Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
5 Posts

Pacific Victory» Forums » General

Subject: This or Holdfast: Pacific; and Differences Between Versions rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Cameron
United States
Phoenix
Arizona
flag msg tools
mb
I feel Holdfast: Pacific is a bit too abstract for my usual tastes. Does Pacific Victory gameplay also feel super abstract, or does it have a little meat on its bones?

Also, anyone happen to know what the differences are between Pacific Victory First Edition (2002) and Second Edition (2004)???

Thanks
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Runs with scissors
United States
Vancouver
Washington
flag msg tools
The die is cast.
badge
You say OCD like it's a bad thing.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Any response to your question is going to be subjective. I think that any game that you can play in a day is extremely abstracted, but I play a lot of games that can take days or weeks to play. I think that 5 hours for the scenario starting in Dec '41 is fair.

The rules are posted online, so you can go through them yourself and see what you think. The latest rules are in the file section, and are about 15 pages long.

With this game and many other Columbia games, supply is emphasized. If you get cut off too far away from your supply lines you're in more trouble than if you had fought a battle.

In battles, the different units have priority in initiative. So your air units are going to hit first, then your carriers, then battleships, cruisers, and last any ground units get to fire at invaders or enemy air. Carrier planes are abstracted into carrier strength, and cannot be removed from the ships. Individual blocks generally represent groups of ships.

American subs start out weak until '43 when they solved the torpedo problem. The Americans get to build more powerful ships starting in '43.

Allies have the greater supply pipeline, but more trouble getting units redeployed to where they are necessary. There are about 10-12 optional rules that you can put into play if you want to model certain things.

I'm sure that part of the difference between 2002 and 2004 is the ruleset, but you can get the latest rules online.

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Geoff C
Canada
BC
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ive looked at both and played and own PV. I passed on HP because it seemed simpler and more gamey. There is simply more granularity to PV and more of a nod to history/simulation although it has its gamey moments too. Just not as much imo.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Martin Gallo
United States
O'Fallon
Missouri
flag msg tools
badge
mbmbmbmbmb
They both have a similar level of abstraction but use mostly different rules to play. I think HF is "less abstracted" but has more map and more blocks due to a different scale, and "takes longer". HF is a "re-implimentation of Victory in the Pacific using blocks instead of counters and a different combat system.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark J.
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
What I recall is the only difference in the versions of PV was the rule set and minor graphic choices on the map such that it doesn't matter which version you get as long as you download the current rules. That's usually the case for Columbia Games editions. There are a few exceptions mainly Bobby Lee 2nd edition vs. 3rd edition.

Edit: Just a note that Columbia is constantly updating their rule books with minor edits--they are very good about that--so even if you pick up the current edition of the game, check for updated rules.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.