Matrix Games Forums

Posted: **Fri Dec 23, 2005 1:49 am**

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

Posted: **Fri Dec 23, 2005 1:53 am**

well worth it....

Posted: **Fri Dec 23, 2005 2:01 am**

It's basically PacWar on a larger scale. If you loved the first game and overlooked its flaws, no doubt you'll like this second version.

Posted: **Fri Dec 23, 2005 2:08 am**

PacWar = Night
WitP = Day

You won't regret it. I haven't regretted a minute.

Ok, I've regretted several minutes. They were self-inflicted.

No discharge for self-inflicted wounds...

Posted: **Fri Dec 23, 2005 2:39 am**

If your tolerance for bugs is low, and don't like the idea of Jap officers commanding Allied ships and disappearing units/officers, you might want to wait until version 1.8 is released.

Posted: **Fri Dec 23, 2005 2:43 am**

Hummm....those sound like show stopper bugs to me. Do these things happen often? Are their "triggers" for them that seem to make them occur often?

Posted: **Fri Dec 23, 2005 2:49 am**

They happen often enough to warrant entire threads on them such as the following:

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1008113

Units disappearing can somewhat be worked around by not airlifting the entire unit in one turn, and waiting until the landed fragment becomes the parent. Sometimes the wait is very long.

Posted: **Fri Dec 23, 2005 2:53 am**

ORIGINAL: Whipple

Hummm....those sound like show stopper bugs to me. Do these things happen often? Are their "triggers" for them that seem to make them occur often?

Some folks report it as a big problem. Personally, I see the very occaissional odd replacement of a ship captain, and in roughly 2500 PBEM turns over 6 games I've never had a problem with it. May crop up more in games against AI.

Posted: **Fri Dec 23, 2005 3:01 am**

Thanks for that link to the thread!

I see these used in the thread: WO and KB. What do these mean?

Thanks again.

Posted: **Fri Dec 23, 2005 3:03 am**

And don't expect the bugs to be fixed anytime soon, the person responsible for fixing the bugs is spending most of his time working on a different new game now.

WO means Warrant Officer, KB means Kido Butai, what the Jap carrier force is called.

Posted: **Fri Dec 23, 2005 3:07 am**

WO is Warrent Officer. In the context, it is the nameless, faceless and (most importantly) statless replacement for the many leaders who will go missing. I know many have faith that this bug will be fixed in the 1.8 (or 1.7) patch, but I don't. More and more it appears that whatever form of database is being used for leaders is irrepairably screwed up and needs to be replaced completely. Which is never going to happen.

KB is Kudo Batai (or however it is spelled). Specifically, the IJN carrier task force that carried out the attack on Pearl Harbor. More generally, any concentration of Japanese carriers. Of special note because the mechanics of air-to-air combat in the game make that force almost invincible.

Posted: **Fri Dec 23, 2005 3:15 am**

Jap CV TF's are almost invincible due to that air-to-air mechanics? Explain please?

Posted: **Fri Dec 23, 2005 3:23 am**

CAP is generally considered to be more effective and impenetrable than it was historically. Also, the US has a carrier coordination penalty that is often decisive in carrier engagements.

Posted: **Fri Dec 23, 2005 3:31 am**

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?

Posted: **Fri Dec 23, 2005 3:34 am**

It's something similar, although it can happen in WiTP in 1942 even if the Allies have only have 2 carriers in the same TF.

Posted: **Fri Dec 23, 2005 3:41 am**

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

Posted: **Fri Dec 23, 2005 3:46 am**

PacWar in its last incarnation pre-Matrix meddling is still the best strategic level Pacific theater WWII computer game ever made (and the best is none too good). WitP is a deeply flawed failure, sort of like James Dean's acting career. It's not just the bugs. It's the stuff that doesn't work. Air combat. Land combat. Surface combat. ASW warfare. Command and control. Logistics. Movement. Reconnaissance. You name it. It's ridiculous.

[[January 12, 1942. The glorious forces of Imperial Japan have just overrun the decadent Yankee base of Noumea. Battleship Nagato is short on 16" ammunition. Fortunately, landing parties have discovered a cache of this rare munition hidden in the former officers' mess in crates labeled "Snap-E-Tom Bloody Mary Mix."]]

Posted: **Fri Dec 23, 2005 3:55 am**

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 then what I know now, 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. [:(]

Posted: **Fri Dec 23, 2005 4:03 am**

ORIGINAL: pasternakski

PacWar in its last incarnation pre-Matrix meddling is still the best strategic level Pacific theater WWII computer game ever made (and the best is none too good). WitP is a deeply flawed failure, sort of like James Dean's acting career. It's not just the bugs. It's the stuff that doesn't work. Air combat. Land combat. Surface combat. ASW warfare. Command and control. Logistics. Movement. Reconnaissance. You name it. It's ridiculous.

[[January 12, 1942. The glorious forces of Imperial Japan have just overrun the decadent Yankee base of Noumea. Battleship Nagato is short on 16" ammunition. Fortunately, landing parties have discovered a cache of this rare munition hidden in the former officers' mess in crates labeled "Snap-E-Tom Bloody Mary Mix."]]

To me personally the bugs are a much bigger flaw than the historical inaccuracy. While the inaccuracies make this game into a fantasy game rather than an historical simulation, I don't mind fantasy games. It still has the potential of being more fun to play than Space Empires IV.

By the way, the game comes with an editor and some of the historical inaccuracies can be edited away. There's a Combined Historical Scenario that was made and is still being made using the editor that tries to do away with historical inaccuracy, but some of the inaccuracies are hard-coded and impossible to do away with.

Posted: **Fri Dec 23, 2005 4:13 am**

ORIGINAL: Lt. Calley

By the way, the game comes with an editor and some of the historical inaccuracies can be edited away.

Tried it. Sucks. The PacWar editor is much better.

Matrix Games Forums

Differences between Pac War -v- WiTP?

Differences between Pac War -v- WiTP?

RE: Differences between Pac War -v- WiTP?

RE: Differences between Pac War -v- WiTP?

RE: Differences between Pac War -v- WiTP?

RE: Differences between Pac War -v- WiTP?

RE: Differences between Pac War -v- WiTP?

RE: Differences between Pac War -v- WiTP?

RE: Differences between Pac War -v- WiTP?

RE: Differences between Pac War -v- WiTP?

RE: Differences between Pac War -v- WiTP?

RE: Differences between Pac War -v- WiTP?

RE: Differences between Pac War -v- WiTP?

RE: Differences between Pac War -v- WiTP?

RE: Differences between Pac War -v- WiTP?

RE: Differences between Pac War -v- WiTP?

RE: Differences between Pac War -v- WiTP?

RE: Differences between Pac War -v- WiTP?

RE: Differences between Pac War -v- WiTP?

RE: Differences between Pac War -v- WiTP?

RE: Differences between Pac War -v- WiTP?