One person's opinion on MOW Vietnam....

[Beylous]

Well, I've played it quite a bit now and I have to say, I'm impressed. I enjoy the challenge, which actually isn't impossible if general tactics are applied. There's MANY different ways around situations....I personally enjoy sending the baddies to the dirt one at a time before kicking it off with the rest of them ambush style. I like the sound, I like the ability to field strip the battlefield, and there's no greater satisfaction then giving a tank the bad news with an RPG or AT weapon. There's a few minor issues I find with the AI (I RARELY let the team of their leash and allow them to move at will as they have a habit of doing silly things at times), but overall, I think it's a great title. Great job guys!

Just one question though, when I set the team to fire at will, even when there's a bad guy right in front of them, they don't open fire unless I manually ignite the engagement. Any thoughts or help?

[micromancer]

No fix for that. Click on an enemy to see its pathetic field of view and you will see why your soldiers aint shooting.

[Zombifreak]

Originally Posted by Beylous

I'm impressed.

Troll.

[Fred DM]

Originally Posted by Zombifreak

Troll.

are you about done? it's really not necessary to keep spamming each and every post with your negativity. you don't like the game, we get it.

[Beylous]

Originally Posted by Zombifreak

Troll.

I'm a troll because I put I'm impressed? Okay.....ummmmm.....well then, guess I'm an impressed Troll.

[Razw]

The game is one-"sided", meaning nearly every mission is the same as the next one. And what will you do when you've completed the 15 missions, taking into account you got the bonus missions. Well the co-op is just the same thing, the mulitplayer is shitty as hell, and then there is no editor.

[Beylous]

Originally Posted by Razw

The game is one-"sided", meaning nearly every mission is the same as the next one. And what will you do when you've completed the 15 missions, taking into account you got the bonus missions. Well the co-op is just the same thing, the mulitplayer is shitty as hell, and then there is no editor.

Fair enough, but personally I can't stand MP games so I can't really say much about that aspect. But when it comes to the SP portion, I enjoy the challenge. I'm still playing through the other MOW titles even though I've beat them countless times. I just enjoy going about things different ways. It is pretty one-sided, I agree, but I like how it's executed.....minus the voice acting of course which is why I turn off the music and speech, lol. I enjoy having to watch every step I make, hell, sometimes a person can get cut down within the first few SECONDS of gameplay.....awesome. For the budget they were working with I think they did a good job. It could have been a hell of a lot worse....look at Call of Juarez: The Cartel, they screwed the bunk completely and were probably working with a bigger lump of cash.

[Ninja2dan]

So far I'm enjoying the game quite a bit. Sure, it has its negatives, but overall the initial release version is still a lot of fun.

Personally, I prefer the "smaller" elements under control. In the previous MoW titles, you had some missions where you controlled 3-8 soldiers, and others where you had command of over 25. When you throw in too many soldiers, you end up spending so much time micro-managing every little trooper that you get overwhelmed easily. You have almost no time for "manual control", as you spend more time just clicking from grunt to grunt ordering men to loot more ammo (instead of just standing there like a bullet magnet) or keeping an eye on vehicles and telling someone to hop out and repair when the turret is busted.

MoW:V goes the lighter route, sticking mostly with small-unit combat. On average, missions offer command of 4-6 soldiers, with a few missions offering control of a dozen or so temporary units. This makes the game more enjoyable (in my opinion) because you spend less time having to micro-manage everyone else, and that means more time concentrating on a specific unit. And with less "disposable" units under your command, it also means you need to modify your tactics in order to maximize survivability.


So far, most of the missions do have a challenge because with fewer units and usually no vehicles or heavy weapon support you need to think about your actions and how to maximize lethality while minimizing risk. Most of the missions are designed with a Stealth aspect, hence the smaller unit available. Sure, you can "go heavy" and just light em up, but without a larger combat force or the ability to call in reinforcements, that probably isn't a safe option.

I find it easiest to locate and identify lone enemies or smaller patrols, taking them out as I go. Work the perimeter a bit, removing as many units as possible without raising the alarm. Once those patrols are out of the picture, you can usually sneak about easier to plant charges or complete other objectives. You can also try looting supply containers for AT capabilities, or taking over an HMG/mortar position and moving it into a "safe" location for support duties.


Even with all of the cool new gameplay, I'll admit that there are still things that need "fixed" or tweaked. The Claymores for example do NOT work like a Claymore, they function more like the old MoW AP mines. I'm also seeing a complete lack of any AT grenades, and on certain maps against armor the use of a limited supply of RPG's usually results in the death of the operator because those rounds do little damage against M-48 and the larger tanks.

Of course this is just the initial release, and there are probably going to be several fixes/patches/updates along the road. Overall though, great game. I think the price was a bit too much for the content, but I'm hoping that future patches and updates will compensate.

[Beylous]

Well said!

[commanderz]

feel too short of the campaign and mission is boring.....and most of the mission is stealth type which i hate.....i miss the big scale wars...