Differences, WITP vs UV? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945



Message

ratster -> Differences, WITP vs UV? (2/13/2002 2:51:00 AM)

After reading the overviews on the websites for these 2 games, a few question or 2; Other than the scale, 60 miles vs 30, theatre size, and production abilties/decisions in WITP, I'm wondering what the major differences will be?



crusher -> (2/14/2002 5:45:00 AM)

IS it true that UV is really a test and if it does good they will push WITP. i think alot of people want WITP.



crusher -> (2/14/2002 5:46:00 AM)

IS it true that UV is really a test and if it does good they will push WITP. i think alot of people want WITP.



crusher -> (2/14/2002 5:47:00 AM)

sorry about two posts



Lex Morton -> (2/14/2002 6:01:00 AM)

Hi Crusher you can remove totally or edit your posts by hitting the little icon with what looks like a bit of paper and a pen on it,which is the 4th one in from where it displays the time and date data about when you placed it originally. Lex Morton PS Please ignore this if you knew this already!



David Heath -> (2/14/2002 1:08:00 PM)

Hi Yes IV is going to be the base for WITP. We felt that we didn't want gamers saying that WITP is good but if they done that it would be great. So we wanted to get the base system down (this is UV) and get gamers input and ideas on how to make this a better game. Work on WITP is already being done and will be kicked into full gear once UV is done.



ratster -> (2/15/2002 1:28:00 AM)

quote:

Other than the scale, 60 miles vs 30, theatre size, and production abilties/decisions in WITP, I'm wondering what the major differences will be?
Sooo, then that's a yes, the above are the only basic differences? I read on a thread over in the UV board that scale has been reduced also to 50 miles a hex? Any chance they'll take it down to 30, like UV?



Joel Billings -> (2/15/2002 1:59:00 AM)

Not a chance. The major changes are as you indicated. Minor changes are not decided on yet. We believe the basic UV engine will do the trick with the need to add production and possibly alter ground combat somewhat. As is usually common when you can reuse an engine, we should be able to react to player comments and make the minor improvements that make the game more playable and enjoyable. Joel



ratster -> (2/15/2002 4:25:00 AM)

Gracias! Sounds great! With 50 mile hexes will there ever be more than one base per hex? If so, is it possible for bases in the same hex, to be controlled by opposing sides simultaneously?



Joel Billings -> (2/15/2002 7:24:00 AM)

Don't think so but not sure yet. Joel



A_Master -> (2/20/2002 3:18:00 AM)

I appreciate the honesty but it sounds very much like UV will be a marketed 'beta version' of the game. Fixes (as opposed to bugs) may not be corrected in UV and only added to WITP. Maybe it would be smart to release UV as a freeware version, with only one or two scenarios to generate interest and then release WITP with all the fixes and updates. [ February 19, 2002: Message edited by: A_Master ]



Paul Goodman -> (2/20/2002 3:58:00 AM)

I could be wrong, but somehow I suspect that releasing "freeware" would not be in Matrix' best interest. They've done quite enough of that! I'm sure that Matrix would heartily disagree with your judgement that UV is a beta for WitP. In my opinion, it was something that could be brought to market quicker than WitP, generate some cash flow and from which we could all learn. From that aspect, it does have certain aspects of a beta. No doubt, WitP will be a better game because of UV. No doubt, the hundreds of comments based on thousands of hours of play will point out aspects, perhaps problems, that were not originally caught. That will always be true of any game. That certainly doesn't mean it should be free. Paul



ratster -> (2/20/2002 4:21:00 AM)

Yeah, while they are based on the same game engine, there is quite a bit of difference between the two. Given the amount of time they're spending on UV, and the positive comments by beta testers, I doubt there will be many bugs or errors by the time they go gold. While its quite likely I'll purchase both, I'm more interested in UV. Most of the "challenging" or interesting battles happened in the span covered by UV. Plus I like the smaller scale, and not having to worry about production all the time(not to mention the rest of the Asian Pacific theatre). Besides, I agree that Matrix has provided plenty of freebies, time to start making some dough.



A_Master -> (2/20/2002 5:26:00 AM)

Going back over the 25+ years of computer gaming I can say I have atleast a dozen different pacific war computer games, varying from Guadalcanal, to War in the South Pacific, to PacificWar. From Commodore Pet to Apple to IBM PC. Some are real time. Most have been turned based. All have been different!! I can see a difference between say steelpanthersI (WW2) and III (Modern), or mechwarrior(ww2?) and brigade commander (modern?), but to redo the same game, change the hex size and package it differently is misleading and dammed near fraudulent. It would be better to release the update as UV II. If magazine reviewers get wind of the second release, they will probably tell people to wait for the second release, as most efforts for upgrades and fixes, patches etc.. will be applied to the new product as opposed to an old release.



ratster -> (2/20/2002 6:04:00 AM)

quote:

"... to War in the South Pacific, to PacificWar. ..."
I would say those 2 have about the same relationship UV will have with WitP. They/are/different games even though they use the same *basic* "engine".



crusher -> (2/20/2002 6:25:00 AM)

UV deals with a small area of the war and a specific time frame. Witp deals with the whole war from beginning to end and the entire pacific area including production.



byron13 -> (2/20/2002 8:11:00 AM)

Jeez, guys, these are two completely separate games. UV is essentially a battle game between the U.S. and the Japanese. While there are a lot of carriers, this is the one period of time in which there was real surface combat. The forces were essentially balanced and the grand tactical situation could have gone either way. This game is for those that like tactical combat on a large scale. WitP may use the same engine but I believe will have a completely different feel. There will be many more strategic decisions and will require long-range planning. I'm assuming that you'll have the entire CBI theatre to worry about. Do you focus in the Pacific or in the Far East? You'll have to worry about production. The Japanese have to race in the beginning to grab what they can and then start the long, hard withdrawal as the Allies slowly gain superiority. Carriers will rule this game. Personally, I would opt for WitP as a preference, but I will probably buy UV as well. Same engine? Fine, because there is a different feel. You can make a lot of very different cars using the same chassis. Don't think anyone would confuse a VW Beetle with a Karman Ghia. Matrix, you're doing it right.



Zakhal() -> (2/20/2002 12:01:00 PM)

I think it would be awesome to have 30mil hexes in witp too, but after looking at the current screenies, i think even with the larger hexes theres quite a lot of room there. Atleast more than in pacwar. What? Im drooling? Oh, sorry..*whipes his mouth*



Paul Goodman -> (2/20/2002 8:33:00 PM)

ratster, I think UV is really closer to WitP than just based on the same engine. UV is really a piece of WitP. If you think of it like that, why would you rather have UV, because basically all of what you get in UV will be included in WitP, plus all the other stuff. In terms of the South Pacific, I can see that UV might be better, because it should be easier to develop a reasonable A/I for the limited area. But for H2H, WitP would have to be the better game, wouldn't it, as many things outside of the South Pacific would have an influence on the area. What, for example, would you do as a Japanese player, if the U.S. attacked Wake in August, instead of Guadalcanal? Paul



stubby331 -> (2/20/2002 8:52:00 PM)

"UV is essentially a battle game between the U.S. and the Japanese." Lets just stick to Allies shall we Byron...
Historically, there were just as many aussie dead & woundeded (if not more) in the Ground area covered by UV as our American friends. If our friends at Matrix have done the game along historical lines (as an option at least).Then at least half of your ground forces & a good proportion of your LBA will be Australian.



Snigbert -> (2/20/2002 9:01:00 PM)

UV is definitely a complete game that could stand on its own, even if WitP were never released. It's also a very good game. I think UV is sort of a microcosm of WitP, where you can concentrate more on tactics then grand strategies...where the sinking of a carrier can ruin your carefully crafted plans. Whereas in WitP, losing control of an entire region, or the war for production, would be plan spoilers. If they released a game depicting the battle of Stalingrad, and then a game covering the entire Russian war using the same basic engine, would you think they were vastly different games?



stubby331 -> (2/20/2002 9:07:00 PM)

"UV is essentially a battle game between the U.S. and the Japanese." Lets just stick to Allies shall we Byron.... Historically, the Aussies suffered just as many dead and wounded (if not more) in the area set for UV as our American friends. Also, if our friends at Martix have got it right in UV, at LEAST half of your ground forces and a good proprtion of your LBA is going to be Australian. Beaut heh.



elmo3 -> (2/20/2002 9:08:00 PM)

Paul One reason for preferring UV over WitP _might_ be that WitP turns out to be "too much of a good thing". For example IMO Talonsoft's Battle OF Britain, by Grigsby and Brors, was the perfect size conflict for the game engine. In contrast I thought their Bombing the Reich, which used much of the same engine, was too much of a good thing. I'm a micromanager who doesn't like to delegate to the AI and it felt like there was just too much to handle. Of course I am not saying the same about UV or WitP at this stage, just that it might turn out to be a reason to prefer the former over the latter. elmo3 [ February 20, 2002: Message edited by: elmo3 ]



A_Master -> (2/21/2002 1:18:00 AM)

Snigbert comments are interesting, but I must disagree. War in Russia (SSI) and Stalingrad (Atomic) are/were two very different games. Both were enjoyable. There may have even been a Stalingrad scenario for WarInRussia, but I can't remember. What I do know, is if SSI tried to publish a scenario 'Stalingrad', with larger hexes and less functionality, prior to releasing War in Russia, they would have been creamed. Atomic did publish a number of games using the same platform, and they did well, but they reached a point were very few people purchased there software. I'm sure most wargamers purchased UTAH Beach (V for Victory # 1), maybe GOLD/SWORD/JUNO (I didn't) and possibly MarketGarden (I did because I've always been interested in this battle), but how may people purchased VolkariLuki, or D-Day or Stalingrad (I did but waited for it in the bargain bin). MATRIX should release UV as a scenario of WITP.



byron13 -> (2/21/2002 2:27:00 AM)

Stubby: Sincerest apologies for the comment. I actually caught that remark about the Americans before I sent the message and thought I had changed to Allies. No question that our fellow outcast colonists (I'm from the old penal colony now known as Georgia) saved our bacon during 1942. My point was that UV should largely leave out the Brits and all of the Chinese and the massive slugfest that took place in Asia. I still say UV is definitely a stand alone from WitP, and one could play one without getting tired of the other. UV is unique in the area it covers, the time it covers, and the type of combat it covers. I wouldn't get tired of WitP if I had a smaller version that focused on land combat in Asia or carrier warfare in the Central Pacific. The focus is different, the scale is different, and I simply believe that the feeling of playing UV will be different from playing WitP. If you want to play God and play a game that covers half the globe with political rules and production concerns, play WitP. But, if you wake up and just want to play some kick butt combat game on a grand tactical scale without worrying about the other garbage, play UV.



ratster -> (2/21/2002 3:50:00 AM)

Um, yeah, what you guys said, lol. UV isn't a subset contained within WiTP. The scale alone will have significant impact. The BOB vs. BTR is a good analogy. You won't be able to segregrate the South Pacific theatre out of WitP, as is done with UV. So playing WitP is not going to be just UV on a larger scale. Sure the WitP map encompasses the UV map, but again, at a different scale. And again, you can't *ignore* the rest of the Pacific theatre in WitP, as you can in UV(since its not part of the game). I do understand the "dissenting" viewpoint. I'm sure a lot people felt the same way when the orignal Wargame construction kit was released, after many games had been made, and sold, using the exact same engine. For me, I don't want to control the whole shebang all the time. The operational level of UV is perfect for me.



A_Master -> (2/21/2002 4:35:00 AM)

BTR? BOB the old apple version? Anyway, I'm sure that WitP will have atleast one scenario which encompasses UV, and atleast one for Guadalcanal, maybe more. A lot of games have scenarios with reduced maps and possibly different hex scales. I'm sure it would not be difficult to turn off production option, or schedule specific reinforcements at given dates and times. The more I think about this, the more I like the idea of delaying UV and include it with WitP.



ratster -> (2/21/2002 5:36:00 AM)

quote:

"BTR? BOB the old apple version? Anyway"
BTR = 12 o'clock high:Bombing the Reich
BOB = Battle of Britain(BTR's predecessor) They were both for WinX. If you want one of the ultimate expressions of micro-management possibilties, play the BTR campaign game(700 turns). You get to plan every/single/mission, if you like.



David Heath -> (2/21/2002 7:43:00 AM)

Hi Guys After reading over the tread I think some more details are in order. UV engine and scale have been set up to deal with the operation in the South Pacific. Lets start with what will look the same. The interface will be very close on things like air groups, naval units, forming task forces etc. The scale may seem minor but 30 miles to 50 miles is a big difference considering the amount of area we are covering in WITP. Before anyone asks WITP at 30 miles a hex is impossible but for the elite of machines. The WITP map alone was at 200 megs and we were not even done yet. WITP will be the largest wargame any of us at Matrix Games or 2by3 Games have ever try to develop. Here are some of the more major changes your find like land combat... you now have a chance fight the China campaign, Soviets units will also be represented in the game. There will be scenarios for the South Pacific but the scale alone will make it a very differnet game. Supply and the game turn length will also play huge differences in the game. The basic UV engine will be the same but SO much more will be added the it may very well take us longer to complete the WITP game then it took us to make UV and with with using UV as a base. The main reason we did Uncommon Valor first was we all loved what Gary had started and felt that WITP is going to be such a monster and we wanted to do it right. God only knows how long it will be before some else comes along to give you a detail wargame covering the Pacific Theather. We all could see how well UV would be a good starting point. We took that idea and felt that with the public playing UV we could use the feedback to fine tune the core game as well as give you a good South Pacific wargame. The ground combat in UV is limited and would not work for the whole WITP. We are considering making a Battle of Britain with Operation Sealion. This would be much more closer to UV then WITP. I hope this gives everyone some view as to the differnces and reasons behind what we are doing and thank you for your interest in our products. [ February 21, 2002: Message edited by: David Heath ] [ February 22, 2002: Message edited by: David Heath ]



Zakhal() -> (2/21/2002 8:02:00 AM)

Thanks for the info. Witp sounded awesome, now it sounds even more better. Im out of words.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.828125