disappointed!!

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: marky

ORIGINAL: scorryuk

Having read through the forums here to try and improve my gaming experience it`s clear alot of you out there love this game. Unfortunately I seem unable to share this collective enthusiam-but not for lack of trying. To give you an example- I played as US, started training my pilots to increase experience before Jap attack. Keep close eye on morale, fatigue etc. Have search planes on patrol. Next thing I know Jap fleet appears out of nowhere of coast of Gil. Ok I think, all those bomber sqauds I transfered from Austrailia will be put to good use as will my carrier group sitting SE of Japs. Of course I cant choose targets so all my aircraft decide to attack the small group of transports and destroyes (4 ships in total) as opposed to large 10ships+ of main Jap fleet. I might have forgive the computer if it had have sunk one but out of 50 aircraft I get 2 measly hits!! For crying out loud they didn`t have any aircover. Sitting ducks to an air squadron. Ok maybe my Carrier force can do something. No, didn`t launch. So I make the mistake of changing fleet status to "react to enemy". Which it duly did by racing north- alot! Putting itself in range of nearly all Jap land based aircraft and within spitting distance of much stronger Jap force. My planes attack, get cut to shreds and score zero bomb strikes out of 12. Japs attack , skip by CAP and cripple my 2 carriers. Can you understand how I might feel a bit cheated? Not to mention the feeling that I got to make practically zero tactical input.
For me this game seems to miss the crucial ingedients for the carrier battles of the pacific (well apart from luck which was all one way!). I think the definitive war game that does this period of history justice should be real time. Timing was one of the biggest factors in determining victory- when to strike your enemy and when not to. I want to be able to play the cat & mouse game played by the navy commanders- using darkness and weather fronts to quickly close then steam out of range to avoid their counter attack. Catching the enemy off guard and bombing their carriers as there planes refuel/rearm on deck. I want to decide the flightpath of my bombers so as to disguise my fleets location. I want tactical reports from my XO telling me the enemy fleet has just been spotted heading SE at 30 knots, how will I react. Or maybe the main elevator has been damaged and we cant launch planes for 2 hours, a long time when the enemy carriers are in striking distance. I want to be able to have subs and seaplanes shadow enemy fleets to give runing commentry on their movements/actions. All these things and more would give battles a tense atmosphere and feeling of excitement.
I really be interested to hear what other gamers think of all this. I know this game has alot of fans and I`m not looking to upset them. Just expressing my disappointment that as a seasoned strategy gamesplayer , I couldn`t warm to this game.

i KNOW wat u mean wen u say ur disappointed [:'(]

ive played alot of games in my 10+ years of my gaming career, and right now i cant remember being this disappointed by a game, that i havent been able to play AT ALL

i havent even been able to play it for 1 second cuz the stupid thing wont work [8|]


o, btw, good rule for games with a computer?

the computer ALWAYS cheats [;)]

u can set ur watch to it and put money on the fact that a computer WILL cheat, GUARANTEED

Marky. What is happenning with your game?

[2ndACR]

Up in the Bug report section under "will not run" everyone has asked him that same question. We have tried to get his computer specs from him, but he does not know.

[marky]

lol

looks like im becoming a househoild name

lmao

Ron, in answer to ur question, i have decided to get a new game disk

as for the spex - i know this so far -

Pentium II 400

wen we got it, it was 1998, and i cant remember all the spex.

it is NOT, repeat NOT mine.

and for many reasons i dont think i can expect 1 of my own, or the replacement of this 1

alot of which is a LONG story


ANYWAY

my aforementioned computer geek brother in law says that if a get a new disk it should work on this piece of shi@ computer [:)]

[tsimmonds]

ORIGINAL: scorryuk

Appreciate all the replies! Definately a steep learning curve. Never thought about importance of commanders, thanks will have to look at this. As for lack of hits had definately trained squadron up. Will maybe persevere, but still feel the game is slightly flawed genius.... What do you think of my comments on a real time version of the game where timing is as important as the strategy?

I think if you play a single one-day turn every day, that by definition makes it an RTS. I certainly would have no interest in playing a one-day turn every minute, and may the fastest twitcher win. What did you have in mind exactly? If you truly mean to have it crawl along minute by minute, I think this makes for a mighty boring game.....

You are probably wanting a game that simulates battles rather than campaigns. Now I can see an RTS version of any of the carrier battles of the war, or of all the naval battles for that matter, some great situations there. That would certainly be fun, but it's a whole 'nother game on a much different level than UV....

[denisonh]

Someone needs to let me know how you could PBEM an RTS version of War in the Pacific.

When they do, then I could be convinced.[:'(]

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

ORIGINAL: scorryuk

Appreciate all the replies! Definately a steep learning curve. Never thought about importance of commanders, thanks will have to look at this. As for lack of hits had definately trained squadron up. Will maybe persevere, but still feel the game is slightly flawed genius.... What do you think of my comments on a real time version of the game where timing is as important as the strategy?

I think if you play a single one-day turn every day, that by definition makes it an RTS. I certainly would have no interest in playing a one-day turn every minute, and may the fastest twitcher win. What did you have in mind exactly? If you truly mean to have it crawl along minute by minute, I think this makes for a mighty boring game.....

You are probably wanting a game that simulates battles rather than campaigns. Now I can see an RTS version of any of the carrier battles of the war, or of all the naval battles for that matter, some great situations there. That would certainly be fun, but it's a whole 'nother game on a much different level than UV....

[scorryuk]

Don`t think for one minute that UV would benefit from being a RTS in the mould of C&C and all that other wannabe "strategy" crap. Those type of games have tarred the genre. Think Total War series is damn good. UV is totally unlike anything else out there which is sometimes a good thing and sometimes not. Slow pace not to everyones taste, thats for sure. But perfect for PBEM. Haven`t tried that yet. Would get distracted too easy! Would still like to see some sort of real time strategy game base on war in pacific where you could manipulate time. Pause it and check intel. reports and issue orders, fast forward to see results of these. Pause again cos report comes in of enemy aircraft/ships spotted. You know what i mean. But still retains the detail and depth of UV. No resource gathering crap. You are supreme commander who picks targets and makes crucial decisions. not very useful for the PBEM fans out there but think it would play well as an online head to head game. Pure tactics and strategy!

[marky]

lol


turning into a op/rts war here................

[denisonh]

Not sure where you are going with this. I don't believe that UV would benefit in any way, shape or form from being RTS. Not for a minute.

I have played UV for nearly 2 years. The last time I played against the AI was in 2002. This game is a masterpiece in PBEM. It is adequate with the AI. TCP/IP is unworkable for anyone with a life (not to mention I could not play my current PBEM opponents who live in Australia, New Zealand, Italy, France, Florida, and another deployed in the Indian Ocean).

And as for your "resource gathering crap", I submit that one of the most attractive feature of UV is the logistics piece. REAL strategic and campaign warfare is in part a function of logictics. Without logisitcs, too much "stupid" sh1t happens. In UV, if you don't pay attention to logistics, you will more likely than not LOSE. You can win tactical victores, but will lose without adequate attention paid to supporting your campaign(s) over time. Somewhat realistic and historical.

Pure strategy and tactics my @ss!

As the saying goes, amatuers talk tactics, professionals talk logistics.

ORIGINAL: scorryuk

Don`t think for one minute that UV would benefit from being a RTS in the mould of C&C and all that other wannabe "strategy" crap. Those type of games have tarred the genre. Think Total War series is damn good. UV is totally unlike anything else out there which is sometimes a good thing and sometimes not. Slow pace not to everyones taste, thats for sure. But perfect for PBEM. Haven`t tried that yet. Would get distracted too easy! Would still like to see some sort of real time strategy game base on war in pacific where you could manipulate time. Pause it and check intel. reports and issue orders, fast forward to see results of these. Pause again cos report comes in of enemy aircraft/ships spotted. You know what i mean. But still retains the detail and depth of UV. No resource gathering crap. You are supreme commander who picks targets and makes crucial decisions. not very useful for the PBEM fans out there but think it would play well as an online head to head game. Pure tactics and strategy!

sure. But perfect for PBEM. Haven`t tried that yet. Would get distracted too easy! Would still like to see some sort of real time strategy game base on war in pacific where you could manipulate time. Pause it and check intel. reports and issue orders, fast forward to see results of these. Pause again cos report comes in of enemy aircraft/ships spotted. You know what i mean. But still retains the detail and depth of UV. No resource gathering crap. You are supreme commander who picks targets and makes crucial decisions. not very useful for the

[LargeSlowTarget]

ORIGINAL: scorryuk
Would still like to see some sort of real time strategy game base on war in pacific where you could manipulate time. Pause it and check intel. reports and issue orders, fast forward to see results of these. Pause again cos report comes in of enemy aircraft/ships spotted. You know what i mean. But still retains the detail and depth of UV. No resource gathering crap. You are supreme commander who picks targets and makes crucial decisions. not very useful for the PBEM fans out there but think it would play well as an online head to head game. Pure tactics and strategy!

Sounds like he wants a rebored 'Burning Steel: Great Naval Battles' parts II and III. Pity, they do not run on my XP crate.

[Didz]

ORIGINAL: scorryuk

Having read through the forums here to try and improve my gaming experience it`s clear alot of you out there love this game.

You are not alone so don't let these guys suggest that you are somehow mentally deficient for wanting a game that models things more accurately. I was one of the first to purchase this game and along with well over half the early purchasers wiped it from my HD in disgusted very soon afterwards.

Hopefully War in the Pacific will be more playable.

[denisonh]

I am sure you have some evidence to support this assertion?

I am curious as to the source of the "data" and accuracy of your statement.

I do not believe it is true, but would entertain the presentation of some facts to validate your statement.

ORIGINAL: Didz

ORIGINAL: scorryuk

[snip]
....and along with well over half the early purchasers wiped it from my HD in disgusted very soon afterwards.

[snip]

[pasternakski]

ORIGINAL: Didz
don't let these guys suggest that you are somehow mentally deficient for wanting a game that models things more accurately.]

Nobody's mental competence is being questioned here. Degree of dedication to learning the game is, however, another matter.

I was one of the first to purchase this game and along with well over half the early purchasers wiped it from my HD in disgusted very soon afterwards.

Maybe you did. Everyone I know stuck with it.

Hopefully War in the Pacific will be more playable.

I don't understand you. Your first complaints were about realism, now you offer an unsubstantiated criticism of playability.

Let's calm down and talk rationally for a moment. UV was conceived and designed as an "operational" level game where you were the theater commander giving orders to be followed by your subordinates. The subordinates, in many cases, are creative geniuses (read "screwups") who execute your general commands imperfectly. You were not to have full control over this, and the game intended to make you live with the frustration as any commander at this level would have to do.

Two unfortunate things happened. First, the AI routines representing your sub-commanders were subject to the same petty foibles and limitations of AIs generally. Everybody (including me) was p1ssed off to some degree or other. Second, it became apparent that gamers interested in simulations like this are micromanagers and control freaks. "I want to be able to order this." "I need to control that." "I don't want the computer to do such-and-such."

As the patches unfolded, the intention of the design changed. More was assigned to the player, less was assigned to the computer. The one thing that remained unchanged was that you, the player, could not tell your air groups which TF or TF type to attack. I believe that the same trend has continued into WitP, judging from the information made available by the designers and testers.

The game system is far different now from what it was. I like UV. I don't worship it. I think it became an odd hybrid that somehow works for human-vs.-human play, but fails pretty miserably as a human-vs.-computer game. I fear that my bottom line for WitP will be pretty close to the same.

But, what do you want? This system is by far the best simulation of Pacific warfare on an "operational" (now "tactico-strategic") level ever created. If you have some belief in RTS or other nonsense, you probably ought to buy products that satisfy your taste - and comment on those companies' forums about how lousy their games are.

[siRkid]

I was one of the first to purchase this game and along with well over half the early purchasers wiped it from my HD in disgusted very soon afterwards.

There are 7834 posts in this thread, several thousand more than any of the other games (SPWAW not included). I think this is a good indication of the popularity of the game.

[scorryuk]

[

Let's calm down and talk rationally for a moment. UV was conceived and designed as an "operational" level game where you were the theater commander giving orders to be followed by your subordinates. The subordinates, in many cases, are creative geniuses (read "screwups") who execute your general commands imperfectly. You were not to have full control over this, and the game intended to make you live with the frustration as any commander at this level would have to do.

Two unfortunate things happened. First, the AI routines representing your sub-commanders were subject to the same petty foibles and limitations of AIs generally. Everybody (including me) was p1ssed off to some degree or other. Second, it became apparent that gamers interested in simulations like this are micromanagers and control freaks. "I want to be able to order this." "I need to control that." "I don't want the computer to do such-and-such."

As the patches unfolded, the intention of the design changed. More was assigned to the player, less was assigned to the computer. The one thing that remained unchanged was that you, the player, could not tell your air groups which TF or TF type to attack. I believe that the same trend has continued into WitP, judging from the information made available by the designers and testers.

The game system is far different now from what it was. I like UV. I don't worship it. I think it became an odd hybrid that somehow works for human-vs.-human play, but fails pretty miserably as a human-vs.-computer game. I fear that my bottom line for WitP will be pretty close to the same.

But, what do you want? This system is by far the best simulation of Pacific warfare on an "operational" (now "tactico-strategic") level ever created. If you have some belief in RTS or other nonsense, you probably ought to buy products that satisfy your taste - and comment on those companies' forums about how lousy their games are.
[/quote]
Some good points. It take me a while at the start to grasp the concept that UV is an operational level game in which u trust your sub-ordinates. And I really have come to like it. But it`s the way in which those subordinates screw it all up that drives me nuts and makes me wish for more control. Of course this is where it would fail as turn based. Can`t control everything like that. So I just figured that it would be great to take all the detail and brilliance in UV and let it play out real time, or hour per turn or something. That way itel. reports come in, decisions have to be made and I, as supreme commander, get to make them. As to the reply about logistics, they are the least interesting aspect of any war. Can`t someone else do it? I want to re-enact the battles of Midway and Coral Sea. And I don`t want to worry about wether or not we brought enough toliet paper. What influeced the outcome of these battles? Good intel, good strategy, good timing (or bad) and luck are just a few factors. I just hate it when I spot enemy TF on my front door step, I send in my forces to engage and they end up one hex away so there is no battle. Bloody frustrating. Why did my TF commander not engage? He was only a couple of hexes away to start with! I`ve 4 subs in the area and plenty of search aircraft. But I click end turn and they slip through the net, despite having already being mauled and having burning , slow moving APs in their fleet. So I`m not saying to get rid of UV or anything, it`s still the best simulation of Pacific Warfare we have though without much competition. And is loved by PBEMers. But think it would be more accessible to masses if they was a version that played in real time or (by hourly turn). And would be more rewarding to give player more control. And before anyone jumps on their soap box to go into one I am NOT wishing for a dumbed down RTS game. I really, really hoped I`ve cleared things up here...

[pasternakski]

ORIGINAL: scorryuk
But it`s the way in which those subordinates screw it all up that drives me nuts and makes me wish for more control.

Thanks for simplifying the most important statement. That's really it, isn't it? I think we are all frustrated with our AI subcommanders. I know that I will never, ever allow the computer to run my submarines, for example.

It's the primary weakness in the design, the way I look at it. Maybe we just need total control of everything, but that makes games of this size and scope almost unplayable. WitP would turn into a monstrosity that would make even Raverdave look human by comparison...

I dunno what to do. I guess I'll just play whatever they give us and shut up.