More Ageod! Nice!
All of this talk about South Pacific has whetted my appetite for some Pacific War naval action. Sadly, since I’m not near fellow grognard board gamers, I’m interested in PC options. And here the pickings look a bit slim–Carriers at War is enjoyable, but I would salivate over a game that combined its carrier simulations with a more robust campaign.
Any ideas? For what it’s worth, Grisgby’s WitP is a bridge (or 20) too far, but something like War Plan Pacific isn’t deep enough for long-term tastes.
I guess I’m intrigued by the old Grigsby Carrier Strike or the 90’s game “Battles in the South Pacific”, but I confess my love for DosBox is waning. Suggestions?
Anybody play anything good lately?
@Leglaen, your options for playing an actual good Pacific wargame on the PC are slim. Have you considered Uncommon Valor?
Yeah I have been playing an early version. Very interesting stuff!
@Brooski, thanks for the suggestion–I haven’t tried UV.
Is it similar to the Coral Sea scenario for War in the Pacific?
It’s more than that - it’s a Solomons-to-the-Bismarcks '42-43 game in scope, with individual scenarios covering things like Coral Sea but with the ability to play the whole thing out, Watchtower to Cartwheel. The scale is different than Pacific War as well.
Steam is featuring an 85% off Unity of Command bundle that includes Unity of Command: Stalingrad Campaign, Unity of Command - Red Turn, and Unity of Command - Black Turn for $4.49.
I hear you. Though, I can’t help but think that it’s not WWII per se that is the problem, but the repetitive, unimaginative, and thoroughly bland approaches to the war as a game subject that rankles. There seems to be a market for the same sort of games over and over, though, so what do I know? And all of the innovative ways of approaching WWII seem to have flopped over the years. In the end, it comes back to another variation on the same game mechanics theme.
@TheWombat Good point. As I always say re video games, show me something new if you want my money. I suppose if someone developed a truly unique approach to the Western Front (or Eastern, or Pacific, at this point) I’d probably gobble it up despite the tiredness of the theme.
There have been some interesting approaches to livening up WWII games, but they’ve all had their often serious flaws. Command Ops, in addition to its non-game issues (pricing, how it’s sold, etc.) struggles with the balance between abstraction and control, and the whole thing rides on the AI’s ability to execute the player’s desires, and the UI’s ability to let the player translate her or his ideas into commands for the AI. It’s not always a pretty picture, but I truly admire the attempt. The Combat Mission games have a ton of baggage, which in the end for me overwhelms the genius at the core of the series’ origins (which was, Squad Leader modernized; I remember the very early alpha stuff and design concepts from when I was a journalist). And of course, Battlefront’s bizarre pricing system and toxic community. Other stuff–the various attempts to do operational or strategic games in real time, or to cover large-scale strategic warfare without hex grids and standard mechanics–usually have faltered because they either did not work, were impossible to figure out and actually play, were too abstract to satisfy grogs, or simply were not fun.
What I’ve always wanted is a game system that focused on doctrine and national military characteristics well beyond the superficial “Germans have good tactics and tanks, Americans have good artillery and supplies, Russians have lots of stuff but it sucks.” A game system that makes each national force truly unique and requires the player to understand that commanding a German Korps is not the same as commanding an American Corps, and where the AI (for your forces as well as the enemy) actually used doctrine and historical practice to do stuff. Of course, this would entail figuring out how to quantify a lot of soft factors, which may well be impossible. Which is why we continue to get the sort of Gary Grigsby/Norm Koger “count the number of rifles and round up” sort of stuff which I’ve come to loathe. It’s very simple to assign a value to every piece of gear (“mess kit M1A1 = 1 attack”)j.
I played the Command Ops and Combat Mission games (badly) when the first came out years ago. Even those systems are getting a little long in the tooth. These days if I buy a WWII–themed game it’s more likely to be an adaptation of a board or card game like Nuts! or Heroes of Normandie
Slitherine Steam sale this weekend. Finally picked up Pike and Shot for $20. Lots of good WWII stuff for sale too. :-)
I have been very tempted by Conflict of Heroes, Awakening the Bear, although the opinions on the store pages seem to allude to unfixed bugs, without much precisions. Did anybody play it?
There used to be a demo. It didn’t do much for me.
Indeed, looking it up, I found it listed on a game hosting site, but “unavailable yet”. Seems to have disappeared totally from Matrix’ own. … Pulling a demo doesn’t seem like a good sign…
I played the first three scenarios a few years back. It worked fine if I recall.
I haven’t played it since it first was released, but I agree with Rod. It’s a perfectly serviceable, if not exceptional, board game adaptation.
How’s Drive On Moscow? It’s been on my wish list for months, but even at $5 I can’t quite pull the trigger. Someone talk me into or out of it.