War on the Pacific Admiral's Edition

[kstanb]

I just recently bought "War in the Pacific Admiral's Edition" and I can say that I haven't played a better strategic wargame in a long time

Anyone with some interest in naval or air warfare should take a look

[Dowly]

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=186857

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=179728

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=154228

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=159427

MU-MU-MU-MULTIKILL!

[kstanb]

and why I am the last one to know about it? hehe

they need to improve their marketing

edit: they should also improve their interface to reduce micromanagement

their problem is, in my opinion, that Matrix churn too many mediocre games or re-label old ones every year, so when a good/ innovative one appears it might be hard to spot

edit#2: Gary Grigsbys wargames are now in my scope crosshair

[Egan]

Won't click on the links there just in case, but you should also check out the AARs that myself and CCIP are running on this page. There is also an older AAR from the game between myself and the now long vanished Happy Times as well. Probably a few pages further back.

I agree that Matrix do seem to churn out a lot of less than steller wargames. WiTP:AE is a triple A, solid gold hit, though, and you're never going to see it's likes again.

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by kstanb

edit#2: Gary Grigsbys wargames are now in my scope crosshair

War in the East is excellent.

[Raptor1]

Originally Posted by Egan

I agree that Matrix do seem to churn out a lot of less than steller wargames. WiTP:AE is a triple A, solid gold hit, though, and you're never going to see it's likes again.

First, never going to see its likes again? What does that make War in the East?

Second. Their re-releases of older games, like Harpoon, TOAW and Eagle Day/Bombing the Reich, are excellent, at least the ones I have. TOAW in particular received some massive updates that would not have happened if Matrix didn't re-release it. As for their new games, quite a few of them (War in the Pacific, obviously, as well as War in the East, Battles from the Bulge...) rank as some of the best games in their genre in my opinion.

Well, I admit I haven't played quite a few of their games yet, but most games from Matrix I have are excellent. Their real problem is that most of their games are overpriced and they rarely drop their prices.

[Dowly]

Oh yes, the remakes are excellent. Tho, only tried the Close Combat remakes,
but those were very good. And you get the original game too when you get the
remake.

[CCIP]

Originally Posted by Egan

Won't click on the links there just in case, but you should also check out the AARs that myself and CCIP are running on this page. There is also an older AAR from the game between myself and the now long vanished Happy Times as well. Probably a few pages further back.

I agree that Matrix do seem to churn out a lot of less than steller wargames. WiTP:AE is a triple A, solid gold hit, though, and you're never going to see it's likes again.

Agreed. It's not for the faint-hearted - 3 months in I still feel like a total beginner, but it's well worth the detail. It can be a bit exhausting, but especially as a PBEM game to play against a real opponent it is really fantastic.

Speaking of which, I should catch up on that AAR

[Fincuan]

Originally Posted by CCIP

Agreed. It's not for the faint-hearted - 3 months in I still feel like a total beginner

You're not the only one
After two months I feel like just about mastering the game technically, but there's still the whole strategy aspect to learn.

Judging by AARs in the Matrix Games forums even veterans from WitP get surprised by AE once in a while. PzB vs. Andymac is a good example.

[kstanb]

I bought it a week ago, and I have spent literally the entire week trying to learn how to play... and I am still in turn #1

The only real weakness of the game is the non-value adding micromanaging; I am not against extreme detail levels, but having to issue the same order for each floatplane group one-by-one (or at the most to all in the same TF) is not fun

Question to veterans: how long do you spend on average on a single turn?

edit: another small weakness is the lack of scenarios, there are really very few; I am surprised there is not a Midway" or "Leyte"

edit2: kudos to CCIP and Egan for that highly detailed AAR... it will take me some time to fully read and then start following

[Egan]

Originally Posted by Raptor1

First, never going to see its likes again? What does that make War in the East?

Second. Their re-releases of older games, like Harpoon, TOAW and Eagle Day/Bombing the Reich, are excellent, at least the ones I have. TOAW in particular received some massive updates that would not have happened if Matrix didn't re-release it. As for their new games, quite a few of them (War in the Pacific, obviously, as well as War in the East, Battles from the Bulge...) rank as some of the best games in their genre in my opinion.

Well, I admit I haven't played quite a few of their games yet, but most games from Matrix I have are excellent. Their real problem is that most of their games are overpriced and they rarely drop their prices.

No, you aren't going to see a game like WiTP:AE Again. I'm not trying to take anything away from War In the East. I know from plenty of people who have played it that it's a great game. The same goes for the fantastic Panther Games releases like Battles from the Bulge. But the fact is that so many of it's features, from one day turns to the quite terrifying level of micro management, are not going to be making a return again. As a whole, from the pilot management and logistics up, we're talking about a level of complexity that leaves virtually all the other Matrix titles behind. It's already been mentioned that any future WiTP 2 will be more similar to WiTE in terms of structure. So yes, I'm pretty sure that we are not going to get a game that takes two years to complete the campaign and immerses you in the sort of stupidly detailed mass-micromanagement to the level that you can (manually) reassign every single pilot in every squadron that fought in the Pacific campaign whilst simultaneously forgetting your quartermasters warning that a tiny level one atoll somewhere southeast of the malarial zone - on which is based a single company of naval support and a single yard patrol boat - just "ain't gonna feed itself."

The reissues are one thing, and it's good that there is a publisher that is willing to invest in older titles, but - and there are exceptions - a lot of the Matrix catalog looks badly dated. One of the reasons I love BftB so much is that it seem to me to be a conscious effort to move computer wargaming into a new place and do new things that don't rely on what was possible 40 years ago on a table top strategy game. It's an amazing title and it's one that I should play more of, especially now the expansion pack is out.

[Egan]

Originally Posted by kstanb

Question to veterans: how long do you spend on average on a single turn?

Depend. Some turns you can simply give important stuff the quick once over and save 'n' send. Others are going to be a little longer. In the full campaign you quickly realise that once a lot of things are set up (Pilot training, for example,) you don't need to check it again very often. Some do one big 'house-keeping' turn per in-game month, some a bit more often.

The first turn, though. You don't need to remember everything, that's important to bear in mind, but it definitely helps you get up to speed to get as much in there are you can. I think I would take four or five hours spread over several days to do the first turn now. Set up what bases I want to expand, get the pilot training sorted out, work out convoys, get supplies underway to the important places etc....and if your playing the Japanese you can add a few hours for crying a lot before manning up and diving into the industry side of things.

[kstanb]

You said, work out convoys............please don't tell me that auto-convoys are not working....

I am playing as Japan, and I am hoping that the initial scenario industry setup is not that bad... I don't plan to do major adjustments other than increasing vehicle, engine and planes production (in both cases taking care that obsolete designs are replaced). I also cancel submarine production and accelerated CVs/ CVLs/ CVEs/ TKs/ AOs

I am still a bit scared about the pilot management part; initially I thought on having my carrier groups on accept only +70% and automatic all the rest; but I decided to change to manual selection until I learn how this pilot replacement work. I don't want my hardcore veterans being transfered to China if I keep the automatic replacement on

[Egan]

Well, there are two sorts of computer controlled convoys. The one I use is where you define it's route, destination, composition and initial load and allow the computer to move, load and unload it. The other sort, the full auto - convoy, tends not to be either used or entirely trusted by a lot of people. It seems to be fine for keeping bases in relatively safe areas secured but maybe not so hot in routing them through more dangerous locales. I have to admit, I've never used it, and I'm speaking from experience as an Allied player. I don't know whether it's less problematic for the empire.

If you want a lot of very high quality information on setting up Japanese industry and convoys, head over to Matrix and check out the AARs by a guy called Mike Solli. Of particular interest will be the information near the start of his current AAR about how he sets up convoy composition with regards to ship type, capacity and speed, and what routes he uses. It's eye opening stuff. The one thing I'll add is that, as a Japanese player, you might want to take extra care of your tankers and oilers. I don't think the Japanese get enough of them to trust to the auto-convoy system.

[kstanb]

thanks for your advice