WCNAW player comments and reviews from around the internet, Updated 1/20/10

[Warship NWS]

Impressions review on USENET,

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical/msg/4cf6dc970801529e?hl=en

*************

Wargamer.com forums,

"Bssybeep": +1 on the "impressions" review. I agree 100%, if you are into naval warfare this is a "must have" product.

***************

"Banquet": I have to say WCNAW is a lot of fun. As pointed out in the 'impressions review' linked above, the replayability of the game is mind boggling. I would definitely recommend it to anyone interested in naval combat. Apart from the obvious classics like Denmark Strait, River Plate, etc.. being able to set up 'what if's' like Hood vs Scharnhorst, or Rodney vs Bismark is amazingly addictive! :)

www.marinesims.de (http://www.marinesims.de)

**************

"Kai": Anyone who is interested in the simulation of sea battles, WCNAW should look at very closely - the game offers plenty of depth and especially WW2 naval engagements off the mainstream (where, of course, the navies of World War II are in place ...)! For me it was already the predecessor Warship Combat: Dreadnoughts and Battleships (WCDB), an absolute must, but Warship Combat: Navies at War brings the tactical map again a huge plus for fun!

*****************

Mike Kreuzer (USENET)

"To make it clear: if anyone reading this still hasn't bought this game yet:
Do it. Do it now. Run, don't walk over to the NWS site & buy it. Now. Buy.
Buy. Now."

************

Wargamer.com "Award of Excellence" Review by Jim Cobb,

http://www.wargamer.com/article/2795/warship-combat-navies-at-war

***********

Vincenzo Beretta :"The best naval tactical wargame available on the market, and best overall wargame of 2009 so far".

*******************

ryandylanr : "..., this game is a huge success and probably represents a milestone in wargaming, PC or board."
Link to the comment (http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical/msg/bd499b8978b97371?hl=en)

***************

gabeeg on the Wargamer.com forums;
http://www.wargamer.com/forums/tm.aspx?high=&m=389400&mpage=1#391069

"If you are at all interested in naval warfare of this time period, it is a must. It is a highly rewarding and *fun* game, and NWS support is excellent. "

****************

USENET GOLD AWARD

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical/browse_frm/thread/fb0c36bba5d4d033#

[Warship NWS]

A review from Mike Kreuzer,

Short version: "If there are no better games released this year (and hey, if there are I’m happy) then this is the 2009 Game of the Year sown up. At last."

Long version: http://wroteontheground.blogspot.com/2009/11/warship-combat-navies-at-war.html

Responses: First thanks for the "5 stars and the compliments". I have a few responses to help add some additional information regarding some points made in the review,


Integration with SAS (http://wroteontheground.blogspot.com/2009/04/supremacy-at-sea.html) was originally promised and may still yet happen for all I know, so that feeling of being a component of something larger makes sense, but SAS would have to be improved quite a lot to make the union worthwhile. As it is this game’s good enough on its own.

Integration is planned on for the SAS engine to act as a compatible operational/strategic campaign handler for WCNAW at a later date, likely after SAS-WW1 is published sometime around Q1-Q2 of 2010. The SAS engine as it is now is up to v1.1 with many player requested, and our own designed, improvements added to the engine. More information can be found here;

http://forums.navalwarfare.org/showthread.php?t=4



My number took about eight hours to arrive I think ,which to me points to a process that should be automated.

Usually the serial code email delivery takes far less time - barring any "email" transmission delays. We would automate the "serial code" delivery process if it was possible but that is not feasible at this time. However, either way, this is still faster then waiting for the mail right? ;)

There’s no PBEM or network play, which is a shame cause the game would be well suited to either,but for a change the AI is up to the job. A statement which is again selling the game somewhat short – I have a sneaking suspicion the AI cheats, it’s that good.
The AI tactical IQ is a top priority. The AI utilizes a turn by turn fully dynamic threat analysis system that evaluates all detected threats and then determines the most suitable tactic to attempt in combat. No scripted responses, no deliberate cheating to try and compensate for a poor AI IQ. My personal background as the primary developer (not trying to sound arrogant in any way) is extensive, and continual, research in regards to the topics of naval tactics, weapon applications, battle analysis, and naval doctrines for nealry 30 years. I constantly work at applying as much of my background to the AI as possible - and will continue to do so with AI tactical logic tweaking and updating through future versions. A PBEM option at some point is a serious consideration. The continuous development the WCNAW engine is also assisted by our NWS Team Asst. Director, William Miller, and our NWS Beta Team members - each of which also have backgrounds in naval wargaming and research.

Maneuvering on the map is at a scale slightly higher than where turning circumferences show up, so disconcertingly at first ships seem to turn on a dime, but that’s OK once the scale makes sense.
WCNAW works within a 3 minute per game turn scale and as such most any division of warships could usually turn 180 degrees (the most you would need to change course in any direction) within that time span. Note however that a speed loss penalty is applied - depending on the ship and severity of the turn - for turning maneuvers. We can further tweak the maneuvering system as required.

Some refinements like land masses, minefields, reinforcements, zooming the map, and all sorts of other good things all seem like possible future additions.
Our FAQ covers most of these topics, http://forums.navalwarfare.org/showthread.php?t=1533 . A map zoom feature, even though the present TacMap functions well as is, is being planned for v1.05+ as an additional player aid.

One down side to the current version of the game is that when a game finishes you can only easily investigate ships that remain on the map.
This topic is being addressed with v1.05+.

The game is missing several things I’d normally howl about – the manual is online (http://navalwarfare.info/files/WC/WC-Manual.htm) (it doesn’t appear separately in the download), and it’s skimpy at best; and there are no scenarios that ship with the game.
These topics were handled intentionally via online viewing (the manual) and scenario downloading. Custom scenarios can also be designed very easily and very quickly - often within minutes. We also have an ever growing thread of player and NWS Team designed scenarios located here;
http://forums.navalwarfare.org/showthread.php?t=1517

The manual is kept online so we can continuously update it on the fly (the manual is even time stamped with each new update) and so all players, potential and present, can view it at anytime simply by having internet access. WCNAW also utilizes a "step by step" interface allowing the player to know exactly what to do next during each game turn. This directive greatly reduces the clutter of requiring loads of graphical, and often confusing, buttons and icons and the potential of "#$@#!*, forgot to give this order to this unit!" situation. Another critical priority of the interface, or what I prefer to call a "battle management interface" (AKA BMI ), is situational awareness and a direct attempt to minimize any potential "information overloading" of the player.

Note: Every game has a user interface, or UI, but a true wargame deserves, IMHO, a quality BMI. A quality BMI is critical to help retain a level of "fun factor" while the player is being potentially educated by a true wargame based on history and/or military topics. The educational value should be derived based on the quality of the research for the topic being covered within the wargame tied with the knowledge level and research capabilities of the developers.

There are some refinements that could be made to the process, adding more eras or restricting ships to historical opponents, but as it is, it works very well.
The "era" is specified during the game startup options - WW1 (1890-1920 warships) and WW2 (1920 to 1950 warships). On the random battle generator screen a player also has the option to select a new random fleet - or fleets, weather conditions, and date.

A section on strategies for players new to naval games might be useful too.
A thread for new players covering tutorials and tactical tips was recently started here;
http://forums.navalwarfare.org/showthread.php?t=1569

Supposedly there was an issue with the game taking up a lot of a system’s background cycles on some quad core machines, but that seems to have been fixed in a patch.
This was due to a very fast interface refresh rate causing a higher then usual CPU overhead on some PCs. This was rectified with v1.03 which dropped the overhead by nearly 75% thus allowing for far more feasible multi-tasking within Windows.

Firstly, while there’s a lot of stuff that can be improved here, even with no improvements it’s already the best naval game going. And in conjunction with that, Mr Dean from NWS says there are going to be upgrades, and I believe him.
Absolutely, as shown in our FAQ link above. WCNAW is not a "here it is, take it or leave it" project.. it will be a continuously updated and improved on engine for several years based on player feedback and our own list of planned features. Within about a week of launching v1.0 we are already at v1.04.. and going strong. ;)

From me, I would like to thank MK for his positive review.

Thanks. :)