Matrix Games Forums

I like to play well done PC games of most genres. Grand strategy is closest to my heart, yet I end up playing it the least because my expectations are so high I am far more critical than I am of a shooter. There's only room for one full price game for xmas, so help me out with a few concerns.

The norm for strategy these days seems to be release=paid open beta, with a reliable product coming after several months of patches. Hearts of Iron and MOO3 seem 6 months to next sequel away from maturity, but UV sounds like its there now. Is it ready for prime time?

Is beating the AI as US reasonably challenging? Is beating it as Japan reasonably hard? Does the AI play realistically, or follow a set of canned responses that I'll soon learn to anticipate? Does it have glaring vulnerability to any normal stratagems?

About micromanagement. I like that logistics play a big role, that's actually a big draw for me. But I like my role in games to stay at one coherent scale. As theater commander monitoring the fuel reserves at bases makes sense, but tracking the fatigue levels of individual pilots seems like it should be done by someone far below me in the food chain. Does the interface make this kind of fine grain management reasonably natural, or do I have to do a lot of tweaking around every turn to get things set right and avoid losing that crucial few percent advantage?

Thanks for your responses.

Hi,

Let me say that I really like this game. It is my favorite wargame, bar none. This game is the ultimate in making me feel that if I read history accurately, then I will play well, as opposed to just learning how the game works and playing to its own rules that may, or more in the case of most games may not correspond to history.

On the other hand, I cannot say that this game may be for you. The AI, like that for any other wargame, is rather dull. I quickly became tired of it and only used it to learn the system. Like every other wargame I have played, the only real challenge is playing against another human.

This is not to say that there are not some challenging AI's out there for strategy games, but just not for wargames. Take Europa Universalis (on which HOI is based) or Civilization. Now those could be challenging to play. But this was because you had to manuver your way through diplomatic intracacies in a situation where you were greatly outnumbered. In wargames, the situation is more balanced and depends on out fighting the AI, which is easy enough to do, and not simply buying it off when things look bad.

As to level of detail, the game may be too detailed for you. You do need to keep track of pilot fatigue, and you need to do it at a finer level of detail than just the average fatigue for the squadron. You also need to worry about setting altitudes for your planes. I guess there are other things that might be considered detail oriented as well.

That said, if you are trully into long term, strategic planning and not just going with the flow (easter egg hunting as Mogami calls it) then this is a great game. Each operation can take days, even weeks from the time it is begun to the time it is done and takes a great deal of planning. Beyond the level of operations is the level of the overall strategy that will determine the course of the campaign over several months if not longer. Knowing where you are going and what you want to accomplish when you get there and what it will take to do that is what this game is all about. While wargamers talk about these kinds of things for other wargames, in no game that I have seen is it more vital than in this one.

So if you like hard core strategy this is a great game. But if you want a game that takes a more casual approach, you may find that UV is not what you were after.

Yes.



Or is there a part of that word that you don't understand?

Beating the AI is never as challenging as beating a human. I won't expect the AI to be as clever as the IBM Deep Blue. It is already good enough if it plays like an average opponent.

Finally, UV is the best game (strategic level) in WWII Pacific theatre so far. Hard to master, but easy to start.

Yes but it, it seems to have all that you want, and only a little of what you dont want (eg pilot fatigue), although the new patch is meant to manage this a lot more effectively saving your top pilots from getting too fatigued and ginving your rookies a go as well

Right now, UV is the best operational wargame out there.

I am a very critical gamer, and I have had a blast playing UV. This game has everything you want in a Pacific War game: carrier action; surface fleet action; land battles; etc. . .

You can command anything from a PT Boat flotilla to a grand surafce fleet consisting of carriers, battleships, and heavy cruisers. . .

It just has the right feel. The AI will give you a real run for your money. I have enjoyed some the best, most intense naval action, while playing this game. It will spoil you for any other wargame. . .

Matrix support is second to none, and I would recommend this game without hesitation.

Cheers!

I will back up joe with a simple:

Yes.

AI in computer games generally are not a challenge provided they don't 'cheat'. Therefore, no the AI won't be too hard to beat, but then again, what AI is?

Play PBEM if you want a challenge and against the AI for entertainment.

Reiryc

Use the AI for practice in the game's mechanics and tactical execution, then go for some PBeM.

I use the AI to refine what I do in PBeM. I'm generally a mess either way, lol.

This game is simply amazing. The ship and air battles are simply drool.(+beautiful +stuly)

Only downside is that the game is humongous time-consumer. I dont dare to dream taking third gaming session before xmas.

And the AI is (quite) challenging. Especially if you play japanese on the downside.

Yes. Buy it.

These guys have already given you the best reasons to buy it. It's fun; it's challenging; it's realistic; it requires long-term planning; and it's fun! Let me add one more: it's actually educational!

UV has helped me understand the war in the South Pacific. (OK, I did learn something from Pacific War, but this game for some reason has grabbed me more.) I may not fully understand the campaign now, but at least I have a new appreciation for the importance of air power, and even basic stuff like why aircraft carriers matter! And the logistical stuff is an eye-opener. Sure, I've played zillions of wargames that require me to keep troops in supply, but actually having to load a transport with supplies and fuel, and then safely see it to its destination, gives you a much greater appreciation for the logistical hurdles faced by both sides. And it's surprisingly fun.

Beyond that, the game has prompted me to buy books on the campaign, to read about the equipment and people involved, and to learn about strategy by reading the strategy threads by UV gurus here.

One last thought: the AI kicked my butt the first couple of times I played. Now that I've learned the game system, I can beat it, and I admit it's not Deep Blue -- but at the same time, it does NOT play the same way each time. That said, the best way to play is surely PBEM. The game is really ideally suited for PBEM. The PBEM community here is quite active, and their AAR's are entertaining reading. Read a few and you'll see what I mean.

Buy it.

Buy it. I've been playing wargames of every type -board wargames, pencil and paper role playing games with armies, miniatures, and computer wargames since 1967. This is the best computer wargame I have played and it beats the vast majority of board wargames too.

Use AI to learn to play then get into PBEM. You'll never look back - but you will be checking your e-mail every five minutes!

Thanks to all who took the time to reply. Sounds good. Hopefully I'll show up on the opponents board once I get a sense of it - really good games are fun even getting trounced, because you feel like you're learning to do better next time.

I do find the fine grain stuff like pilot fatigue and altitude sort of annoying. It seems out of place in the scale of the game, like such things would have a fairly obvious optimal solution (torpedo bombers low, level bombers mid) that would be decided by a lower ranking officer in real life. I suppose I shouldn't think of it as "SimRearAdmiral" though. As a wargame I guess it helps allow a greater degree of skill and allows the override of foolish AI choices. It just reminds me of reformating a document where you have to go through by hand and find every repetitive glitch and fix it.

>>This game is the ultimate in making me feel that if I read history accurately, then I will play well, as opposed to just learning how the game works and playing to its own rules<<

Yes, details aside, that's exactly what I was getting at. Cool.