November 24thFor me, it looks like Cold Waters 2. Graphics aren't even much better, but the gameplay is expanded to surface ships and aviation.https://youtu.be/38omwdVtl4g
>>1854397Is this another wargame for babies? Ha ha. Do you like watching the pretty airplanes fly? The colorful explosions?These dumbed down toy soldier games are laughable. There is not strategy. There is tactics at best. Compared to a true grand strategy game like HoI 4 they are closer to Rainbow 6.
>>1854426>like HoI 4kekd
>>1854397Oh yeah it's interesting. I want to see the full extent of the battle sizes this game is capable of. Especially when you do Carrier ops.
>>1854397Yeah im hyped for that altought i see few rough edges - no ability to switch between EMCON/weapons tight/free en masse, that shitty pajeet voice over that you hear sometimes as opposed to Jane Fleet Command tier chatter from US ships, helis flying indefinetly with no refuel etc.Still im hyped as fuck, hope it will have mods and mucho sandbox options.
>>1854797What pajeet voice? I haven't watched any gameplay yet.>hope it will have mods and mucho sandbox optionsStraight from their FAQ>Can Sea Power be modded?>Modding is a very important aspect of Sea Power and so it will be heavily modable. All in-game objects like models, textures, sounds, etc can be replaced or even added. We will use so called asset bundles later on for that and will provide tutorials and templates for you to guide you through this. Additionally there are data files which describe every single unit so you can not only alter the visual things but also the physics and behaviour. All text messages are exposed in files as well so the language can be changed too.https://steamcommunity.com/app/1286220/discussions/0/2259062250969419779/
>>1854856That "multiple hostile contacts" line i hear from time to time. Maybe more slavic and not pajeet. Little detail bit still its jarring when contrasted with US chatter.
>>1854397Thank you Jesus, now I won't be forced to learn CMO to scratch my "realistic" wargame itch.
>>1854426Yea man your visual novels with combat are true grand strategy
>>1854797iirc I saw one of the youtubers show you can do it en-masse but your ships have to be in a formation.
>>1854885It's obviously a placeholder line voiced by the devs. There's more worrying signs.>2024>Sea power has to launch as early access (means they ran out of money) with UK and France missing and no multiplayer>1999Fleet command comes out as a full game with everything sea power is lacking + live action cutscenes and a banging ost
>>1855047It's the sad state of modern gaming. Even Bohemia had to launch a tech demo for Arma 4 in early access, and they're still a year or two away from finishing it.
>>1855047In 1999 there was market for this, now gaming is full of zoomers, die shits and hardcore sim crowd is a dying breed.>wanting to play as france or in mp
>>1855077Playing with friends is fun.
>>1855088>having friendsPoser. I wouldnt mind some coop tho, that could be fun.
>>1855077A big turning point in the marketability of milsims came when EA shut down their Jane's Combat Simulations division in 2000. Pretty much every other company (including Novalogic) did the same in quick succession, with only a handful stragglers (Dangerous Waters, Lock-On Modern Air Combat) surviving into the mid-00s.
>>1854426Still better then paraslop with false sense of depth.
>>1855047>No multiplayer Damn, dead on arrival
>>1855077>waaaaahhh this genre is literally dying because I said soNo it's not. Doomers like you should fuck off instead of trying to make everyone else just as miserable. Brainlets who can't enjoy anything else except running around and shooting shit have always existed. Just as the market for realistic military-themed pieces of media will always exist.
Looks like an interesting game, I think the mission editor is going to be very good, meaning infinite scenarios.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ob5npjC-beo
>>1857857>backfire regiment getting mauled taking down a CBGsounds about right from what I can understand of anti-carrier tactics in the era
im hyped. i hope the AI isnt badive wanted a modern Fleet Command for years
>>1855077>not honhonhoning into battle aboard the carrier la grande baguette.Truly those who do not play France are mirthless.
>>1854426>Compared to a true grand strategy game like HoI 4fuck you I spat my tea because of your post
>planeshow big are the maps? Did they have to reduce weapon ranges?
>>1863993It's full world scale though landmasses are low-res and the focus is on sea/coastal combat. Weapons have realistic (public knowledge) ranges. Yet to see if weather and shit affects that though. Also yet to see how the physics engine handles world scale. You can't do the player-as-origin trick with multiple aircraft and missiles.
I see it hasn't been posted yet, so here's a list of confirmed units.https://docs.google.com/document/d/1llRp19OsJMnZJuqYh2He1xD05B-VUBrQbwy-FN9Dey4/edit
game looks great, but I doubt the ai will be able to manage desu.
Will it be as moddable as Cold Waters?
>>1868781It's supposed to be.
>>1864617no early 2000s scenario to bully the Chinese like the seawolf's?
>>1868863Well, not at release, but if that file is correct, they're going to add the rest of the units from CW, which should include Chinese.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-s1Y0YV7Bg>youtuber managing an airbase and a carrier strike groupthank god the devs added the formation select menu. Imagine playing out Desert Storm in this
excited for this
It's coming out on 12th November>Sea Power will be entering Early Access with a broad amount of content, namely:>Over 20 Scenarios: Including both historical and fictional encounters>Steam Workshop Support: Share missions with others and try to do better than your friends>Mission Editor: An intuitive and flexible tool to recreate any conflict of the 60’s to 80’s Cold War era around the entire globe>Massive Cold War Arsenal: over 150 naval units, more than 60 aircraft, 130 weapon systems, and 50 different ground objects>Dynamic Campaign (Alpha): An evolving theatre-scale campaign that we target adding in Q2 2025, with improvements and polish added throughout our Early Access development phase. This will be linked to Steam Workshop so that you can create and share new campaigns toohttps://store.steampowered.com/news/app/1286220/view/6565776610564512411?l=english
>early access
>>1873914Normally I'd be bothered by that, but the game looks fine in gameplay videos. Probably the only issue I noticed was some weird lighting related to commie blocks and trees.
>>1873914God nobody cares, go whinge somewhere else
What do you think will be the price?
>>1873914>niche game cant secure a honka AAA publisher that showers them in money for freeGood, ill take Early Access over some DIE infested faggotry that comes with "complete" AAA titles.>>1873905Based.
Are there any signs/talks about ground component tho? Except static buildings and AA/arty guns we saw of course.
>>1876035Sea Power if it was made by a AAA Studio>Historical asymmetry between Warsaw Pact and NATO completely disregarded in favor of perfectly balanced unit lists, somehow still ends up with a Russia bias>Units that wouldn't even be concepts until the mid 2000s allowed in 1960s games as "prototypes">Historical unit capabilities completely disregarded in favor of "Rock, paper, scissors" style gameplay, exceptions to be made for "rule of cool" units like Battleships>Later nation packs are completely unbalanced, the USN will yield to the might of the Ethiopian People's Navy>No weapons with beyond visual range capabilities, all combat must take place within visual range, doomstacking is mandatory>No weather, No Logistics, No ROE, No ESM management, No EW, No Data Link, No sonar modeling, No damage control modeling, no tactical decision making, nothing that requires critical thinking or reasoned judgements. Game needs to be a fast & simple, "point and click" explosion simulator>30 min single player campaign, no scenario editor, game is heck'n multiplayer oriented>3000+ ahistorical skins in a plethora of obnoxious colors to choose from!>65% chance a unit will spawn with a female voice>Nazi-Zombie Halloween Event Schlock>April Fools event that is just a developers poorly disguised giantess fetish>Helicopter spam is the meta>Game spawns an entire generation of "Cold War Military History Experts" who think they now have an Annapolis level education in naval warfare>Endless circlejerks about how realistic it is, presented as a "military simulator" by "journalists"
>>1876565>somehow still ends up with a Russia biasNot in 2024..
>>1876565Dont forget troon voice packs, rainbow camo for ships and obligatory nigger women commander in the campaign.
>>1876568Bold of you to assume reality will have any impact on how this sausage would be made. If you were hoping they'd nerf Ivan because Ukraine is the current thing, you've forgotten that these aren't scary evil capitalist russkies. No, these are the Russians before they turned bad, the "righteous defenders of the working class", the Soviets.
is submarine warfare less accurate than cold waters given the wider scope of this game or did they port that whole?
>>1876590People are saying that it's actually more accurate, meaning that you have to rely more on using decoys rather than dancing in the water. This guy made a nice tutorial video on sonar in Sea Power.https://youtu.be/DZwuud-UrBA
>>1876568Good luck with implementing corruption and malfunctions into the gameplay.
>>1876570US Navy Admiral Shardonae La'Dynasty SACLANT (1968-1989) is a historical change we made to express the diversity of our game. They/Them will guide you through the NATO campaign. They're counterpart: Admiral of the Fleet and Hero of the Soviet Union, Sergel Moonstaravich Furpov is based off of years of Fur Affinity research into what Soviet Admiral Sergey Gorshkov's fursona would have looked like, if he was a disabled, FTM, furry
>>1876578None of the plebbit fucks who simps for hohols cares about it, they just see russia they go into frenzy.>>1876597All it takes is some bias in attack rolls.>>1876598I hate you so fucking much
>>1876811>5% chance of S-300 performing RTLS
will keep an eye on this, it looks like a dumbed down screenshot fantasy for players who can't into CMANO / C:MO.My fear is all the money has been pumped into the shiny surface, and there is no real depth or AI able to convince.
>>1876975>CMANO / C:MO.If you want something closer to this, wait for Modern Naval Warfare.
>>1876597>Good luck with implementing corruption and malfunctions into the gameplay.Malfunctions: x% chance a system fails to function, this number increases the longer your ship is away from port. Well trained & funded Navies start with a lower x% and it increases at a slower rate, they also have an advantage when it comes to system down time. This changes over time: The USN of the early 1960s is well trained but by the 1970s isn't quite so anymore until the Reagan build up of the 1980sCorruption: X% Chance your vessel will spawn short of fuel, weapons, X% chance a sensor is entirely missing>>1876811>None of the plebbit fucks who simps for hohols cares about it, they just see russia they go into frenzy.I concede the point, I suppose we could make it a PLAN/KPN/VPN bias, which is even more a ahistorical>I hate you so fucking muchThe highest honor an anon can bestow, I'm humbled
>>1876975CMANO has horrible AI. you need to plan out everything for the AI
>>1876565triple a? more like eugen.>t. enjoyed sd44 normandy
>>1854397So is this kinda like a more modern Harpoon?
I was very excited for the game but then I saw a gameplay video where a pair of f15s fired 1 (one) radar missile at an incoming mig23 and then just kept flying towards it, eventually trading with the mig23 1 for 1I then watched a Jane's Fleet Command video and saw that AI planes know how to defend against incoming missiles
>>1876565>Historical asymmetry between Warsaw Pact and NATO completely disregarded in favor of perfectly balanced unit lists, somehow still ends up with a Russia bias>Units that wouldn't even be concepts until the mid 2000s allowed in 1960s games as "prototypes"Sea Power does these though.
>>1877294>Sea Power does these though.As to the first point, nothing we have seen so far indicates this. Western and Eastern block units appear to emulate their real world counterparts (West having better sonar, radar, ECM and damage control capabilities, Eastern block having superior sinkability) As to the secondLetting you fuck around in the mission editor to do ahistorical things (Like using 1980s units in a 1960s scenario) or including optional alt-historical assets like the 1970s era Orel class carrier is not the same thing as permitting as a standard function of gameplay, the ability to bring a 1990s era system to a pre 1980 game, simply because it's a prototype, a la the Wargames series.
I think adding doing alt history stuff in games like these is good. Whats the point if USA obliterates everyone else immediately the game would be boring.
>>1881505>Whats the point if USA obliterates everyone else immediately the game would be boringYou literally know nothing about naval warfare. Just because Soviet navy wasn't based around carriers doesn't mean they weren't a threat to Americans.
>>1881767wasn't the surface fleet only goal to protect the ballistic missile submarines long enough to launch if necessary?
>>1873905>Dynamic CampaignThis is what I'm waiting on. If multiplayer dies the game will at least live on through this
>>1881980>If multiplayer dies
I'm so hyped about this, for all inteded purposes this looks like an improved Cold Waters and that game was already pretty good
>>1882823>looks like an improved Cold WatersThat's basically the idea. After all, it's made by former CW devs and Dot Mod creators. It's a bit disappointing that they're launching it in early access, maybe there were running low on money since the game has been in development for a long time without any release date but on the other hand, it already looks solid in those early build videos.
>>1881767>>1881843Paper specs of individual ships like the Slavas and Kirovs are very threatening to U.S. ships. Based on gameplay videos those ships seem extremely powerful in-game to the point they can reasonably counter a U.S. Nimitz.
>>1881980There hasn't been a good dynamic campaign in military simulators since... well, ever. It's always repetitive, buggy, gamey (in a bad way) and the AI never puts up an interesting challenge. I'll take hand crafted scenarios and campaigns any day.
>>1883906Cold Waters would have had a very decent dynamic campaign if only you could control multiple units or at least be part of a fleet, seriously it wouldn't take a lot to have a great dynamic campaign in Sea Power.
And here is the roadmap
>>1885368These roadmaps are always overoptimistic. GHPC still hasn't added infantry.
>>1885369Which part is overly optimistic? The majority of the stuff there is very basic.
>>1885368The lack of saving and loading system is a bit concerning. Are they running low on cash so they had to rush the early access release? Also, "various upgrades to different aspects of AI engagements" is an interesting way to say that AI is more or less broken.
>>1885372Early access is always without exception a desperate last-ditch ploy to raise enough capital to keep production funded, or to convince the publisher that there's enough of a market to keep the lights on.There are 0 benefits to early access outside of a short-term injection of capital.>>1885368>multiplayer literally not even plannedGrim.
>>1885373Sometimes games are stuck in EA for years with little to no progress, others decide to slap 1.0 despite barely improving anything (see Bannerlord) but there are examples of games properly utilizing early access and having a proper release once it ends. Arma 3 and Kerbal Space Program are the first examples that come to my head.>short-term injection of capitalThat depends on the game's popularity. You have cases of games where player count peaked during EA but in other cases, it got much more popular after release, like Baldur's Gate 3.I can already see Sea Power being a very popular tactical game, as pretty much every youtuber in that sphere is making videos about it. The game looks quite solid in those videos, so a success of a certain degree is almost guaranteed.
>>1885368lol what a fuckin mess. Guess I'll leave it on my wishlist for a few years to let things work themselves out.
>>1876035idk how you could even stuff DEI shit into something like this
>>1885368I hope this is because they have big plans for the dynamic campaign
>>1885368see you in Q2 2026 then
>>1854397Will this finally dethrone pic related?
>>1885975It's because they spent all their budget making an autistically dry missile targeting and aircraft sortie simulator and then realized they need to figure out a way to turn it into a game people will actually play for more than a few minutes. "Dynamic campaign" is always a dead giveaway that there's no plan and no clear vision.
>>1886113>autistically dry missile targeting and aircraft sortie simulatorWell, that's good. It's supposed to be a naval sim after all.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5xmAgoplKU
>>1886222Anything interesting?
>>1886235Bringing in the DotMod guy from cold waters was a mistake.
>>1886265Why?
>>1886222wtf is up with people wanting multiplayer in a simulator?
>>1885974>nog commander>female voice packs>troons>campaign/missions about muh hecking restoring democracy>muh based communist russia/capitalism badDont worry, fags like this always find a way.
>>1854397Looks pretty cool. Hopefully it's not too autistic.
>>1886320Because a """simulator""" is still just a videogame, and wargames get extremely dull offline because strategy revolves around the predictable AI.But in truth this is just a wargame. There's not nearly enough autism here to be a simulator and making your wargame sp only to chase the sim audience is bizarre.
>>1885373>>1886376>>multiplayerhow do you even make it work in a game that relies on you, the player, having control of time to run through a scenario
>>1886372It seems to be a middle ground between Wargame and C:MO
>>1886379Have you never played Paradox games? Control of time in multiplayer game is easily doable.
>>1886376personal preference, but I'm more excited about the possibility of having dozens of well made detailed user made campaigns and scenarios than I'd be over multiplayer, Eugene games relied on that entirely and the single player went to shit after the first wargame.
>>1886409Time for the harsh reality, singleplayer fans are a minority.
>>1886435You are retarded if you actually believe that>>1886376Its because of idiots like this that AI will never get better, multiplayer would be a nightmare to balance anyway
>>1886266He's the worst kind of autist, the one that can't accept any criticism. He holds onto every slight like its a personal attack. If you want a reason why the game took so long to come out and is still a mess, look no further. When the game releases and people start to question things he will be front and center on the steam forums to reply to every single little thing and tell them how wrong they are.
>>1886445So long? Wasn't it announced in 2020? 4 years isn't that long, especially these days. And the way you described him sounds oddly specific. Were you active in the community?
>>1886456Not super active, I lurked around and saw the fallout when he and the guy he was working with split up to make separate mods for Cold Waters. It's just the feel I get from the guy.
>>1886464Interesting, I didn't want to waste too much time on it, but when I was looking at mods, I quickly found out that there was a drama between Epic and Dot mods. Supposedly one stole content from the other, but I have no idea who did it, because both sides accuse each other.
>>1886354>neomarxist dei fags>thinking the soviets were goodlol
>>1886468All of them used to praise Russia for being anti imperialist and anti racist. Now the programming changed, but you still have tankies defending it.
>>1886473nah neomarxists have always hated russia and viewed them as evil fascist imperialists
>>1886476Wrong
>>1886379Turn based PBEM
>>1886473Tankies arent the neomarxist DEI fags, the DEI fags and most of the "Marxists" in the western left are all trotskyists. All the tankies died in the 90s or turned into Maoists
>>1886549Former tankie here, then I read Mein Kampf and Solzhenitsyns “200 Years Together”. Really got the noggin’ joggin’.
>>1886549Same shit
>>1886468They do.
>>1886625Amren borther fuck commies my fellow magapede. God bless you and god bless israel.
>>1886633communism is a jewish ideology
>>1886639None of my commie books ever attempted to explain why the Rothschilds gave millions of dollars to the Bolsheviks. Rather curious.
is this /v/ or /vst/?
>>1886721/v/ + /s/ + /t/
>>1886201>Well, that's good. It's supposed to be a naval sim after all.People don't want to play realistic single player naval sims, they want to play casual multiplayer games that prioritize balance and visuals over realism (like Wargames Red Dragon) Games need to be less engaging so gamers can slip their attention between 3 or 4 other distractions, thinking games are dead. Trying to compete in an oversaturated market to produce gamerslop with broad appeal rather than trying to carve out your own niche or revive a neglected sector of the market is the smart strategy.
>>1886435>Time for the harsh reality, singleplayer fans are a minority.No shit, fuck off causual
>>1886790>causualGo back to school, retard.
>>1886794>Go back to school, retard. No
>>1886435quality > quantity
>>1886111that's not harpoon, anon.
>>1887098Harpoon is a different game, but it already has a successor, which is Command: Modern Operations.
>>1887110it's not too different, it's just that you're stuck with the map view. fidelity is higher with harpoon (the series), which is why it's better.fleet command is good, and with the nws realism patch, it's great, but it still lags harpoon imo.
>>1886235
soon...
>Sea Power | Upcoming launch tomorrow>Sea Power: Naval Combat in the Missile Age is scheduled to release into early access at 1000 UTC on the 12th November 2024>During Early Access we expect to release a regular weekly or bi-weekly update to the stable branch that you will have access to. >There is a really good chance that Save/Load functionality will be going in properly in the next few days Really makes me think why they are releasing a game without a save system, when it's just a few days away.https://store.steampowered.com/news/?emclan=103582791467211212&emgid=4458094434636005569
>>1892824Are there any scenarios that can last many hours? If not i don't see how its going to be very useful.
3 hours left lads
>>1893268nevermind wtf is that price
ITS OUT$45https://store.steampowered.com/app/1286220/Sea_Power__Naval_Combat_in_the_Missile_Age/
a little bit pricey but I think it'll be worth it
>>1893325does it have a save system?
>>1893337heard the devs say it does
>>1893325>>1893327$45 wtf
>>1893344you can get it cheaper it if you buy it in another region anon. It's only about 20 USD in my country
Price is very steep. I will wait for someone to crack it.
>why do things cost money?Lol commie zoomers. Devs dont make games for haircuts
Waiting to purchase until I know exactly the scope of gameplay - if I can play it like Cold Waters (command of one vessel over a campaign) then I'll go for it.
>>1893381currently it’s being able to control an entire task force over scenariosdynamic campaign to come within the next 9 months or so
>>1893428Alright. I'll probably hold off for now thenI don't really want to command a whole task force, frankly commanding one unit is the limit of my brain space.
So, how is it?
>49 eurodollars compared to WotS's 33
>>1893325>give us $45 for a barely working game that you are going to have to rely on the community to make scenarios for at least a yearHaha no.
>>1893569>>1893559I don't get it, it's so much more expensive than all the other nu-MicroProse titles
>>1893582Supposedly it was Microprose who had a final say in pricing. Maybe they looked at C:MO as a comparison.Also, what are even guys behind WotS doing? The game is not being update and there's no announced projects.
>>1893594>Also, what are even guys behind WotS doing?Pretty sure most of them migrated to Triassic. Or was it just a couple key figure? Not sure anymore.>Maybe they looked at C:MO as a comparison.Oh please no, Slytherine are giga kikes.
>>1893582I dunno either, could be they know the diehard ship sim fans will buy it at any price. Maybe it will get a price reduction in the future like Carrier Command 2. Either way I'll wait a year, not shipping with a dynamic campaign is a big miss for a game like this.
>>1893601I bet that it's going to go on a 30 or 50 percent sale in the next few months. Steam winter sale is coming soon anyway.
>>1893605I don't think they will drop the price on the winter sale. Usually recently released games don't do that.
it sucks atm there are tons of bugs, memory leaks and no unit/fleet AI of any kind
Tired of every interesting game being stuck in the eternal EA hell
uhoh, its not looking good lads
>>1893756go back to /v/
>>1893763i didnt mean that. i want the game, but seems like need to let it cook for a few months
>>1893777It was quite obvious when they announced they're launching it in early access. I read those dev blogs and many features are supposedly just a few months away. If they couldn't wait a few months more, then I guess they really needed money.
>all these kike faggots whining about a $50 sandbox gameDo you retards even understand the value of the dollar at this pointI can guarantee at least 70% of you faggots have wasted more money on a single vehicle in something like bore blunderNot to mention regional pricing that takes the game below $20 in a lot of areas
>>1893804Cool it with the antisemitism, mr. Marketer.
>no multiplayerAll this complexity and systems, yet no opponent to use them to the fullest or innovatively.Such a waste.
there is no unit AI right now so its a tech demo. you cant even assign AI patrol zones
>>1893825Kinda gay. Why would you have a strategic AI in a game like this.
>>1893844wouldn't*
>>1893825Really?
>>1893825>there is no unit AIWhatThe units aren’t just sitting around jacking off, what the fuck are you talking about
>>1893804Oh sure I can easily buy this game if I were so inclined. The thing is that I know this game is far from complete and I'm in no hurry to buy it, especially when the asking price is stupid high for a game that should be $30 max in its current state. Funnily enough, these guys shipping the game out a month early to all the content creators showed me how shallow the game is and turned me away from an instant buy. Make a complete game and I'll pay the $50, don't ask me to fund your abortion.
>>1893856they dont use sonarbuoys, cant manage carrier airwings and cant turn sensors on or off
>>1893862They literally do? Where the fuck are people getting this notion they don’t drop sonobuoys, they literally do that, I’ve seen them doing it
>>1893825Why would you just come onto the internet and lie
Launching anti ship missiles will never get old
>>1893892how do u assign that shit in the editor
>>1893916Depending on where the heli’s coming from, generally the AI is smart enough to do it itself
>>1893923do the ai ships turn their radars on and off?
>>1893929Seems like they do, I’ve had plenty of times where there’s no EM contacts from them, and then the light up when there’s something incomingIt’s a behavior you can control in the mission editor, you can have the units have their radars on or off from the beginning, and from there they’ll either probably stay on or be a bit more selective on what they do
Ive only been playing for a couple hours, but at the combat distances it feels like Command:Naval operations got a nice GUI.Currently trying some of the workshop missions
>>1893911Yup, especially with Russia and their Dakka carriers
Made a simple "bomb the terrorists" scenario and I'm liking it so far. There's plenty of toys to play with and I didn't even touch naval units that much yet. I hope they add amphibious assault units one day, like the AAVP.
What's up with this terrain?
surprised there isn't a taiwan straits scenario
>>1894170DIY
>Sea Power is 210PLN>Elin another 100PLNOh for fuck sake..
fug
>>1894497the hormuz scenario was fun until a silkworm tanked two SM-2s and raped my cruiser. Also the formations seems janky as fuck, I've had my ships completely lose formation and just go around in circles a couple of times
also>cruise missile torpedolooney tunes weapon
>>1894537you say that but it's better than the ASSROCK
>>1893825at least play the fucking game before you make stupid comments like that
>>1886111That's a fucking fun game.
>>1894628>ASROC 6nm rangeVery sad. But then again the US's strategy generally seems to be "just drop weapons from aircraft lol".I wonder if they will include the Sea Lance given that it was only canceled because the USSR fucking died.
incredibly funny moment when the game decides that yes, you should spawn in really close to a neutral ship
>>1894826Seems like they mistakenly programmed in some anachronistic behavior. Ramming civilian vessels is a pastime of the modern USN.
>>1894775That's for the old RUR-5 (the version in the game). The current (VLS) RUM-139 has longer range.
>no kola-class frigate>no riga-class frigate (69 built)>no skory-class destroyer (no less than 70 built and in service until 1984)trying to make a PACT northern fleet surface fleet scenario with ships that actually served there getting real troublesome
is saving locked behind difficulty setting? because I've had to restart "Breakthrough" scenario three times because of crashes or bugspic related, planes can't actually run out of fuel and crash so when they shit themselves and get stuck in landing-queue loop, the carrier becomes unusable because you can't launch planes anymore due to waiting for this stupid fucking flying underwater flying in a circle
>>1894898its missing the entire royal navy. There's a ton of work that can be done on this game. I'm glad it even released
the pathfinding completely shits the bed sometimes. In this scenario these two boats suddenly decided to go in the complete opposite direction to what their course was which meant the ran right into land. Doesn't matter if I manually controlled them on to the right heading, they'd just turn around immediately and go the opposite direction as soon as I gave them back AI control. Didn't matter if I removed the formation and individually ordered them.They have to do something about bugs like this when the scenarios are so long and require careful planning.
>no fleet AI>no multiplayer>just scripted AI pathingNo thanks
how the fuck do you get A.I bombers to bomb airfields?>mission type: land attack>ROE: whatever the fuck, doesn't matter>loaded with bombs>spazzes the fuck out every time and starts bombing everything except the airfield
>>1895298yeah its a glorified tech demo. its years away from playable
so is 2 years time optimistic for a somewhat finished game?
>>1895449GHPC launched into early access 2 years ago.They haven't completed step 3 out of 9 of their roadmap.Early access is always a gamble.
>>1895396>years away from being playableHave you even played the game you fucking troglodyte
>>1895475they're backed by Microprose, they just needed a cash injectionLook guys, normies don't play these kinda games, so in order to get ambitious projects, we do early access... it's just the way it is
>>1894899Saving is coming soon(tm).Schizochads winning again calling all the scams over the past few years.
how do tomahawks work? tried selecting the weapon -> clicking on land-based target. just makes my ship turn 180 degrees away from target, never fires and keeps cruising away till I hit cease fire
>>1895610nevermind, just realized it's cause of minimum engagement distance
I thought Harpoons were bugged but it turned out my Orion was beyond the engagement range. I thought it was the blue circle, but it's actually the red one. What does the blue circle stand for?
>>1895657>What does the blue circle stand for?operational range before bingo fuel. I don't think aircraft can actually run out of fuel at the moment though so they just become yellow and fly back to base, which is interesting when their base is a ship that has been sunk because then they just stay in the air
FIX THE FUCKING MEMORY LEAK NOW YOU FUCKING NIGGERS! NOWOWON>boot up game (rookie mistake)>12GB ram usage>nigger rigger scenario for 10 minutes>23GB ram usage
>>1895978>bought an early access game (rookie mistake)
I guess AI can use airfields and carriers now. I placed a Soviet airfield hoping it would be an easy bombing target and 15 minutes into the scenario I see those bandits in the air.
>>1896032ngl they really got meits still an upgrade over trying to make Jane's Fleet Command work in resolutions bigger than 1024
>>1896033Nvm, for some reason, it sends only these two kinds of crafts, AEWC and helo.
>>1896033>>1896108the AI launches fighters at you from the coastal airfield in the hormuz scenario if it spots any helis
>>1896185Interesting, I'll check the Iranian airfield from the editor later.
its rough right now but i hope it turns out good. it seems like a passion project for the devs
Am I doing something wrong or are there no BVR tactics with Air AI? Sent a 4-ship of tomcats to intercept some mig-25's and both flights flew straight lines into each other as they wiped each other out in a matter of seconds with fox-1s
>>1896409this is the number one reason why I'm not buying the game (well that and the price and other things)jane's fleet command has AI jets actually defending against fox3 missiles but here they just charge at you, at least that's what I saw from other people's footage
>>1876598Is there a heterosexual version of the navy?
>>1886379REAL TIME NIGGERS CROSSING THE ATLANTIC
>>1895347This is exactly US/USSR aviation tactics from the period. The US never beat the Vietnamese airforce.
>devs blocked two functional elevators on carriers because they wanted to decorate the main deckWhy?
>>1877257Yes, it's exactly what this is!Glad someone still remembers Harpoon. I played a lot of it on an Amiga
Is the War On The Sea dev and Sea Power devs still feuding with each other for breaking up Killfish Games?
it's a really cool game, but it has a laundry list of possible improvements, bugs and jank that need to be fixed to be truly playable. Having the AI shit the bed 25 minutes into a 1 hour scenario so bad you need to restart doesn't work
>>1897137Still? What do you mean?
>>1897193There was a post on the steam forums for War On The Sea in a now deleted thread where the WoTS dev accused the dev of Sea Power of falsely claiming to be the "lead dev" of 'Cold Waters' and 'War On The Sea' when apparently no such position existed and that the split with Killfish Games wasn't a cordial one.
>>1897475>From the lead designer of Cold Waters, Sea Power lets you control NATO and Warsaw Pact forces in modern naval conflict campaigns. Use your advanced naval weaponry and sensors to respect rules of engagement and defeat the enemy forces in a tense fight for initiative and air/naval supremacy.This is really the first time I hear about and that sounds like a nothing burger. The guy still worked at Killerfish Games.Moreover, latest update on their site is from 2021. News section is removed from steam store page and last update was in February. Moreover, the game is stuck at 'mostly positive' and recent reviews are mixed. It looks like they had some problems at Killerfish.
the units are retarded. no AI at allthe steam forum is insane with complaints. BAIT AND SWITCH
>>1897609Why do you retards keep saying hyperbolic bullshit like thisElaborate your issues or the devs will just write you off as whiny faggots, justifiably so
>>1897475There was a disagreement by the two leads of the studio which is why they split.
>>1854397Quick run down?
>>1897902Euros don't know how to make a functional game, only a barebones simulator. Check back in two years to see if they dropped the game or if it gets a campaign and the ability to save your progress.
happy i refunded this turd>no ai>airfields dont work>no mplayer>no matchmaking
VAMPIRE VAMPIRE VAMPIRE
>>1897609>>1898166Is this like the /vst/ version of shazaamposting/Tortanic?
>>1898206t. butt hurt your ghey fleet command ripoff is a scam
>>1898208The only one that's butthurt here is you little dummy
>>1897902Cold Waters combined with Fleet Command but in early access. If you like that type of games, it's worth checking out. If not, better wait for the 1.0 release.
>>1898205>play blue side of that Guam defense mission>blue feet is just a set of shit boats against a Kirov btg>start hearing that sound a few seconds in>VAMPIRE VAMPIRE VAMPIRE
>>1898284>play Guam red side>start well outside of range of Granits>play Guam blue side>suddenly the Kirov battle group is well within the range of Granits?????
game sucks balls. its pre alpha at this point
>>1898297the range isn't an issue as much as the difficult to balance fact that red has a sub tracking blue from the start.
>>1898338It’s a random chance, sometimes NATO has a sub tracking the Kirov group too
>>1898206The same anon keeps going around making up shit about newly released/upcoming games. Like pretending Manor Lords was just pre-rendered footage and didn't exist, or sperging about Kyiv being present in EU5.
>>1898474Oh the Manor Lords seethe was amazing.
>>1898523>troonor lords
>>1898206Its not even /vst/ version, those are the same miserable fucks that inhabit /v/.
>>1898474pure cope
>>1898166Might be worth something down the line. But right looks to be barebones.
im sad this thing turned out to be a bust. its years away from being truly playable :/
>>1895513micropussy just shits out half baked unfinished autistslop. catch me outside with that shit
>>1895298Grim
i like it. it's basically just fleet command with better graphics. the only real issues i've run into is land attack stuff isn't modeled that well and the ai needs work to utilize more out of its platforms.unlike fleet command, i've been having a lot of fun with low level air attacks on warships, like fighters with as-7 if the ussr, or doing sead with ew support on the same.
>>1899635On the other hand, air combat is so busted compared to Fleet Command. Planes barely do anything to evade missiles, often it's just popping flares and not much else. I downloaded one mission where you're supposed to sink a destroyer that intercepted a ferry. Under your command you have 2 missiles boats, a helicopter and 2 MiG-21s. Enemy has MiG-27s and because of early missiles, which are so shit, you have to rely on guns and getting a plane to actually hit another is a massive pain in the ass.
So does it have anything direct control like cold waters or is it purely multiple unit, tactical/strategic gameplay?
