Uncommon Valor: Campaign for the South Pacific
Anyone have it? It looks intriguing and it has gotten alright reviews. Tom or Mark, have either of you guys played it yet? Any opinions on it?
THere were a few posts from Tom and I on the old QT3 boards.I like it a lot,but it is geared at a specific type of gamer.If you like Grigsby type games,you will likely love it.The interface is much better than the old games like Pac War and WiR,but it's still got lots of niggles.There's a lot of freedom in the way the player can approach his strategy(a trademark of Grigsby games,IMO),and as a consequence the game can be intimidating.
It's my favorite Grigsby game since WiR,and it's a great operational depiction of the historical situation.You'll find yourself facing similar concerns to the actual commaders.I'd love to try it via email,but there's no way I understand the game well enough yet to take on any of the diehards who are playing it.
One caveat-I don't particularly like the way mine warfare is depicted,even after it has been toned down in the patch.
It's a very good Grigsby wargame - but the above comment is very telling. If your thought of a good Pacific War campaign wargame doesn't involve such things as mines, this isn't for you.
Originally Posted by Mike Oberly
It's a good game if you're a grognard (and I am), but I'd still like to have a pure naval Pacific War campaign based game. I'm far more interested in the cat and mouse game of the naval campaigns than I am the logistics of the full theater. Interestingly enough, one of my all time favorites, that did a superb job of this, was Grigsby's old Apple II Guadacanal Campaign game. It was all about guessing where the enemy CV tasks forces were, gambling where to send your search planes and how much credence to put in initial search reports, whether to bet on sending all of your strike planes on an attack on a TF that might or might not be a CV or waiting for confirmation reports (and risk being hit first), etc.
Lol,Jeff.I didn't realize how my 'mine' comment really sounded until I read it in your quote.
The game is really more of a logistics management game than a sexy game of carrier battles.Of course,logistics management is really what campaigns on this scale are really about.I could even do without mines being included at all,since their use can be abused and it adds an extra burden on the player without a lot of payoff,but that's just me.
As I mentioned in a post on the previous boards,deep database games such as UV are appealing to me because of the self contained universe that is eventually created.
I don't mean to implay that UV is deadly dull and academic,because it's not-it's intense much of the time.People should just be aware of what they're in for.It's the wargame of the year,for sure.
World's End Supernova
I'd say UV is easily the best wargame since Combat Mission (although this is coming from someone who didn't try CM until a few months ago). It exists very much on the operational level, so it's no Carriers at War. My CGM review should be rolling out next month, so more specifics then, but I'd heartily recommend it to any wargamer.
Thanks for all the replies, everyone. This definitely sounds like an interesting game, but one that I sort of need to be in the mood for.