Supremacy At Sea?

[Batou]

Reading the NWS forums it seems SAS is a bit of an odd duck that was released before it was ready.

Any one here pick it up, comments?

[Banquet]

I ordered it.. still waiting for it to arrive. I'm very interested to see what it's like. No one is exactly raving about it on the forums, but I wonder if that's because they're still trying to get their heads around it - as it seems quite complex.

There do seem to be some bugs (carrier a/c not launching), but it seems like another patch is coming soon that should sort them out..

Some things about it seem odd to me. For instance the Atlantic campaign includes just about everything the Germans dreamt of building.. which I presumed was to help balance the campaign.. but it then goes on to say it's almost impossible for the Germans to lose. So I wonder why they didn't include a historical build campaign that would presumably be more balanced.

All in all though, it seems very open ended with the ability to create large or small campaigns that can be micro managed, or left to your 2nd in command (AI) to deal with the details. I'm really looking forward to trying it out.

[thewood]

There are really only a couple significant bugs. Most of the issues are the same as with Jutland, people not understanding how it works, or people not understanding the scale. I find the biggest issue being it is so darned complex. It has an exceelent manual, but its 500 pages long. Who can read that.

[Johnnie]

It was NOT released too soon by any means and it looks like a pretty awsome game. I'm just beaking in and waiting for the next patch (coming shortly) which has certain things I consider important.

[Batou]

It was NOT released too soon by any means and it looks like a pretty awsome game. I'm just beaking in and waiting for the next patch (coming shortly) which has certain things I consider important.

Really? I've not heard anything but, it's a work in progress with users spending more time fighting the user interface and pop-boxes the enemy!

[Johnnie]

Totally untrue. View the NWS SAS forum. Better yet, try it. I think there is a working demo. In any case, there is a 55 page AAR which illustrates exactly what you get in the game.

Batou:

I don't mean to single you out. But I don't think it is responsible or fair for someone to say or repeat that a game has been released too soon or is unfinished, or could use more pre-release work, when that somone has yet to try it.

This game is in no way unfinished or released too early. It is much more finished than most. A person is not being fair if he says otherwise without playing it. (I have no connection whatever with NWS.)

[thewood]

What isn't finished is people reading the manual. There are things to fix, no doubt. But the majority of complaints have been answered as, that's the way it was designed. Some people may not like the design, but mostly they didn't read the manual that was released 30 days before the game, for free.

[Martyr]

I read a good deal of the manual, and that's why I didn't buy the game. What I read gave me the impression that, while there may be a good deal going on under the hood in SAS, none of it is particularly historical. I have the sense that (for example) the Pacific Campaign in SAS will feel like the Reds vs the Blues, each with particular strengths and weaknesses included for game balance purposes. What it won't feel like is the Pacific War of 1941-45 involving the Empire of Japan and the United States and others, with all of the very specific historical, economic, and political issues involved there.

But again, that's just my sense from the manual.

[thewood]

Having the game, you can, if you choose, play a completely historical Pacific game. It would take a lot of work and micromanagement, but its very doable.

One issue I have with that train of thought is what people expect from a wargame. How much flexibility should the AI have? Do you want the Japanese to always attack PH the same way? SHould they always build the same ships? I feel that most wargamers like the AI to stick to historical moves, but they themselves aren't. I see people claiming that WITP is not an historical game because the AI did this or that. Well, maybe 20-20 hindsight allowed the programmers to give the Japanese an alternative to being crushed every time, but based on historical capabilities.

I think that is the key. Give the AI the historical capabilties and let it go to town. Don't make the AI attack Midway every time. That's is not a game, that's a recreation of events. SAS is a game of historical capabilities and potential. You can set it up to mimic Japanese moves in WW2, but you better make the historical US moves, or its kind of cheating.

[Slider6]

Having the game, you can, if you choose, play a completely historical Pacific game. It would take a lot of work and micromanagement, but its very doable.

One issue I have with that train of thought is what people expect from a wargame. How much flexibility should the AI have? Do you want the Japanese to always attack PH the same way? SHould they always build the same ships? I feel that most wargamers like the AI to stick to historical moves, but they themselves aren't. I see people claiming that WITP is not an historical game because the AI did this or that. Well, maybe 20-20 hindsight allowed the programmers to give the Japanese an alternative to being crushed every time, but based on historical capabilities.

I think that is the key. Give the AI the historical capabilties and let it go to town. Don't make the AI attack Midway every time. That's is not a game, that's a recreation of events. SAS is a game of historical capabilities and potential. You can set it up to mimic Japanese moves in WW2, but you better make the historical US moves, or its kind of cheating.

Right on target of what a wargame really should be. (Something more than a recreation, with historical as a base to build from)

Yes both the player and the AI should have more than historical taken options

I'll have to look into this more.