A truly terrible game

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

Ambassador
Posts: 1756
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 5:15 pm
Location: Brussels, Belgium

RE: A truly terrible game

Post by Ambassador »

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

ORIGINAL: Ambassador

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Should I be offended given I released updates for scenarios what 6 months ago - so 10 years after release inclduding updated AI scripts...
You’re above that. You’re a higher spirit, safe from the petty insults of the crawling cockroaches.[;)]
Speaking of higher spirit, we could be teaching the OP a bit about patience by ignoring his diatribe about the game and just offering to help change his mind. For starters, I suspect the OP jumped into the Grand Campaign without trying the smaller scenarios to find out how to use the User Interface. Even starting with those simpler scenarios I had to restart them a couple of times to overcome my mistakes in settings and strategy. Persistence will win but it means keeping positive in the face of many failures.

Having said all that, Ubwart, if you are expecting a game with a pedigree running back 15 or more years to show you all the CGI flash of current games, you will never appreciate this brain-expanding monster. Twenty bucks to learn a bit about your preferences is an inexpensive life lesson.
You might be right.

A word of advice to the new players
User avatar
LST Express
Posts: 574
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 1:38 am
Location: Texas

RE: A truly terrible game

Post by LST Express »

Putting in the effort has been worthwhile to many of us. Maybe don’t give up so quickly.
User avatar
castor troy
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:17 am
Location: Austria

RE: A truly terrible game

Post by castor troy »

ORIGINAL: ubwart

This has got to be one of the most tedious things and god-awful games I have ever played. It has all of the detail and much more of pacwar and none of the charm. PW had all kinds of tool to let you see where the battles were and so on. Not this dog, you have one battle report thing with 800 reports to wade through after each turn to find your one carrier battle.

Then take into account that carriers are generally not going to attack the other side even with reaction range of 6. No they would rather sit in their base and wait for the enemy to move away and attack your force with a much larger attack than the computer ever seems to mount for my carriers.

I paid 20 or so for it and it is not worth $1. No support no updates and Matrix still wants 79 for this old dog. I would rather pull my teeth via my ass than play this again. PW was about 50 times what this game is worth.
Someone please explain to me how my 3 carriers consistently get their asses kicked by one opfor carrier.
[:o]



LMAO
User avatar
Nomad
Posts: 7273
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2001 8:00 am
Location: West Yellowstone, Montana

RE: A truly terrible game

Post by Nomad »

He signed up yesterday, made his two posts and left. I say do not feed the troll.
User avatar
kbfchicago
Posts: 364
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 4:46 pm
Location: NC, USA
Contact:

RE: A truly terrible game

Post by kbfchicago »

ORIGINAL: Nomad

He signed up yesterday, made his two posts and left. I say do not feed the troll.

Concur, but there is value here seeing the community's response. If nothing else we reaffirm each others passion for the game.

I for one have spent far more of my time with AE since its release vs. any other computer game, hands down, no question, no doubt reaching many 1000s of hours. Like all things in life it has pros and cons, for me these pluses and minuses tabulate up to highly playable and challenging on many, many levels. It is however not for everyone..and that's ok. I wish him well and hope he can find something that fits him as well as WITP-AE fits us.

Keep Calm and Game On!

Kevin
MacBook Pro / WITP-AE running in Parallels v15.x
User avatar
USSAmerica
Posts: 19211
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2002 4:32 am
Location: Graham, NC, USA
Contact:

RE: A truly terrible game

Post by USSAmerica »

ORIGINAL: ubwart

This has got to be one of the most tedious things and god-awful games I have ever played. It has all of the detail and much more of pacwar and none of the charm. PW had all kinds of tool to let you see where the battles were and so on. Not this dog, you have one battle report thing with 800 reports to wade through after each turn to find your one carrier battle.

Then take into account that carriers are generally not going to attack the other side even with reaction range of 6. No they would rather sit in their base and wait for the enemy to move away and attack your force with a much larger attack than the computer ever seems to mount for my carriers.

I paid 20 or so for it and it is not worth $1. No support no updates and Matrix still wants 79 for this old dog. I would rather pull my teeth via my ass than play this again. PW was about 50 times what this game is worth.
Someone please explain to me how my 3 carriers consistently get their asses kicked by one opfor carrier.
[:o]

Here's a quarter. Call someone who cares. [:D]
Mike

"Good times will set you free" - Jimmy Buffett

"They need more rum punch" - Me

Image
Artwork by The Amazing Dixie
Will_L
Posts: 245
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2000 8:00 am
Location: NYC-Queens

RE: A truly terrible game

Post by Will_L »

ORIGINAL: ubwart
Then take into account that carriers are generally not going to attack the other side even with reaction range of 6. No they would rather sit in their base and wait for the enemy to move away and attack your force with a much larger attack than the computer ever seems to mount for my carriers.

Your CV TF won't react unless you set it with a reaction range to either a destination hex with remain on station orders or give it patrol orders with up to three patrol points. If you sit the TF in port with a reaction range it'll simply sit in port. (Please correct me if I got any of this wrong guys.) Maybe you should have checked the forums for advice before you took the plunge into the deep end off the learning cliff, there is plenty to be found.
I would rather pull my teeth via my ass than play this again.
Please do so, I really wanna see you pull this off.
was Will_L for a while.
ubwart
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2021 2:35 am

RE: A truly terrible game

Post by ubwart »

You gotta use your brain. Son I was one of the original players of the old PW game and even that SW game was better than this. What does this game offer? Every man, unit of clothing and roll of TP in theatre. No easy way to see combat reports, no real reason why my carriers never launch, then I see some kind of political points needed to assign a leader, where does it show my pool? No fing ware. I loved the old games for their complexity but this is just complexity for complexity's sake. with nothing to help make managing a pacific war easier, you really want to scroll through 40 pages of shit to see the one combat report that is important to you? Go right ahead.
ubwart
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2021 2:35 am

RE: A truly terrible game

Post by ubwart »

Wow reaction range wow i never would have thought that i needed to do that. Of course i have RR set to limit but even my SC units don't seem to move in reaction. in fact the only time I have had a surface action is when my SC force with a 3 or 4 RR arebased at midway and the japs sent a fleet. to midway, they were seen but did my ships ever move to intercept not once. So the battle takes place at .... midway not in the sea near midway. PW and UV both reacted correctly.

I remember testing UV about 20 times with the same attack by an american TF against japs. 20 times moving to the same location with exactly the same number of bomb and torp hits. i have no idea how you hard code attacks to come up with the same results each iteration of the game. WITPAE this game is just too tedious and I love sitting for hours working out my plans.
ubwart
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2021 2:35 am

RE: A truly terrible game

Post by ubwart »

signed up yesterday but played since before MG was a thing. Playtested about 30 games including VfV and uncommon valor. this game is just pile on more useless shit and strip away tool that help you follow the events. Why on earth is there no map view of battles from the previous turn among about 500 other terrible design options.
User avatar
PaxMondo
Posts: 10338
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:23 pm

RE: A truly terrible game

Post by PaxMondo »

ORIGINAL: btd64

That said. Try checkers. Might be more your speed. Oh by the way, I bought WPO and WITP before AE and I joined the forum just after I bought AE. I had been reading the forum for years and with AE I needed some help and support. I asked all the wrong questions and sometimes a brief spanking. You just joined the forum and broke the rules. Your first few posts should of been questions. Not an attack on something a lot of people love. Think about that for a while....GP
I'm thinking more tic-tac-toe ....
Pax
spence
Posts: 5421
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 6:56 am
Location: Vancouver, Washington

RE: A truly terrible game

Post by spence »

Have to say I can't understand why anyone would not like this game EXCEPT that there are some very slow periods while one organizes the logistics to support future action. Having finally advanced to late 1944 as Allied such things become very important (since one has so many of everything). The Japanese advance had to have been a shoestring affair right from the get-go only possible because there was such a dearth of decently trained/adequate forces to oppose them. (BTW I have no idea why his forces won't engage especially in the early going (as Allied) other than "operator error").

(I only play as Allied - being an old f@rt "the blush went off the (production) rose" a long time ago.)
User avatar
RhinoDad
Posts: 274
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2020 12:34 pm

RE: A truly terrible game

Post by RhinoDad »

It is a great game but it takes a certain kind of person to like it. Guess that is why there are all different types of games and various levels of detail and historical feel. Then again maybe trying to get a rise from people is his game.
Improvise, Adapt and Overcome

Success is how you bounce on the bottom

Experience is a comb life gives us after we have lost our hair
User avatar
rustysi
Posts: 7472
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2012 3:23 am
Location: LI, NY

RE: A truly terrible game

Post by rustysi »

ORIGINAL: USSAmerica

ORIGINAL: ubwart

This has got to be one of the most tedious things and god-awful games I have ever played. It has all of the detail and much more of pacwar and none of the charm. PW had all kinds of tool to let you see where the battles were and so on. Not this dog, you have one battle report thing with 800 reports to wade through after each turn to find your one carrier battle.

Then take into account that carriers are generally not going to attack the other side even with reaction range of 6. No they would rather sit in their base and wait for the enemy to move away and attack your force with a much larger attack than the computer ever seems to mount for my carriers.

I paid 20 or so for it and it is not worth $1. No support no updates and Matrix still wants 79 for this old dog. I would rather pull my teeth via my ass than play this again. PW was about 50 times what this game is worth.
Someone please explain to me how my 3 carriers consistently get their asses kicked by one opfor carrier.
[:o]

Here's a quarter. Call someone who cares. [:D]

+1[:'(]
It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb
Ian R
Posts: 3440
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Cammeraygal Country

RE: A truly terrible game

Post by Ian R »

ORIGINAL: ubwart
... then I see some kind of political points needed to assign a leader, where does it show my pool? No fing ware. I loved the old games for their complexity but this is just complexity for complexity's sake. .

Actually it tells you how many points you have in the pool, at the top of the window where you finalise selection of the new leader.

Reading your posts suggests that what you were hoping for, but did not get, was a modernised windows version of the old Pacwar, same time/map/unit scale etc, but with (some of) the bells and whistles of AE added in. There has been some work done on the old Pacwar; you might want to check out the latest version. Rich Dionne is working on improving the AI.






"I am Alfred"
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 20313
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

RE: A truly terrible game

Post by BBfanboy »

ORIGINAL: Will_L

ORIGINAL: ubwart
Then take into account that carriers are generally not going to attack the other side even with reaction range of 6. No they would rather sit in their base and wait for the enemy to move away and attack your force with a much larger attack than the computer ever seems to mount for my carriers.

Your CV TF won't react unless you set it with a reaction range to either a destination hex with remain on station orders or give it patrol orders with up to three patrol points. If you sit the TF in port with a reaction range it'll simply sit in port. (Please correct me if I got any of this wrong guys.) Maybe you should have checked the forums for advice before you took the plunge into the deep end off the learning cliff, there is plenty to be found.
I would rather pull my teeth via my ass than play this again.
Please do so, I really wanna see you pull this off.
Reaction setting is a thing with a Surface Combat TF set to patrol an area. But CV reaction is a different kind of reaction that has nothing to do with the reaction range you set in the TF screen. Basically, if there is a high enough detection of the enemy and high enough commander aggression, the TF will react towards the enemy and if he detects you at the same time he might react towards you.

There are a lot of complex calculations going on behind the scenes taking into account weather, aircraft ranges, your escorting fighter numbers and who knows what else. I suspect the OP put all of his fighters on CAP with a high range dispersing it to nothing. His bombers likely didn't try to fly because there was no fighter escort. Hard to tell because his post did not include any details.
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
User avatar
Lokasenna
Posts: 9303
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:57 am
Location: Iowan in MD/DC

RE: A truly terrible game

Post by Lokasenna »

ORIGINAL: ubwart

You gotta use your brain. Son I was one of the original players of the old PW game and even that SW game was better than this. What does this game offer? Every man, unit of clothing and roll of TP in theatre. No easy way to see combat reports, no real reason why my carriers never launch, then I see some kind of political points needed to assign a leader, where does it show my pool? No fing ware. I loved the old games for their complexity but this is just complexity for complexity's sake. with nothing to help make managing a pacific war easier, you really want to scroll through 40 pages of shit to see the one combat report that is important to you? Go right ahead.

Well, you're coming of pretty dense. I guess this wasn't an early April Fool's joke after all, although we do have an early fool...

In any case, in order:

Combat reports are exceedingly easy - displaying them during the replay is an option that can be toggled, and you can press 'C' during your orders phase to look back at them.

Carriers not striking - check your settings and look up the rules. That simple. I found it fairly intuitive.

Political points - check in the manual, but it's also intuitively visible on the score screen. Did you try looking?


I like the complexity, but I've got a big brain. I guess you're all the way on galaxy brain level though and don't want to be bothered with the details.

ORIGINAL: ubwart

Wow reaction range wow i never would have thought that i needed to do that. Of course i have RR set to limit but even my SC units don't seem to move in reaction. in fact the only time I have had a surface action is when my SC force with a 3 or 4 RR arebased at midway and the japs sent a fleet. to midway, they were seen but did my ships ever move to intercept not once. So the battle takes place at .... midway not in the sea near midway. PW and UV both reacted correctly.

I remember testing UV about 20 times with the same attack by an american TF against japs. 20 times moving to the same location with exactly the same number of bomb and torp hits. i have no idea how you hard code attacks to come up with the same results each iteration of the game. WITPAE this game is just too tedious and I love sitting for hours working out my plans.

Reaction range actually has nothing to do with carriers reacting or launching strikes.

Your ships have to 'see' stuff to react to before they can react. Didja think of that?

TFs react correctly in this game. In fact, if I have a complaint, it's that reactions are too frequent, leading to far more action in the game than occurred in the real world. Admittedly this makes it more approachable and less frustrating to play, however.
User avatar
RhinoDad
Posts: 274
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2020 12:34 pm

RE: A truly terrible game

Post by RhinoDad »

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I like the complexity ....

TFs react correctly in this game. In fact, if I have a complaint, it's that reactions are too frequent, leading to far more action in the game than occurred in the real world. Admittedly this makes it more approachable and less frustrating to play, however.
The game puts compression and other abstractions that make for more action than historically, while maintaining a historical feel. I believe striking a good balance, personally though, like you, if it had to be changed it would change toward the less action, less accurate (bombers, naval rifles), more historical. But that can make a game what it can not be, a historical study; and can become quite tedious to play.

As you say it makes game play less frustrating and more approachable, less boring, for the average player who wants this level of detail. Still you have plenty of complaints on the forum from those who do not know their history well, or want more of a video game feel; lots of action, bomb hits, and naval rifle hits.

This player if not a troll seems to wants more of a theme video game. Much simpler with lots more action, more of a comic book feel. The game engine does its thing with some general guidance from the player. Like a video with some guidance from the viewer which effects the story. This level of detail combined with a historical feel becomes tedious and complicated instead of adding depth and playability.

Everyone has their preferred style of game play. Just like shopping one person's quick interesting shop is another's longest, tedious day.
Improvise, Adapt and Overcome

Success is how you bounce on the bottom

Experience is a comb life gives us after we have lost our hair
User avatar
Trugrit
Posts: 1186
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 12:31 pm
Location: North Carolina

RE: A truly terrible game

Post by Trugrit »

ORIGINAL: RhinoDad
ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I like the complexity ....

TFs react correctly in this game. In fact, if I have a complaint, it's that reactions are too frequent, leading to far more action in the game than occurred in the real world. Admittedly this makes it more approachable and less frustrating to play, however.
The game puts compression and other abstractions that make for more action than historically, while maintaining a historical feel. I believe striking a good balance, personally though, like you, if it had to be changed it would change toward the less action, less accurate (bombers, naval rifles), more historical. But that can make a game what it can not be, a historical study; and can become quite tedious to play.

As you say it makes game play less frustrating and more approachable, less boring, for the average player who wants this level of detail. Still you have plenty of complaints on the forum from those who do not know their history well, or want more of a video game feel; lots of action, bomb hits, and naval rifle hits.

This player if not a troll seems to wants more of a theme video game. Much simpler with lots more action, more of a comic book feel. The game engine does its thing with some general guidance from the player. Like a video with some guidance from the viewer which effects the story. This level of detail combined with a historical feel becomes tedious and complicated instead of adding depth and playability.

Everyone has their preferred style of game play. Just like shopping one person's quick interesting shop is another's longest, tedious day.
“The game engine does its thing with some general guidance from the player.
Like a video with some guidance from the viewer which effects the story.”


False...It is not “some general guidance from the player.” This game takes a
great deal of player input. More detailed player input than any other wargame
in my humble opinion. Nowhere near a video experience for most players.

Seems the OP was looking for a fun tactical wargame instead of a strategic wargame.

It is a common problem with some people who try this game.

Everyone thinks “carrier battles” when they think of the Pacific War.
This game is not about “carrier battles” it is about the strategic aspects
of brutal mid 20th century industrial warfare. That is very complex and
the workload can be tedious at times.

The Pacific War was more about non-sexy logistics than carrier battles.

This is one of the reasons that I always recommend a new player start with the
main campaign scenarios instead of the small scenarios. They give a much better
understanding of the game right from the start.

A new player can get the idea that the small scenarios are real easy and they can
jump right in, not look at the manual, not do their homework and get some
fun carrier battles which they can easily win. After getting beat numerous times
they blame the game and quit.

This game is not for children or casual gamers it is for very hard core wargamers.

The game carries the label “Expert level” in the game description. Amen!

There is a very good argument for never dropping the price of this game because
a very high price weeds out the casual players and children.

"A man's got to know his limitations" -Dirty Harry
User avatar
btd64
Posts: 14061
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 12:48 am
Location: Lancaster, OHIO

RE: A truly terrible game

Post by btd64 »

ORIGINAL: Trugrit

ORIGINAL: RhinoDad
ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I like the complexity ....

TFs react correctly in this game. In fact, if I have a complaint, it's that reactions are too frequent, leading to far more action in the game than occurred in the real world. Admittedly this makes it more approachable and less frustrating to play, however.
The game puts compression and other abstractions that make for more action than historically, while maintaining a historical feel. I believe striking a good balance, personally though, like you, if it had to be changed it would change toward the less action, less accurate (bombers, naval rifles), more historical. But that can make a game what it can not be, a historical study; and can become quite tedious to play.

As you say it makes game play less frustrating and more approachable, less boring, for the average player who wants this level of detail. Still you have plenty of complaints on the forum from those who do not know their history well, or want more of a video game feel; lots of action, bomb hits, and naval rifle hits.

This player if not a troll seems to wants more of a theme video game. Much simpler with lots more action, more of a comic book feel. The game engine does its thing with some general guidance from the player. Like a video with some guidance from the viewer which effects the story. This level of detail combined with a historical feel becomes tedious and complicated instead of adding depth and playability.

Everyone has their preferred style of game play. Just like shopping one person's quick interesting shop is another's longest, tedious day.
“The game engine does its thing with some general guidance from the player.
Like a video with some guidance from the viewer which effects the story.”


False...It is not “some general guidance from the player.” This game takes a
great deal of player input. More detailed player input than any other wargame
in my humble opinion. Nowhere near a video experience for most players.

Seems the OP was looking for a fun tactical wargame instead of a strategic wargame.

It is a common problem with some people who try this game.

Everyone thinks “carrier battles” when they think of the Pacific War.
This game is not about “carrier battles” it is about the strategic aspects
of brutal mid 20th century industrial warfare. That is very complex and
the workload can be tedious at times.

The Pacific War was more about non-sexy logistics than carrier battles.

This is one of the reasons that I always recommend a new player start with the
main campaign scenarios instead of the small scenarios. They give a much better
understanding of the game right from the start.

A new player can get the idea that the small scenarios are real easy and they can
jump right in, not look at the manual, not do their homework and get some
fun carrier battles which they can easily win. After getting beat numerous times
they blame the game and quit.

This game is not for children or casual gamers it is for very hard core wargamers.

The game carries the label “Expert level” in the game description. Amen!

There is a very good argument for never dropping the price of this game because
a very high price weeds out the casual players and children.



Not for children, perfect 👌....GP
Intel i7 4.3GHz 10th Gen,16GB Ram,Nvidia GeForce MX330

AKA General Patton

DW2-Alpha/Beta Tester
SCW Manual Lead & Beta Support Team

"Do everything you ask of those you command"....Gen. George S. Patton
Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”