for the replies?


The number of scenarios is limited, but I think the AI makes up for it. You are never quite sure where the carriers will show up. Also you and the AI can move quite a bit over night when spotting is near impossible unless it's by a coastwatcher or sub. When dawn breaks you are never sure of the situation, hanging on every spotting report that trickles in. I think that is what makes the game what it is. The tension builds as you need to decide which reports to trust and if you can get your planes to the target and back all while avoiding enemy planes. A single mistake or hesitation can ruin your day if you get hit with a full strike.

It's less involved than WitP or UV. You are the admiral for a single engagement, that's it. I was doing the Coral Sea scenario in about 30 minutes. Quick, fun, and a nice challenge.



Erik Rutins -> RE: Opinions? (6/8/2007 10:59:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tedhealy
The number of scenarios is limited, but I think the AI makes up for it. You are never quite sure where the carriers will show up. Also you and the AI can move quite a bit over night when spotting is near impossible unless it's by a coastwatcher or sub. When dawn breaks you are never sure of the situation, hanging on every spotting report that trickles in. I think that is what makes the game what it is. The tension builds as you need to decide which reports to trust and if you can get your planes to the target and back all while avoiding enemy planes. A single mistake or hesitation can ruin your day if you get hit with a full strike.

It's less involved than WitP or UV. You are the admiral for a single engagement, that's it. I was doing the Coral Sea scenario in about 30 minutes. Quick, fun, and a nice challenge.


That's exactly it, really - I've yet to have a scenario play out the same way twice and it's perfect to play in between WITP PBEM turns. [;)]



Unhappy -> RE: Opinions? (6/9/2007 12:43:21 AM)

I've played and enjoyed a number of releases from Matrix.  I was excited about Carriers at War.  I downloaded it today.  It stinks.  Badly.  Can I get a refund or sell my serial number or something?  Please?



TheHellPatrol -> RE: Opinions? (6/9/2007 12:44:01 AM)

You guys did it right with CAW, congrats to Matrix and SSG! Very polished with a good tutorial and well written manual. I think CAW is a record trouble free release as the support forums are virtually empty...good job.
I have been without my DSL for a little more than 3 weeks[8|]...Man, when my satellite was installed yesterday morning was i suprised: CAW, Campaign Series, FOF Official Patch and some very promising games coming up[&o]



JudgeDredd -> RE: Opinions? (6/9/2007 2:08:49 AM)

Well, I took the plunge and I am pleasantly surprised...

Game is veryy polished. Tooltips are a godsend in wargames. Well done. Game seems like it can swing between easy and intricate.

I played the Wake Island? scenario and and was gobsmacked to see I had won, when I lost a shed load of ships...including all 3 carriers! But maybe I have to up the ante...just a bit surprised at my first outing.

It is very polished and smooth, though. I did have a CTD when I clicked the QUIT button ( of all places) and choose to send the message to SSG...maybe that's why the support forum is so quiet?

Anyway, thanks to all involved for allowing me the chance to play, what appears to be (in the early stages) a good game.

What I would say is the tutorials......some people (as I did initially) may find them very "short"...but looking back, they are great. Very simple and to the point. You aren't trying to cram everything into one tutorial. They (and especially some tutorials are extremely short, but they work as you don't get bored doing them and they keep the focus on the job at hand.

Well done and thank you for your efforts to please me in the gaming world.



blastpop -> RE: Opinions? (6/9/2007 3:29:09 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Unhappy

I've played and enjoyed a number of releases from Matrix. I was excited about Carriers at War. I downloaded it today. It stinks. Badly. Can I get a refund or sell my serial number or something? Please?


Hmmm, I'm not sure what was expected- but it seems very faithful in concept to previous CAW games. I feel it is one of my best computer wargame purchases. If one wants to control all aspects of how things are done- load the bombs, captain a ship, fly a plane- this isn't it. What you command is in essence what your historical counterpart did from his PoV. It plays well and is already managing to kick the tar out of me. Carriers at war is what a wargame should be!



sfbaytf -> RE: Opinions? (6/9/2007 5:21:13 AM)

If it ain't broke don't fix it. Huge fan of the original and I like the new version. Would have liked more scenarios, but what the heck. This is a perfect game for my laptop and will allow me to kill some time during the commute from work.



Hertston -> RE: Opinions? (6/9/2007 5:56:11 AM)

Very good game.

I've always had a soft spot for stuff where you can play to a finish quickly; ideal for filling the odd spare hour, particularly when that's all you find yourself with, and CaW pulls that off while still retaining a very 'wargame' feel. Looking forward to trying some MP with this one; that could be a real blast, I think.



freeboy -> RE: Opinions? (6/9/2007 6:12:44 AM)

re the polished and smoth comments.. perhaps one of the best out of the gate pre patched games for ease of use and info, I especially like that one can select the strike, tailor or, cordinate it or auto strike..... one of many fine features



Caltone -> RE: Opinions? (6/9/2007 6:20:24 AM)

Great fun, very stable and intuitive.  The tutorials are excellent, concise, and quick.  I've played a few scenarios so far and enjoyed everything I've seen.  If you liked the original or have an interest in the PTO then this is a must buy.



cdbeck -> RE: Opinions? (6/9/2007 7:12:44 AM)

Well, I was on the fence. But I think I am gonna jump. Especially now that I see Judge Dredd bought! [;)]

His standing on the sidelines was keeping me from fully committing!

SoM



Llyranor -> RE: Opinions? (6/9/2007 7:26:30 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: blastpop
What you command is in essence what your historical counterpart did from his PoV.

Would you say the game does a good job of putting you in the CO's shoes? Taking away some of the micromanagement details that the CO would deleguate to his subordinates, while not being an overly simplistic system? I don't want details for the sake of details, but I do enjoy realism when it heavily impacts the gameplay in a positive manner. I just hope the game isn't too shallow in the long run, though it doesn't seem like that's the case from what I've read so far. I'm still on the fence, and will probably wait for more impressions/reviews.

Are there any plans in terms of expanding the franchise?



flintlock -> Expansion (6/9/2007 8:11:45 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Llyranor

Are there any plans in terms of expanding the franchise?

See Gregor's post within this thread.



GenChaos33 -> RE: Expansion (6/9/2007 11:24:34 AM)

Wow, pretty fun little game! So far, played 2 Midway Scenarios as US. First Midway(historical), got wiped out plus I was learning as I played. Second Midway(Sara added), won the battle. 4 Jap CVs sunk to 2 US CVs lost. I was able to get a perfectly timed dawn first strike launched just before Jap counterstrike.  I like it, I luv it, I want some more of it!!! (CAW that is)



HobbesACW -> RE: Expansion (6/9/2007 2:42:35 PM)

First impressions after an hour of playing around are good. Looks like a fun quick game to play while waiting for
PBEM's to arrive for other games.

Chris



blastpop -> RE: Opinions? (6/9/2007 3:42:42 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Llyranor


quote:

ORIGINAL: blastpop
What you command is in essence what your historical counterpart did from his PoV.

Would you say the game does a good job of putting you in the CO's shoes?


I think think it does so admirably. There is enough detail and the game is playable in a reasonable amount of time. My first Coral Sea as the US, I was dead in two days, but had the potential for 6 more days. So there is a lot to consider...



ravinhood -> RE: Opinions? (6/9/2007 3:45:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins


quote:

ORIGINAL: tedhealy
The number of scenarios is limited, but I think the AI makes up for it. You are never quite sure where the carriers will show up. Also you and the AI can move quite a bit over night when spotting is near impossible unless it's by a coastwatcher or sub. When dawn breaks you are never sure of the situation, hanging on every spotting report that trickles in. I think that is what makes the game what it is. The tension builds as you need to decide which reports to trust and if you can get your planes to the target and back all while avoiding enemy planes. A single mistake or hesitation can ruin your day if you get hit with a full strike.

It's less involved than WitP or UV. You are the admiral for a single engagement, that's it. I was doing the Coral Sea scenario in about 30 minutes. Quick, fun, and a nice challenge.


That's exactly it, really - I've yet to have a scenario play out the same way twice and it's perfect to play in between WITP PBEM turns. [;)]


When do you have time to play WitP PBEM turns? You're suppose to be working 24/7 on those games that have been in production for years now. EIA and CWIF!!! Just to name a couple. ;)

As for the new version of Carriers at War I can't say anything about, I don't have it yet or have had the opportunity to play it at one of my friends houses. But, from the origional version I can say it was one of the best and few naval sims I would play. It has a beer n pretzels ease of use interface, but, I would hardly call it beer n pretzels gameplay. The AI is one of the few that can actually challenge the vets. I met my fate more than once against it, but, in this type of game a lot of what happens depends on the luck of who spots who first. Now, perhaps the AI gets a tad bit of an advantage in this spotting I don't know, it's said it doesn't cheat. ;)



Erik Rutins -> RE: Opinions? (6/9/2007 3:48:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ravinhood
When do you have time to play WitP PBEM turns? You're suppose to be working 24/7 on those games that have been in production for years now. EIA and CWIF!!! Just to name a couple. ;)


Yeah, actually I don't (used to though), but if I were, it would be perfect for that.

Regards,

- Erik



Hellcat_Canada -> RE: Opinions? (6/9/2007 5:54:04 PM)

Just to pipe in...

The interface is awesome, a one or two things that seem a bit strange to me though.  To detach ships are very specific situations required because it seems I can't do it whenever I want to.

Oh and the editing aspects are awesome, I already threw in a bunch of new tunes to listen to, and been generally messing around with the editor a bit.



Brigz -> RE: Opinions? (6/10/2007 3:48:39 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

I'd like to know what's so special about this? I'm intrigued about it and it may be something I'd like to add to my list. I had UV and liked it. I have WitP and it's a bit daunting at the moment.

I've read people saying they've had "years" of playing the original...how so with only a half dozen scenarios? I ask because a half dozen scenarios is fine if the AI is programmed in such a way as to not be predictable...different starting positions, different approaches etc.

How much "game" is in here?

Why this instead of War in the Pacific or Uncommon Valour or, indeed, Warplan Orange?

Thx for the replies?

Since you already bought this, my post may be moot, but I did own and play the original Carriers at War and can give a little info if my memory works.
The original game came with complete moding ability. You could edit everything including the plane and ship graphics if you were handy with a graphics program. Also SSG's excellent magazine, Run 5, published several scenarios which were also available on a disk. The origianl game went through several refinements and editions and eventually allowed the player to play any Carrier action anywhere in the world. I think the final product was called the Complete Carriers at War. For a DOS program it was quite ahead of it's time.
Base on the screenshots for the new Matrix edition it looks like they have done a good job of updating and cleaning up the game. I only hope they didn't include the optional attack animation that was interesting at first but soon became boring and slowed down play. Even if they did keep this feature I'm sure as in the origianl it is an option and can be turned off.

I'm pleased with what I've seen so far and will probably buy this new version. As a matter of fact I almost bought the hardcopy/download this morning but for some reason decided to wait. Maybe I'll download it tonight. Hope no one has had any issures with download and installation?



CJMello63 -> RE: Opinions? (6/10/2007 3:56:38 AM)

DL and install went fine, no issues.



Gregor_SSG -> RE: Opinions? (6/10/2007 5:50:12 AM)

Just to clarify, the AI doesn't cheat. It uses the exact same fallible sighting reports as the human player.

However, some sides have advantages in some tactical situations. The Japanese had their cruisers equipped with floatplanes and used them effectively for long range seraching. The US considered planes on surface ships as gunnery spotters. In a scenario like Coral Sea, the Japanese have their fleet carriers, surface units, light carrier, seaplane carrier and landbases all available for searching. That's a lot of eyes in the sky, and that makes it hard for the US who are mostly relying on their carrier based planes for searching, in the tactically contested areas of the map.

Gregor



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.796875