Matrix Games Forums

Sorry if this question was adressed before. I'm very tempted to buy UV but what is better in UV than in the old but still very interesting Pacific war (except the updated interface) ?
A quick look in the press and web sites may give the superficial impression that the game mechanism are very similar.

I purchased UV just a couple of weeks ago, after spending the past couple of months playing PacWar (Matrix edition) very intensely.

It does share some similarities with PacWar, but there's a lot more detail relating to individual units. Here are a few of the things I'm coming to appreciate about UV:

1) As noted above, there's increased detail relating to every unit. This is to be expected, given the scales of the two games, but the fact that you need to keep track of elements like fatigue, unit disruption, and operational damage/aircraft losses throws in an extra bit of complexity missing from PacWar.

2) Reduced scale. Because UV only focuses on the south Pacific, as opposed to the entire Pacific theater, it's a little less overwhelming when you're trying to start formulating a strategy. Oh, there are still many things to consider, but it's not quite as imposing as thinking, "Well, should I target Wake, the Philippines, or China-Burma-India for that next major operation?"

Additionally, with the reduced scale, I find myself caring more about each and every unit at my disposal. I'm currently playing the Operation MO scenerio as Allies, and unlike PacWar, I find myself gloating over every Japanese transport or patrol boat I send to the bottom. Conversely, for the last five turns I've been hovering over the crippled Lexington and Yorktown as they crawl south toward Cairns after the Battle of the Coral Sea (Lexington will probably make it--Yorktown won't). You eagerly await any reinforcement, even that worthless little squadron of sub-chasers. You check that forward fighter group every turn to see if their fatigue has dropped low enough to let them fly CAP against one more bomber strike. When I first checked out UV, I wasn't sure how I was going to like this scale, but I find myself enjoying it immensely.

3) The addition of random factors like weather. Again, this is a very nice level of detail to add. A thunderstorm at the wrong time can trash the most perfectly-laid plans. In the example I cited above, I was set up in the perfect situation to attack the Japanese carriers--they'd moved down south of New Guinea, and had spent the last two days launching massive strikes at Port Morseby, while my carriers had been hiding in Cairns after savaging a transport TF at Gili Gili. His squadrons should have been heavily fatigued, while mine were completely fresh (the average Fatigue level among my carrier squadrons was about 2). So, my task force steams north, winds up about 3 hexes away from the Jap carriers, I set up the aircraft to launch strikes while holding a heavy CAP over my ships....

....and a heavy thunderstorm means my planes can't find his carriers, launching instead against the transport task force I'd crippled previously, and setting me up for a huge shootout the next day with notably fatigued strikegroups. If Lexington makes it to port, I think I still gave worse than I got--Shokaku has to be gone, even if I her sinking hasn't been officially confirmed, Shoho probably went with her (if not, she's certainly crippled very badly), and Zuikaku will be out of the war for months. But if I could've gotten off my strike on the first day, with fresh airgroups, my own carriers probably would've suffered far less, and might actually have been able to retire intact rather than desperately limping toward Oz. Ah, the fickle finger of meteorology....

Anyway, none of this is in any way intended to disparage PacWar, which I've really come to like. But the added detail (and vastly improved graphics) in UV makes it an even more satisfying experience, in my opinion.

Mogami can probably make the best comparisons as he is the guru of both games.

Hi, I don't know about the Guru part. I think there are a few players around here who know a lot more about both games then I do.
I 'd say the historic scenarios in UV are more realistic then any scenario in PacWar. How long does it take the Japanese to knock out China in Pac War?
There are scenario's in UV designed to allow the Japanese more assets early on and this allows for adventures in Fantasy Strategy. I know in PacWar I was always a strong advocate for early South or Central Pacific operations intended on drawing out the USN and destroying it. Well scenario 19 is exactly that type of Campaign. Rather then having to contend with production in UV you are involved in much more detailed operational planning. You don't have access to the entire Japanese merchant fleet and supply/fuel stockpiles. You still have plenty of both but you have to haul it where needed. (In PacWar you just sent 100k of each and forget about it)
Submarines are more more important in UV. Daily turns versus weekly.
The allies are not the push overs they are in PacWar. (All allied units start low in experience and have to learn as they go. In UV there are many allied units that arrive quite good.
I really loved PacWar. Then I found UV. Now I think PacWar is a quaint old game like 'Knights of the Desert' I think I owned a 33mhz machine when I bought PacWar but I'm not sure it might have been a 16mhz (back when you measured memory in K's not meg's)

I like UV very much, but the possibilities in large scale strategy is much nicer in Pacwar. I think I will be pleased with WITP.

Pac War was a great one. But we are talking about a decade's difference here. In computer games that translates into light years. Go with UV.

Probably cost me more than a few sleepless nights back in 1993-94. And I payed $64.00 for it back then (any questions about WitP being worth $69.99 ought to be resolved by that.) I played the game for six years, until I could tell by the time the third turn rolled around whether the game was going to be interesting or not. Then I began to play with the editor.

UV is a much better grognard level game - it doesn't play quick, and it doesn't play for whiz bang like some shooters - but if you grew bored with chess - which I did by 13 - then this is the way to go. I haven't tried on the week long turns yet, I enjoy the intensity of trying to time strikes around weather, fatigue, morale, supply and enemy intentions. Love it, to say the least. And right now, since I am rather - ahem, how should I say this, distracted by medication and pain - it is a great source of relief. Sort of like Lamaze breathing for men.