gravyface1 Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 Not quite sure what PDE offers besides the new campaigns vs. WaW. The AI is supposedly better (and I don't play MP generally) and the map is larger, but the rest (commandos, double strikes, etc.) were in WaW. Can anyone list the differences between the two? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nupremal Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 You get decision scripts and more variables + other upgrades - if you want extra games to play or to play some of the newest mods it would be worth it. If you are happy with WAW for now then just stay with that until you are ready. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZGungHo Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 I like PDE a lot more than WaW, and I can't exactly say why either. It seems to play better to me, plus you get all those cool what if scenarios that I'm just loving! I'm very glad I got it, and recommend it too! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arado234 Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 gravyfaceone one of the reasoms I like P.D.E.is because you can ignore traditional pacts(Nazi,Soviet)and change the course of the game right away.It makes things a little more interesting. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin I Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 I specifically like Storm of Steel (the game starts with a build up period in early 1939, as Arado says giving more flexible strategy) scenario for PDE a great deal. I find some of the post war scenarios deeply unrealstic, a bit silly and not very playable. The modern Cyprus screnario is interesting and a welcome change from more gamed periods. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZGungHo Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 I admit the Sea Lion, Neptune not very realistic, but so what? They are FUN man!! I love the fact that SC manages to give us a sense of realism, and is still FUN! You've just gotta have both,and Hubert has managed to give us both! That's why I'll buy Pacific Theater sight unseen, as soon as we can preorder it I'm there. Over the last several years, I've played the SC family of games more than any other - so a big THANKS to Hubert! Now back to Neptune! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill101 Posted October 3, 2008 Share Posted October 3, 2008 I specifically like Storm of Steel (the game starts with a build up period in early 1939, as Arado says giving more flexible strategy) scenario for PDE a great deal. I find some of the post war scenarios deeply unrealstic, a bit silly and not very playable. I'd be interested to know why that might be, as I can't help but wonder whether it's because there was no real war in Europe post-1945, so those of us who normally play historical wargames have a problem with refighting hypothetical wars? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin I Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 Bill - The scenario where the Russians are poised to invade the US requires the US navy to be reduced to unrealistic levels - simply to make the game playable - and I do not believe the Russians could mount this massive amphibious operation a few years after WWII. It ignores the atomic bomb as a deterrent too. The scenario where the Germans join the Allies to immediately face the Russians also seems unlikely in political terms. For the postwar PDE to work I would want more attention to force strength and capabilities. Also, the technology scale would be better increased above the WWII scale (so Level 6 fighters are possible, etc) rather than reset the values. I DO think immediate postwar conflict is a reasonable scenario (eg Berlin crisis) but you cannot ignore the atomic bomb in such a game. Given decision events we CAN simulate this - both the strategic consequences and the political ones (via diplomacy system). I like the Storm of Steel because it lets you generate hypothetical scenarios too - but I think these ones are more possible and interesting. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill101 Posted October 4, 2008 Share Posted October 4, 2008 I see, thanks Colin. That makes sense. We did discuss whether or not to include the atomic bomb when play testing, but when we looked at the production figures for atomic bombs during the time period in question it was felt that they would have been a game stopper - the US had hundreds by 1948. There were a few other reasons too but I'm afraid that I can't recall them at the moment. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubert Cater Posted October 9, 2008 Share Posted October 9, 2008 Thanks AZGungHo and I'm glad to hear you have enjoyed the products thus far. I'll have to credit the many campaign contributors to the last set of releases such as Edwin, Jeff, Bill, Gunnar, Kuniworth, Robert and Matthew as they have done a fantastic job with them and thank them as well. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.