Differences between Pac War -v- WiTP?

[Cmdrcain]

ORIGINAL: Whipple

I played Pac War many years ago and throughly enjoyed it. I can't count the number of hours I spent in that game.

Before I buy WiTP, I was wondering if anyone could tell me if the differances are worth the price? I D/L'd Pac War on here and have been playing it once again. Being a WW2 Pacific War grognard I love the detail in that game.

$70 bucks is a good chunk of change if the only differances are eye candy.

Thanks ahead of time for all replies.

Very Respectfully,
Whipple

Ummm Pac War sold in 1990's for About $65

Factor in inflation , 470 is cheap [:D]

Differences? WITP is Pacwar on hyper Steroids...

Witp is more detailed plus the land combats more detailed and fun, more and more stuff its not just eye candy...

WITP is what Pac War should been if there had been hardware like now in the 1990's..


[8D]

[Admiral DadMan]

ORIGINAL: Lt. Calley

ORIGINAL: Whipple

So it comes down to this: If you could go back in time would you buy the game?

This might not be the best place to get a good answer to such a question, because the people with a low tolerance for bugs that have answered your question by already having given up on the game don't frequent this forum anymore. I bought the game at the end of August knowing that there still were bugs but I had faith based on the reputation of Matrix that they would soon be fixed. If I knew now what I knew then, I would not have bought it.

Here's a comment from someone who gave up on the game a long time ago and returned to see if it got any better:

ORIGINAL: ctid98


I've played WitP since the day it came out, UV before that and even way back to Steel Panthers I & II playing right through the wars. Didn't bother with SP III as it was just a poor hack of SP II that tried to part me from more of my hard earn cashed. I'd hoped that WitP wouldn't do the same on UV and I'm happy to say it hasn't as it offered so much more, BUT, I won't be buying another Matrix or Gary game again (not until this ones up to spec at least!).

When WitP came out, it was slow, oh so very slow, had bugs but there was the promise of patches. Patches to fix the bugs, patches to add player recommendations, patches that would make all other games irrelevant, but sadly the patches didn't fix the bugs, they seemed to only add others.

Now I don't mind the interface, I can work with it, but I'm sorry, after a year and a half since release and patches, 1.10, 1.20, 1.21 (I think???) 1.30, 1.40, 1.50, 1.60 we should have elimitated the basic stuff of paratroops disappearing, leaders disappearing, its not the Bermuda Triangle, its functions, packages, arrays and basic programming. Get to grips with it please!!!

I feel that a lot of the problems resulted from the testing and those who did it. Reading the background on a lot of the guys I got the impression that a lot had served in the forces (RESPECT!) and now spent a lot of their spare time on war games (yet more RESPECT, as it beats doing drugs). However being good at a game and playing it a lot does not qualify you as a tester. I could be wrong, they could all have qualified from MIT with flying colours in the field of War Game testing (now thats a course I wish I could have taken when I got my BSc!!!! [:D]), but I don't think that is the case. Poor testing lead to poor feedback which lead to a poor game experience.

We now find ourselves many months down the road sick to the back teeth of bugs that never get fixed and not wanting to play the game any more. I haven't been on this forum for 6 months and hadn't looked at WitP for a similar amount of time because I was tired of waiting, last week I fired it up and what happened, I couldn't load a division fully even though I had all the ships and a bombardment TF sat in mid ocean for 4 turns never going in for the final move (poor leader or not you carry out your orders or do a spell in the glass house!!!). But I figured that as 6 months have passed they'll be a new patch that will have fixed all this and will make me want to spend hours scrolling around the Pacific again, but what do I find, a beta release that has issues.......

I don't like having a go at people, and certainly don't like having a go at WitP as it really is an enjoyable game, but only if it works and it doesn't. [:(]

ctid98 knocked the WitP testers a lot; unfairly in my opinion; and to be honest, I was a tester.

Testers caught quite a few bugs that I'm not even going to get into - that was our job. The two big ones (Leaders and Disappearing/Teleporting Units) did not evolve during testing while I was involved.

As to "Gameplay issues" like "Uber CAP" and "Uber ASW", etc., I can only say that when issues arose, we gave input and moved on to the next issue (ok, most of us). Our job was to identify repeatable bugs, test the corrections; all the while continuing to play normally while also tryng to break it.

Do I agree how some of the game works? No.

Is WitP broken? Not for me.

I do have issues with it. I’ve made my opinions known and that is that. I didn't code the game, and enough pissing and moaning has been done to power a small city for a year. I've opened the Editor and changed what I thought should have been done that isn’t hardwired code.

The game is sometimes a study in contradictions. If you’re easily pissed off, this game wouldn’t be for you even if it was perfect.

[Cmdrcain]

ORIGINAL: Whipple

If I remember correctly from Pac War, if you put more than 4 CV's in a TF, you risked not getting planes off the deck, even when attacked. This what you are talking about?

The restrictions in Pacwar didn't apply as much to Japanese either, in Pacwar Japanese could put more CV's in a TF then Allies, so the favoring a bit of Japanese in WITP isn't much different..

[Cmdrcain]

ORIGINAL: Lt. Calley

ORIGINAL: Whipple

So it comes down to this: If you could go back in time would you buy the game?

Here's a comment from someone who gave up on the game a long time ago and returned to see if it got any better:

ORIGINAL: ctid98


I've played WitP since the day it came out, UV before that and even way back to Steel Panthers I & II playing right through the wars. Didn't bother with SP III as it was just a poor hack of SP II that tried to part me from more of my hard earn cashed. I'd hoped that WitP wouldn't do the same on UV and I'm happy to say it hasn't as it offered so much more, BUT, I won't be buying another Matrix or Gary game again (not until this ones up to spec at least!).
[:(]

With Respect, while theres still some bugs to trounce, certain "bugs" are more operator error then
necessary bugs... take disappearing paratroopers, it is well known if transport troops you should wait a turn before moving the what is now smaller "main" group so that the now smaller main group resets into a fragment and your what was a fragment becomes a main group ie: Paratroopers/1 bigger then Paratroopers becomes paratroopers and former main group is now paratroopers/1

Knowing that, a person can take a day off from transporting and the units rename selves and so you dont
then pickup the small main unit and have it vanish taking the moved fragment with it..

Games playable , also no game can ever be totally, 100 pct bug free.

[Admiral DadMan]

ORIGINAL: Cmdrcain

ORIGINAL: Whipple

If I remember correctly from Pac War, if you put more than 4 CV's in a TF, you risked not getting planes off the deck, even when attacked. This what you are talking about?

The restrictions in Pacwar didn't apply as much to Japanese either, in Pacwar Japanese could put more CV's in a TF then Allies, so the favoring a bit of Japanese in WITP isn't much different..

There is not a strike launch penalty, it's a co-ordination penalty.

Here's the rule:

7.2.2.11 Coordinating Strikes

Airstrikes from different bases/ships flying to the same target hex will approach the Target
together if the range to the target hex is the same. This allows aircraft carriers to coordinate their
attacks. However, before the attacks are made, there is a chance that some of the units will
become separated from each other and this may result in piecemeal attacks on the target. In
addition, a unit may escort attacks originating at another base/ship if the escorting unit has a
Target that matches the target being attacked, and the escorting fighter is closer to the target than
aircraft being escorted. Occasionally this can occur even if no priority target is set for the
escorting unit.

The co-ordination of (Carrier) airstrikes is affected by how many Carrier aircraft are based in the TF
launching a strike. The chance of uncoordination is doubled under the following circumstances:

• Allied TF in 1942 and the number of aircraft in the TF is greater than 100 + rnd (100).
• Allied TF in 1943 and the number of aircraft in the TF is greater than 150 + rnd (150).
• Allied TF in 1944 or later or a Japanese TF at any time and the number of aircraft in the
  TF is greater than 200 + rnd (200).

Also, in 1942 Allied coordination is generally not as good as the Japanese’s.

So, you can run 4 allied CVs in 1 TF in 1942 and launch 250+ plane airstrikes. They'll just hit in multiple little packets to be devoured by CAP.

I refer to it as the "Midway" rule.

[dtravel]

ORIGINAL: Cmdrcain
With Respect, while theres still some bugs to trounce, certain "bugs" are more operator error then
necessary bugs... take disappearing paratroopers, it is well known if transport troops you should wait a turn before moving the what is now smaller "main" group so that the now smaller main group resets into a fragment and your what was a fragment becomes a main group ie: Paratroopers/1 bigger then Paratroopers becomes paratroopers and former main group is now paratroopers/1

Knowing that, a person can take a day off from transporting and the units rename selves and so you dont
then pickup the small main unit and have it vanish taking the moved fragment with it..

Games playable , also no game can ever be totally, 100 pct bug free.

<censored> Just because there is a work-around does not magically make a bug stop being a bug. And its not just air transport that makes units disappear. Never mind that this "work around" doesn't always work, even if the player manages to guess correctly as to when he should "take a day off".

I don't expect the game to be 100% bug free. I do expect flashing neon obvious bugs that affect such basic game functions as the very existance of units to have been dealt with before release, not be a secondary priority more than a year after release because equally or even more important bugs still haven't been fixed.

[pasternakski]

ORIGINAL: Cmdrcain

With Respect, while theres still some bugs to trounce, certain "bugs" are more operator error then
necessary bugs... take disappearing paratroopers, it is well known if transport troops you should wait a turn before moving the what is now smaller "main" group so that the now smaller main group resets into a fragment and your what was a fragment becomes a main group ie: Paratroopers/1 bigger then Paratroopers becomes paratroopers and former main group is now paratroopers/1

Knowing that, a person can take a day off from transporting and the units rename selves and so you dont
then pickup the small main unit and have it vanish taking the moved fragment with it..

Games playable , also no game can ever be totally, 100 pct bug free.

No, you are not only completely missing the point, but you are mis-stating the workaround.

Paratroop drops are completely different from air transport. If you want to avoid game system errors with paratroop drops, just be sure that you use enough aircraft to carry the entire unit.

The same generally applies to air transport, but if you have to transport fractions of units at a time, you are at risk of losing units, and there is no ironclad way of ensuring that you won't. So, I don't. I avoid a lot of the UV/WitP system silliness just by not doing what I know will trigger the "bug" (I don't, for example, mess with air units assigned to CVs - goofy stuff happens whenever you do, both on board ship and on land. It's bad enough trying to track everybody down when you get a carrier knocked out of action or sunk and get things back into some semblance of order - when you have two or three airgroup fragments land at Timbuktu Beach that can't fly back out, it takes up more of your attention than mounting an assault on Tokyo or on a Ginza jenje girl).

Play this game as though everything was a cardboard counter that cannot be subdivided, and you save yourself a lot of headaches.

[FeurerKrieg]

ORIGINAL: Whipple

So it comes down to this: If you could go back in time would you buy the game?

Just in case you are talling votes -

Yes, I would buy it again. I'd probably have even paid more than 70 dollars.

That's my comment, I'm not going to get into the big bug/design issues discussion - I've read it a thousand times and the conclusion is always the same.

[whippleofd]

Boy I opened up a can of worms here. I didn't mean to do that. The simple fact that you all have such strong feelings towards this game speaks volumes to me. The Pac War boards were never this busy.

Buy it I will.
Figure it out I can.
Ignore the wife to sink that last CV, ya know it!
*Now where did I put that Credit Card?*

[bilbow]

ORIGINAL: Whipple

Boy I opened up a can of worms here. I didn't mean to do that. The simple fact that you all have such strong feelings towards this game speaks volumes to me. The Pac War boards were never this busy.

Buy it I will.
Figure it out I can.
Ignore the wife to sink that last CV, ya know it!
*Now where did I put that Credit Card?*

Good choice. But kiss you fee time goodbye.

[Rainer]

A wise decision, I'm sure.
I have played PacWar since the day it came out. Must have been thousands of hours.
Finally WitP arrived.
And it's good. Period.
Flaws? Yes, but so had PacWar.
Remember what Gary Grigsby said shortly after PacWar was brought to the market? "Pacific War is not complicated enough".
Buy WitP, master the (steeeeep) learning curve, have fun, and just ignore the few whose names and complaints are well known.
Matrix/3by2 apparently have no intention to give up on WitP. Their representatives (incl. Mike Wood) are constantly present here. They do care. And over time they will iron out the remaining flaws. Maybe not all, but the major ones.
Enjoy the game.

[Nikademus]

what he said..... [:D]

[Titanwarrior89]

Yes you must by. Its the best out there, even with all its faults.[:)]

[Skyros]

Yes go for it!. Not only is it better then PacWar, the users are very vocal and supportive of the game(in one way or another), the art mods alone are awesome. I also love the cool game interface[:D]

[Oleg Mastruko]

ORIGINAL: Whipple

So it comes down to this: If you could go back in time would you buy the game?

I would. Hey I'd pay 2x the price asked.

But then again I am Beta Boy Bitch and guy who "blows roses up developer's asses" (quote by Ron S.) [:D]

O.

[509th Bob]

To Whipple - buy it. I played PacWar forever and loved it. WiTP is much better. My only complaint is the fact that I spend about two hours planning each move. So, I'm still stuck in 1942.

As for Oleg - try blowing "sunshine," it doesn't have thorns.

[Oleg Mastruko]

ORIGINAL: 509th Bob
As for Oleg - try blowing "sunshine," it doesn't have thorns.

LOL I think Ron meant "rose petals" but I didn't want to change that lest I be accused of misquoting [:D]

O.

[Andy Mac]

Love it favourite game its the best

[bradfordkay]

The fact that a year and a half after release the game's forums still are so active speaks volumes. Buy it if you enjoyed PacWar, you will not regret it.

[sfbaytf]

I'm going to have to agree with those who say wait and see if the serious bugs get fixed. I was in a PBEM game that was in progress. After 4 months the dissapearing land unit bug reared its ugly head. I had invaded a base with an entire division when suddenly it magically teleported to a far off place. Considering the nature of the Pacific war where occupation of a single strategic island/base could significantly change the course of the war, this pretty much kills the game for now. Having remants of land units scattered all over the Pacific doesn't help things either.

And yes the coordination issue with carrier task forces exists. The leadership bug is a pisser, but not nearly so serious as the dissapearing LCU bug.

As Cramer would say "don't buy-don't buy-don't buy" (train wreck sound in the background.

Check back in 2006 and see if the bugs have been fixed...