Also a ship in port is better protected from weather.

<t>About 18 months ago or so, I suggested that when this project was being initiated it should be kept simple. Use low level technology. Well I'm seeing that you need 'state of the art' drivers, only specific CD players work and generally it's become a very complex game to run. Any hope of running ...

I'm going to look since I still have apple softwared. One was from the australian company, which was stable, the other for PC from QQP. I do recall that somehow the QQP started to give me negative airplanes, and eventually crashed the system. But both games were good and had excellent AI.

Two strikes of 70, early in war (low levels of flak) and only two hits, and that not on a carrier? 1.5%. Need to do some more fine tuning.

<t>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 ...

<t>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 ...

<t>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 ...

<t>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 ...

<t>Wow, some major issues for a game that is already on the market. Also I'm concerned with the memory managment in another forum. I'm using a P2 - 266. Most people I know who would play this game have simular. Will it be a problem?<br/>
<br/>
For the Ascendancy fans. A cheat that I came up with but ...

Even better, have the play testers review the documentation. If it's going onto PDF files and CDs, they should be able to determine how complete it is, and if there are any omissions or oversights.

<t>What made the original game playable was a full addendum to the supplied manual by Computer Gaming World Magazine (which I still have).To make this game fly, please ensure all keys and commands are include in the documentation, and one or two extensive training tutorials are provided that review ...

<t>I agree. The original game had an option for night operations for aircraft. This should be available for surface TF well but with a caviet. A slow TF should be automatically targeted by available aircraft if within range (lots of luck trying to program something like this). Also ships should be ...

<t>Now comes the big 'game question'. How realistic to you want the game. You may order your squadron to attack the main enemy TF, but how often did the planes attack something else. I can recall at least twice that airplanes reported sinking enemy carriers, where in reality they sunk an oilier or ...

<t>Giving this a lot of though, the right answer is probably don't have any default. Since the turns are weekly, I could imagine your carriers launching a strike against 'troop carriers' empty or otherwise, while enemy carriers strike your own.<br/>
<br/>
The solution would be to query each strike ...

<t>Just to clarify numbers of copies sold. Reading some editorials about PC games verses Console games, apparently a successful PC game sells in the range of 250,000 copies. This is far short of the console sales. Also, successful PC games are generally what is being termed a 'casual software', such ...

I agree. But as a wargammer, I would like them to concentrate on AI and game play first, and worry about the Bells and whistles later. No amount of pictures or movies will same the game if it plays crummy.

<t>Umm, Advertising is not going to not going to generate the same income as $30 or $40 up front. If advertising could, it would have been done. The $30 up front actually translates to maybe $5 or $10 to the developer. The rest is packaging and distribution. If a game is really good, it might sell ...

Theoretically it might be nice, but in reality it would kill the game. We are talking about a weekly turn. Can you imagine plotting and controlling each squadron of each base and aircraft carrier. This would be tiresome especially near the end of the war when the US had dozens of carriers.

<t>First, another point I missed above on the "BASE" screen. When you actually click on the base from the either the sorted list of bases, or actually clicking from the map, the base screen will appear. On this screen should be up to 3 additional lists.<br/>
List are:<br/>
<br/>
1) Air base list by ...

<t>I need to put a spike through the heart of this idea and ensure it doesn't rise. Space on a game screen is a premium. To clutter if with advertising, will destroy the game. I for one, don't like seeing advertising on the web or in computer magazines. I don't have a choice in these mediums. If the ...