Wargamer's CAW review is up

[MarkShot]

www.wargamer.com

[AlvinS]

I am getting a script error when I click on the review. Anyone else have that happen?

[MarkShot]

Using Opera 9.21 - just click on stop executing scripts on this page and it will come up. I suppose they will fix it soon.

[flintlock]

I do too.

[DBeves]

Yes - it crashes ie for me - someone goofed I think ... really want to see what they say about this one - I have bought it but remain very unconvinced as of now its something I am going to spend much time with - like to see if someone else confirms my feelings on the game from my play time so far ...

[MarkShot]

deleted - review scripting code fixed

[MarkShot]

deleted - review scripting code fixed

[MarkShot]

deleted - review scripting code fixed

[MarkShot]

deleted - review scripting code fixed

[MarkShot]

deleted - review scripting code fixed

[MarkShot]

deleted - review scripting code fixed

[MarkShot]

deleted - review scripting code fixed

[MarkShot]

deleted - review scripting code fixed

[Adam Parker]

Thanks for posting it Mark.
 
I've got 2 observations. Bill writes:
 

Battle Graphics—A Case of “LESS” Being…Well…“LESS”.

This is one aspect of the game where I wish SSG had loosened up and, for once, gone for the cheap-thrills instead of dignified minimalism.

When your strikes go in, or when the enemy’s planes come within visual spotting range of yours, a tactical display appears so you can view the action in more detail. Small animated planes (really, really small) zoom in and launch their torpedoes at or drop their bombs on, really, really, really small ships. Flak bursts dot the air; near-misses raise tiny water spouts, and hits trigger itty-bitty explosions. If an attacking plane flies into an ack-ack burst, it disappears in a puff of smoke. A beam-on drawing of the vessel being attacked appears in the lower-left corner of the screen, showing the fires resulting from a superstructure hit, and sometimes the hole-in-the-hull from a solid torpedo hit.

 
But I don't think he mentions the fact that the results of this combat are known before the graphics run? That's kinda important in a review if he's going to make an observation. I actually love the graphics as they are!
 
Also he mentions that the role of the player is "clear". I don't think it is - an Admiral doesn't refuel planes.

[Richard III]

Wow !! What a review !! I`m gunna buy that Game.

When is it available ?

[Scott_WAR]

Yeah really,. what game was he playing? Landing lights?????????????

[Scott_WAR]

ORIGINAL: MarkShot


OR you can accept a very grave risk by switching on your landing lights and signaling your location to every enemy submarine within a fifty-mile radius….

[mjk428]

The first version reached American stores in late 1986, in MAC and Commodore format, but reached the height of its popularity in 1987, when the PC version came out.

It would be nice if at least one of these reviewers actually knew when this game was first released - which was late '84 for the Apple II (not Mac) & C64.

[Prince of Eckmühl]

Actually, I think that most wargamers would be very impressed the first time that they sat down in front of the game, to run the tutorial perhaps.

It's only when you notice that certain things aren't happening, your CAP isn't scoring and/or your strikes aren't proceeding as ordered, that you begin to try and sort things out. That's why the flight-deck screen and it's associated status boxes are so important. Without those, players couldn't tell for sure that stuff was actually hung-up at certain points in the process.

Again, though, you have to be looking for hints as to what's going on in the background to find many of the bugs. So, I want to give Trotter a pass based on a lack of reps with the game. If he had played CaW for 20-40 hours and was really interested in what was producing some of the games more implausible results, he'd likely have cited some of the problems that have been reported here on the forum.

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

[GoodGuy]

ORIGINAL: Prince of Eckmühl

So, I want to give Trotter a pass based on a lack of reps with the game. If he had played CaW for 20-40 hours and was really interested in what was producing some of the games more implausible results, he'd likely have cited some of the problems that have been reported here on the forum.

POE,
you, me and others have experienced quite a few of the implausible moments in way less than 12 hrs of playing the game. That's the equivalent of a work day (which is already an undersized time frame for testing/reviewing a game in regard to a tester's accuracy and credibility), so I wouldn't give him a pass. [:D]