Carriers at War compared to UV

[SuluSea]

Hello all, I have UV and enjoy it allot although I'm not very skilled at it as of yet.

My wife is thinking about [although she doesn't know it yet] buying me Carriers at War for XMAS and I was wondering if the interface is much harder than Uncommon Valor?

Also what are the improvments over UV?

Thanks all for any assistance.

[Erik Rutins]

ORIGINAL: SuluSea
My wife is thinking about [although she doesn't know it yet] buying me Carriers at War for XMAS and I was wondering if the interface is much harder than Uncommon Valor?

Easier, I would say.

Also what are the improvments over UV?

Well, it's not a sequel to UV but it does cover some of the same battles. They are different games but both scratch a similar "itch". CAW plays faster than UV, you can get done with an entire scenario in a fairly short (but intense) session, but each scenario has a lot of "mystery variants" for added replayability. It also comes with a full editor for tinkering.

UV focuses more on the ground side than CAW does, which is strongest in the air and naval side.

I'm sure other folks will chime in, but personally I think anyone who enjoys UV would definitely enjoy CAW based on subject matter alone.

Regards,

- Erik

[decaro]

I'm not sure there are any improvements over UV, but CaW is pausable real time w/scenarios measured in days, whereas UV is turn-based w/scenarios (mostly) lasting for months; therefore, UV takes longer to play than CaW, though both are shorter than WitP!

But here's a post of mine on this same forum that might help you compare/contrast UV w/CaW; I called it a tale of two games and based the comparison on the what happened in same scenario (Coral Sea) common to both UV/CaW.

Sometimes I enjoy playing the same historical scenario w/different game engines, i.e., the CM and HttR versions of Market Garden, etc. Recently I played the Coral Sea scenario w/CaW and UV; same ships, same sea, approximately the same number of turns/days. In both games I knew from previous experience to keep my distance from the IJN and stay well west of the southern tip of New Guinea. But that's where the similarities stop.

In UV, the IJ AI has missions at both Buna and Gilli Gilli enroute to PM, so I did a fast transport of troops from both Brisbane and Noumea to Gilli as my small CV TF headed Northwest from Noumea. Scouts from PM spotted the IJN CVs heading South along the NG coast, so after my troops landed at GG, I joined these two FT TFs to my CVs and waited for the IJN invasion fleet to show up.

Although I didn't intend to engage the IJN CVs, my planes had other plans and I managed to severely damage Soho, but at the cost of badly damaging the Lex to the point that she could no longer launch. But I still had enough punch to make life hell for the IJN invasion fleet at Gilli as the UV AI never steams its CV TF past NG towards Australia (unlike in CaW, which can cover its moves w/clouds) to engage me.

Setting my surface TFs to bombard GG finished off the IJN invasion TF -- unlike CaW, surface battles are a common feature of UV -- and what's left headed for home; eventually the IJN CVs had enough and left as well, but the Soho sank en route. My Lex limped home and the rest of my fleets went to their separate bases w/a major victory.

In CaW, I don't have the option of mixing and matching my ships, but I was extemely lucky to catch the IJN CVs first and managed to sink both; later I even got the Soho at range. However, after I thought I was home free and game over, two consecutive IJ subs attacks sank both the Lex and York in the waters off the s. tip of NG; this stretch of sea has active IJN subs in both games, but in UV they are lucky to get past the escorts and hit a CV, let alone sink it outright. And then I was immediately hit w/Betty's, but the invasion failed and I still won a decisive victory, even w/o both my CVs.

Same end result (Allied victory), but very different games. As CaW is pausable real time, it goes faster than UV, and I save on set-up time as I routinely set all my CaW bases to AI control.