russkly
Posts: 58
Joined: 7/27/2004
Status: offline
|
Well, I've pretty much finished the tutorial having taken Saipan but having not nearly enough infantry (2 x USMC divisions???) to take Guam. But that's not the point of the tutorial anyway, and nor of this thread...
Some reflections (FWIW):
Winners:
Incredibly detailed and well-researched game, that requires real thought and time.
Precisely what I was looking for in terms of a challenge to strategic and tactical ability.
The theatre is incredibly interesting due to it involving the truest form of combined arms imaginable.
The AI seems very capable (yet to really put it the test), and nothing has happened yet to make me say, "Well, that's rubbish!".
Improvement idea:
I find it really hard to keep track of everything that's happening, even in the tutorial, and I think this can be enhanced.
People on the forums have talked about keeping paper notes, etc., but there was a useful feature that I remember from the Talonsoft Napoleonic series, which helped ensure that all the main action was responded to:
This was a proactive feature whereby a main event summary list would be presented before each orders phase. This list would detail important events such as units arriving at their destination, HQ units moving out of range of their subordinate units, units coming under attack, etc. There was then the ability to click on any indivdual item to be taken to that unit's order/status screen.
Whilst WitP does have control mechanisms built in, such as lists of naval, air, or ground units, they require the player to seek and activate them, or click on each unit's icon in each hex to find out about command status, supply status, morale status, etc. Even in the little tutorial I've missed a TF for a couple of turns that required attention, and it just becomes a bit of a drag - I can't imagine what the full campaign is like in terms of keeping on top of things!
The important event screen would automatically alert the player to TFs running out of endurance, or land units running out of supplies, etc.
Perhaps I'm missing the point of the game in terms of the attention to detail and proactivity required, or perhaps I've missed something in the manual, but I do feel it's a bit onerous in a game to have to assess each unit's health/progress myself. Commanding officers would normally be fed this information (whether it be enemy contact, low supplies, or whatever) by their subordinate units.
Just a thought - I believe it would increase the palayability of the game, especially for people like me, who have poor memories and for whom the idea of keeping paper notes for a computer game is an anathema!
R
|
Printable Version
Post-Tutorial Reflections of Newbie - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread