WITP vs Carriers AT War

WITP vs Carriers AT War (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion

Message

cpcunningham -> WITP vs Carriers AT War (6/12/2009 11:13:00 PM)
Hi, I'm interested in a war game covering the Pacific Theater of WWII. Looked at most of the info about both games. Familiar with SSG's Decisive series but wondering if Carriers is too limited in scope/variety (ie only carrier based strategy). Would be interested in the experiences of any here that have played both? Favourite? Why? Pros & cons, etc... Thx CC

FeurerKrieg -> RE: WITP vs Carriers AT War (6/12/2009 11:34:26 PM)
WITP takes a few years to play. CAW a few days?

V22 Osprey -> RE: WITP vs Carriers AT War (6/13/2009 12:29:36 AM)
Basicly, War in the Pacific:Grognard willing to dedicate years to a game.The complexity is unimaginable and is the most complex wargame I've ever seen.[X(] Carriers at War:It mostly about ship warfare, dont think it covers land engagements.I would get advanced tactics if you want land + sea battles with alot less complexity.

Sarge -> RE: WITP vs Carriers AT War (6/13/2009 1:44:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cpcunningham Hi, I'm interested in a war game covering the Pacific Theater of WWII. Looked at most of the info about both games. Familiar with SSG's Decisive series but wondering if Carriers is too limited in scope/variety (ie only carrier based strategy). Would be interested in the experiences of any here that have played both? Favourite? Why? Pros & cons, etc... Thx CC Don’t let them scare you off WITP, sure you can as the others point out spend over a year +/- playing out the PTO as I and many do , but I also have spend just a few days playing out scenarios such as Coral Sea. Hands down my all time fav in the world of PC wargaming , I have by far enjoyed and received more mileage out of WITP then any other title. Best advice is go down to the WITP forum and start researching what you will be getting into , which BTW the forum/community and it’s PTO knowledge is second to none , its simply staggering .

pasternakski -> RE: WITP vs Carriers AT War (6/13/2009 1:59:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sarge Don’t let them scare you off WITP, What Sarge said. Also, I do not find WitP to be that complex, just large and often tedious. The logistical details overwhelm some, but it is really just a matter of being patient. After the first turn or two, you can rattle off your orders in just a few minutes - of course, for your first few dozen games, you'll get your butt handed to you on a plate - with no ketchup - but that's how you learn. A great game (but I would wait for Admiral's Edition, a thorough update, before buying - see the AE threads for more).

bigred -> RE: WITP vs Carriers AT War (6/13/2009 2:05:21 AM)
Another option is Uncommon valor, the mother game of WitP. On a smaller scale and one campaign takes about a year to play. The smaller scale allows for time to study of game tactics and programing issues that effect units and play. Most of the effects of UV are also found in WitP. WitP has alot of extra's.

pasternakski -> RE: WITP vs Carriers AT War (6/13/2009 2:34:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bigred Another option is Uncommon valor, the mother game of WitP. On a smaller scale and one campaign takes about a year to play. The smaller scale allows for time to study of game tactics and programing issues that effect units and play. Most of the effects of UV are also found in WitP. WitP has alot of extra's. Yes, UV was a fine game in its own right, but WitP moved far beyond it, particularly in areas where UV was deficient (assigning a maximum range for air missions being one of the most vital advancements). As UV is a seven-year-old design, I no longer recommend it for purchase (and WitP contains several scenarios that approximate what UV offers; besides, there is a new game in the offing called "Carrier Force" that promises to do for UV what AE will do for WitP - gawd, how I hate acronyms...).

Titanwarrior89 -> RE: WITP vs Carriers AT War (6/13/2009 12:39:31 PM)
Uncommon Valor and Witp both are the best games on the theater. quote: ORIGINAL: bigred Another option is Uncommon valor, the mother game of WitP. On a smaller scale and one campaign takes about a year to play. The smaller scale allows for time to study of game tactics and programing issues that effect units and play. Most of the effects of UV are also found in WitP. WitP has alot of extra's.

dogancan -> RE: WITP vs Carriers AT War (6/13/2009 12:51:29 PM)
Take into account that UV is much cheaper than WItP. I suggest you to go for UV and see if you like the concept. If you do, then you can wait for the AE (admiral's edition) of WITP, while playing UV and counting bullets and beans to be sent to some small post in the southern pacific. That is what I do...

Sarge -> RE: WITP vs Carriers AT War (6/13/2009 1:07:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dogancan Take into account that UV is much cheaper than WItP. I suggest you to go for UV and see if you like the concept. If you do, then you can wait for the AE (admiral's edition) of WITP, while playing UV and counting bullets and beans to be sent to some small post in the southern pacific. That is what I do... Admiral's edition is not a stand alone game , you will need WITP also…[;)]

Lützow -> RE: WITP vs Carriers AT War (6/13/2009 2:02:44 PM)
WitP has also smaller scenarios, which can be finished on one or two days.

SuluSea -> RE: WITP vs Carriers AT War (6/13/2009 2:27:02 PM)
UV has 30 mile hex's and WITP are 60 miles. I do like WITP better than UV because of its an improved version of the game despite missing the 30 mile hex's. AE will be 40 mile hex's which should be a big improvement as I see it. I have and play all three, although take it with a grain of salt here's what I think. CAW- fun game play and lots of action in a short amount of time but the lack of scenarios provided will lead to less replay value, I do like the clouds/weather fronts provided however. Some user created scenarios but not many that I've seen. UV -fun game with lots of replay value for fans of the south pacific, mods/material provided from the fans of this game are good. The game does suffer from some gameplay issues that some take advantage of in PBEM which spoils that avenue for me. I like playing against the AI and the game comes with plenty of quality scenarios, especially if you impose your own house rules. WITP- I haven't been playing this but 6 months but the game has taken me by storm. Plenty of user created material / mods for this game. Great game but by July '42 the AI on the Japanese side is bad and has lost its way. Case in point the KB parking off the coast of Port Moresby in Sept. '42 and letting my LBA rake it, despite the IJA having overwhelming force in China not making any moves to gain more resources.... Recently I started playing as the Japanese and found that its almost a different game, very fun. The AI team has made big strides for AE as far as I can read. I don't think you can go wrong with any of the choices but if it were my finances I'd purchase UV first.

Fallschirmjager -> RE: WITP vs Carriers AT War (6/13/2009 4:20:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pasternakski quote: ORIGINAL: Sarge Don’t let them scare you off WITP, What Sarge said. Also, I do not find WitP to be that complex, just large and often tedious. The logistical details overwhelm some, but it is really just a matter of being patient. After the first turn or two, you can rattle off your orders in just a few minutes - of course, for your first few dozen games, you'll get your butt handed to you on a plate - with no ketchup - but that's how you learn. A great game (but I would wait for Admiral's Edition, a thorough update, before buying - see the AE threads for more). I think this is the best way to describe WitP. It is not a complex game just a very large game.

sapper_astro -> RE: WITP vs Carriers AT War (6/13/2009 4:22:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cpcunningham Hi, I'm interested in a war game covering the Pacific Theater of WWII. Looked at most of the info about both games. Familiar with SSG's Decisive series but wondering if Carriers is too limited in scope/variety (ie only carrier based strategy). Would be interested in the experiences of any here that have played both? Favourite? Why? Pros & cons, etc... Thx CC What other wargames do you own and enjoy? And just as important, what other wargames do you/have you owned and disliked? And what reasons for the like/dislike. This will allow some of us to pinpoint whether you would prefer WItP or CaW.

dogancan -> RE: WITP vs Carriers AT War (6/13/2009 6:54:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sarge quote: ORIGINAL: dogancan Take into account that UV is much cheaper than WItP. I suggest you to go for UV and see if you like the concept. If you do, then you can wait for the AE (admiral's edition) of WITP, while playing UV and counting bullets and beans to be sent to some small post in the southern pacific. That is what I do... Admiral's edition is not a stand alone game , you will need WITP also…[;)] oops, my mistake. [:)] but still, it may be a reasonble choice to begin with the cheaper choice and see if it fits to your taste...

cpcunningham -> RE: WITP vs Carriers AT War (6/14/2009 3:09:14 AM)
Thanks for all the responses. It's one of the selling points for the games offered By Matrix: the willingness of their forum users to share their knowledge and experience. I'm someone who has only recently come back to wargaming, having last played the board game versions, and enjoying the new lease of playability on computer (I'm kicking myself for all the boardgames I sold at garage sales). One I enjoyed playing was "Midway" and so my attraction to Carriers at War. I'm leaning towards WITP. As I mentioned, I like the engine and the tactical mechanics behind SSG's Decisive Battles games. And I suspect the same kind of interesting playability in their Carrier At War engine. But the scope (land/sea/air/economics) of WITP is attracting me, as well the re-playability WITP, and that it is about to receive an expansion/update with the AE. I'll let you know what happens. Thx.[:)]

Llyranor -> RE: WITP vs Carriers AT War (6/14/2009 4:55:23 PM)
Can't attest for WITP, since the game intimidates me. But I was somewhat disappointed in Carriers at War. It was a tad too 'beer and pretzels' for me.

Ike99 -> RE: WITP vs Carriers AT War (6/14/2009 8:08:05 PM)
quote: besides, there is a new game in the offing called "Carrier Force" that promises to do for UV what AE will do for WitP [8\|] Don´t hold your breath for this. quote: Can't attest for WITP, since the game intimidates me. But I was somewhat disappointed in Carriers at War. It was a tad too 'beer and pretzels' for me. If WITP is too large and Carriers at War too simple, I think UV is what you want.

pasternakski -> RE: WITP vs Carriers AT War (6/14/2009 8:55:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ike99 quote: besides, there is a new game in the offing called "Carrier Force" that promises to do for UV what AE will do for WitP [8\|] Don´t hold your breath for this. quote: ...and you are speaking on behalf of Matrix?

Ike99 -> RE: WITP vs Carriers AT War (6/14/2009 9:12:25 PM)
quote: ...and you are speaking on behalf of Matrix? No.

GenChaos33 -> RE: WITP vs Carriers AT War (6/15/2009 3:42:27 AM)
Don't forget, CAW as the stupid CVs at station when air strikes/flights are in the air.

sapper_astro -> RE: WITP vs Carriers AT War (6/15/2009 3:59:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GeneralChaos Don't forget, CAW as the stupid CVs at station when air strikes/flights are in the air. This is what happened, unless the aircraft were given coordinates to rebase somewhere else.

V22 Osprey -> RE: WITP vs Carriers AT War (6/15/2009 4:05:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ike99 quote: besides, there is a new game in the offing called "Carrier Force" that promises to do for UV what AE will do for WitP [8\|] Don´t hold your breath for this. quote: Can't attest for WITP, since the game intimidates me. But I was somewhat disappointed in Carriers at War. It was a tad too 'beer and pretzels' for me. If WITP is too large and Carriers at War too simple, I think UV is what you want. Not exactly.WitP has smaller scenarios as well so this gives no reason to buy UV unless you want smaller hex scale.Even then, the Admiral's edition add-on will bring the scale down to almost UV scale.

Ron Belcher -> RE: WITP vs Carriers AT War (6/15/2009 4:14:13 AM)
Well, if I may... CAW is strictly Carriers. You won't have any control of your submarines, supplies nor land based ops. Way big difference with CAW also very few scenarios. Unfortunately. However, it does have a scenario editor. Just don't look for anything fancy in that department either. WitP is not for the easy going, casual gamer. I can say that much! However, I am always learning something when it comes to WitP. It's not that the game is intensive (...hehe which it is!), it's a patient learning curve! Takes getting used to riding a bike without training wheels for the full experience!!![:D]

Terminus -> RE: WITP vs Carriers AT War (6/15/2009 5:45:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pasternakski quote: ORIGINAL: Ike99 quote: besides, there is a new game in the offing called "Carrier Force" that promises to do for UV what AE will do for WitP [8\|] Don´t hold your breath for this. quote: ...and you are speaking on behalf of Matrix? Apparently so... Funny, I never saw him in any development forum for some reason...

Ike99 -> RE: WITP vs Carriers AT War (6/15/2009 6:37:17 AM)
quote: Funny, I never saw him in any development forum for some reason... Strange, no one ever seems to see any of the developers on any forum.

Joe D. -> RE: WITP vs Carriers AT War (6/16/2009 1:01:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dogancan Take into account that UV is much cheaper than WItP ... And PacWar is even cheaper than both; in fact, it's a free download on this forum. I own both UV and CaW and have found the naval battles in the latter to be more realistic. However, CaW is limited in both scope and replayability, i.e., there are still not enough CaW scenarios available, and I don't see any coming down the pipe. In fact, the CaW forum has "cobwebs". That said, it's always fun to fire-it-up and play a game or two, as opposed to trying to set-up a PBEM Grand Campaign in WitP.

sapper_astro -> RE: WITP vs Carriers AT War (6/16/2009 3:03:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Joe D. quote: ORIGINAL: dogancan Take into account that UV is much cheaper than WItP ... And PacWar is even cheaper than both; in fact, it's a free download on this forum. I own both UV and CaW and have found the naval battles in the latter to be more realistic. However, CaW is limited in both scope and replayability, i.e., there are still not enough CaW scenarios available, and I don't see any coming down the pipe. In fact, the CaW forum has "cobwebs". That said, it's always fun to fire-it-up and play a game or two, as opposed to trying to set-up a PBEM Grand Campaign in WitP. Damn shame that this is the case. I noticed that SSG have not even gathered the user made content and put it on their website, though they have for all their other games. Consequently, you have to go strolling through the forums, digging up posts that contain the links to the scenario downloads. It seems like a total lack of interest from them. Not the best way to make people interested unfortunately.

Joe D. -> RE: WITP vs Carriers AT War (6/16/2009 5:07:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sapper_astro ... It seems like a total lack of interest from them. Not the best way to make people interested unfortunately. I can't understand this change; when CAW first came out, I used the OOB from Shattered Sword to argue that SSG gave the IJN had too much Zero CAP in the Midway scenario, and they actually fixed it! SSG issued a second patch which really improved the esthetics of gameplay, but then the bottom seemed to drop out for any future improvements as interest in CaW waned.

aztez -> RE: WITP vs Carriers AT War (6/16/2009 6:16:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ike99 quote: Funny, I never saw him in any development forum for some reason... Strange, no one ever seems to see any of the developers on any forum. ..with all do respect you are being "a bit" too harsh! [:)] As for the topic on hand. Witp will give you a lot of hours enjoyable gaming time. With AE around the corner you cannot go wrong with this title. Personally I think the learning curve isn't that deep... you just have a lot of things to do. Once on motion you can do a turn in 10-20 minutes. That isn't bad.. once you planning and preparing for major operations it can take anywhere betwee 1-3 hours though. However this is very seldom indeed.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.671875