A beta is absolutely voluntary...absolutely. If you don't like the results of the beta, stay out. If you came in and said, "Hey 1328.18 release had a serious issue that really should have been picked up in beta." I would agree. But you are comparing a beta to early access Sea Power that is not a voluntary beta. Its early access. There is no definition, only tradition and expectation. You pay full price for EA and have previewers talk about the polish, expectations are that it should be functional. Can I play, sort of. Does it do what I expect it to do...absolutely not. The bugs and gaps are significant enough for me to wonder what the beta was like.
The hope and expectation is they will fix the issues and add features. But now they have put pressure on themselves. The darned thing has been in development for over five years. Why the sudden rush to get to EA? devs treat EA like free reign to foist an unfinished product on to the masses for money. CMO's betas are not that. They are a FREE development and improvement of the game that you volunteer to play. How can anyone think a free beta is mandatory to use?
Again, you are making a very poor point comparing a full-price early access (itself unusual) for a barely functional game to a fully backed game that offers you the opportunity to voluntarily pre-play and take advantage of the improvements. Note I said opportunity and voluntary. You can easily ignore the beta and keep right on playing. How is that comparable to what Sea Power is doing?
Sea Power
Moderator: MOD_Command
Re: Sea Power
This was on my first day buy list. Got the notification a couple of days ago went on Steam and saw the positive reviews. Read many of the reviews and still haven't purchased.
I'm sure they will work out many of the issues, but pretty clear that the lack of many features hamstrings the game at present. For anything other than a small engagement the lack of features like mission planers is a big drawback. Whether the designers will add or if they are hoping modders will do the work for them, if possible remains to be seen.
Managing a carrier with large air wing, let alone 2 or 3, looks like too much micro management. A youtube with a player who's had dozens of hours into the game commented on lack of AI and in a carrier vs carrier battle commented that the AI doesn't do anything. ASW warfare also problematic at the moment.
Perhaps the fact this is an outgrowth of Cold Waters has ham stringed this in a way as the interface and built-in tools that need to be created and implement to handle medium/large multi-domain operations that involves large numbers of sea/air elements was not really necessary in Cold Waters.
I'll eventually end up purchasing, but in no hurry.
I'm sure they will work out many of the issues, but pretty clear that the lack of many features hamstrings the game at present. For anything other than a small engagement the lack of features like mission planers is a big drawback. Whether the designers will add or if they are hoping modders will do the work for them, if possible remains to be seen.
Managing a carrier with large air wing, let alone 2 or 3, looks like too much micro management. A youtube with a player who's had dozens of hours into the game commented on lack of AI and in a carrier vs carrier battle commented that the AI doesn't do anything. ASW warfare also problematic at the moment.
Perhaps the fact this is an outgrowth of Cold Waters has ham stringed this in a way as the interface and built-in tools that need to be created and implement to handle medium/large multi-domain operations that involves large numbers of sea/air elements was not really necessary in Cold Waters.
I'll eventually end up purchasing, but in no hurry.
Re: Sea Power
I noted there are already discussions about turnaround times for aircraft being instant. My read is they will abstract it heavily and create a simple process of a single time for all aircraft. I did post a couple links from the discussions on this board for reference for anyone there.
edit:
https://steamcommunity.com/app/1286220/ ... 756702315/ (Note: Just realized that post is almost two years old and updated nine months ago. So its mostly bad news that the issues are still front and center.)
This post is good news and bad news.
The good news is they recognize that they need to be more communicative. Using discord only for a very complex game is not optimal. The signal to noise ratio is terrible and hard to filter like a forum. The other good news is they recognize the need for better AI and mission logic to alleviate the burden. They also mention fixing carrier deck and airbase operations.
The bad news is, even for EA, the big functional gaps. Air combat, missions, AI, etc. should have been at least better baked than it is. This is the risk in releasing an EA product after all the marketing hype and then basically charging full price. As a business, the only growth now is DLC, but you still have to invest a lot of resources to get the game to full function.
I am worried it will go the way of Janes Fleet Command. Started with the intent of being THE naval warfare simulator with 3D and detailed modeling underneath. But the got so consumed by the graphical resources needed to expand, they neglected the underneath modeling. This let Harpoon claim the crown of the game for serious wargames while JFC was left to grow stale and eventually abandoned.
It was fun to play for about 30 minutes. Then it became very hectic to get anything done and see all the cool stuff. I plan on playing Battle of Latakia in both CMO and SP. But I'll have to wait for a patch or two from SP to see if they fix some of the issues that impact how it plays out.
edit:
https://steamcommunity.com/app/1286220/ ... 756702315/ (Note: Just realized that post is almost two years old and updated nine months ago. So its mostly bad news that the issues are still front and center.)
This post is good news and bad news.
The good news is they recognize that they need to be more communicative. Using discord only for a very complex game is not optimal. The signal to noise ratio is terrible and hard to filter like a forum. The other good news is they recognize the need for better AI and mission logic to alleviate the burden. They also mention fixing carrier deck and airbase operations.
The bad news is, even for EA, the big functional gaps. Air combat, missions, AI, etc. should have been at least better baked than it is. This is the risk in releasing an EA product after all the marketing hype and then basically charging full price. As a business, the only growth now is DLC, but you still have to invest a lot of resources to get the game to full function.
I am worried it will go the way of Janes Fleet Command. Started with the intent of being THE naval warfare simulator with 3D and detailed modeling underneath. But the got so consumed by the graphical resources needed to expand, they neglected the underneath modeling. This let Harpoon claim the crown of the game for serious wargames while JFC was left to grow stale and eventually abandoned.
It was fun to play for about 30 minutes. Then it became very hectic to get anything done and see all the cool stuff. I plan on playing Battle of Latakia in both CMO and SP. But I'll have to wait for a patch or two from SP to see if they fix some of the issues that impact how it plays out.
Re: Sea Power
With 6 programmers on board one would think should be able to make progress on those items (but what do I know, I'm not a programmer 
). But yes, kinda worrying to see the main issues in July 2023 still seem to be work in progress.
Looking at the player stats, I reckon they could have sold as many as 50.000 copies at this point which is a very solid cash boost. With glowing reviews (85%) and solid concurrent player stats, I'd say that the future looks bright for SP and that most players disagree with us
). But yes, kinda worrying to see the main issues in July 2023 still seem to be work in progress.Looking at the player stats, I reckon they could have sold as many as 50.000 copies at this point which is a very solid cash boost. With glowing reviews (85%) and solid concurrent player stats, I'd say that the future looks bright for SP and that most players disagree with us
Re: Sea Power
Mission editor: That's another thing we're working on. While our missions are based on ini files, we're creating an in-game editor which allows to setup single missions/scenarios.thewood1 wrote: Thu Nov 14, 2024 2:06 pm The other good news is they recognize the need for better AI and mission logic to alleviate the burden.
I got the impression from that wording that the "mission" editor was a scenario editor, not missions to take the burden off the player.
We'll see. Plenty of games sell well, and the anticipation for SP was high given the niche, but have poor long term player counts. Not everyone is a Cyberpunk 2077 or No Man's Sky.Valar wrote: Thu Nov 14, 2024 10:26 pm Looking at the player stats, I reckon they could have sold as many as 50.000 copies at this point which is a very solid cash boost. With glowing reviews (85%) and solid concurrent player stats, I'd say that the future looks bright for SP and that most players disagree with us
I think you nailed it on the head why they released it EA when they did, money. They may need more money to keep funding development. Releasing it EA even with major issues brings an influx of cash.
Re: Sea Power
I think we are also seeing the true colors of Microprose's return. They are pushing products out the door and forcing devs to self fund to continue development. Sea Power, Task Force Admiral, Second Front all come to mind, from what I have seen. Of all of them, Sea Power has the potential for continued log-term development. But they are in a make or break period right now.
Re: Sea Power
I don't think the new Microprose has anything to do with the old onethewood1 wrote: Thu Nov 14, 2024 11:12 pm I think we are also seeing the true colors of Microprose's return. They are pushing products out the door and forcing devs to self fund to continue development. Sea Power, Task Force Admiral, Second Front all come to mind, from what I have seen. Of all of them, Sea Power has the potential for continued log-term development. But they are in a make or break period right now.
https://www.linkedin.com/in/david-laget ... bdomain=au
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MicroPros ... 93present)
Re: Sea Power
Thats not what I was saying. My point was They are using the Microprose brand only.
Re: Sea Power
You are correct, other then the name, the new Microprose has nothing to do with the old one. It was chosen to play on peoples nostalgia.thewood1 wrote: Fri Nov 15, 2024 1:13 am Thats not what I was saying. My point was They are using the Microprose brand only.
Re: Sea Power
Just a comparison of how Sea Power plays out compared to CMO (1500). I chose Battle of Latakia as its in both games as a standard scenario and its a straight forward set up.
Sea Power
It was kind of a confusing mess right now. Some of that is just my inexperience with the game. But it was very hard to tell what was happening as things unfolded. The message log is helpful, but does not seem fully functional. The ESM screen is actually quite useful in seeing info on a contact. But, again, does not seem like its fully operating. There are no settings to pause thew game if a contact is made or based on anything happening in the game. That means you really have to pay attention to whats going on.
Once you make contact, its all micromanagement. You have to turn on all the radars as the player. Seems nothing is automatic in self-defense. You also have to turn on the DECM and point it at each incoming missile. Chaff is the same way. And there is no easy way to see what units you have already given order to. I find myself going back and duplicating orders because of that. The first wave of Styx were handled well by DECM, chaff, and AAA from the boats. But while I was focused on that wave, the closely following second wave came in and I didn't notice them. Because I didn't redirect the countermeasures at the second wave, they killed half my boast. I played it multiple times and the micromanagement required me to pause a lot and redirect both countermeasures and the Gabriels in a counterattack.
In the end, it was very cool watching the action. But frustrating at how much you really have to monitor all the details of your units' activities. In fact, the 3D world was really a distraction and all the subsequent playthroughs after the first attempt, I maximized the map and played from that. I just checked the 3D world now and then to make sure the ships were firing chaff.
CMO
First thing I did was build a zone along the Syrian coast. Then assigned the Israeli boats to a Sea Control mission with radar and DECM active in the zone. Set the speed for the mission. Also set opportunity fire as on and investigate contacts in weapon range. All units had tight fire control. Hit start at 15x time. The blue units went about their business. Styx came in and were either shot down or spoofed. Killed all Syrian boats. Most with missiles, but a couple with guns. Then fired the rest of the missiles at shore targets.
Conclusion
My familiarity with CMO was a distinct advantage here. Any new player would probably micromanage the blue boats. But the would have ended up with the same results. Just like in real life. This is just validation that Sea Power is still a long way from being ready as anything other than a 3D graphical representation of small naval unit tactics. Even just 5-6 boats in Latakia were a little overwhelming to manage at times when the action starts. There is no really planning or planning tools that allow you to focus on the bigger picture. Probably the most surprising thing with my play of Sea Power was my using the map view 90% of the playthrough.
Another patch was just released this morning, but it doesn't seem o impact this playthrough. The final result is that Sea Power was fun but has a VERY long way to go to rival either harpoon or CMO as a simulation of air and naval warfare.
Sea Power
It was kind of a confusing mess right now. Some of that is just my inexperience with the game. But it was very hard to tell what was happening as things unfolded. The message log is helpful, but does not seem fully functional. The ESM screen is actually quite useful in seeing info on a contact. But, again, does not seem like its fully operating. There are no settings to pause thew game if a contact is made or based on anything happening in the game. That means you really have to pay attention to whats going on.
Once you make contact, its all micromanagement. You have to turn on all the radars as the player. Seems nothing is automatic in self-defense. You also have to turn on the DECM and point it at each incoming missile. Chaff is the same way. And there is no easy way to see what units you have already given order to. I find myself going back and duplicating orders because of that. The first wave of Styx were handled well by DECM, chaff, and AAA from the boats. But while I was focused on that wave, the closely following second wave came in and I didn't notice them. Because I didn't redirect the countermeasures at the second wave, they killed half my boast. I played it multiple times and the micromanagement required me to pause a lot and redirect both countermeasures and the Gabriels in a counterattack.
In the end, it was very cool watching the action. But frustrating at how much you really have to monitor all the details of your units' activities. In fact, the 3D world was really a distraction and all the subsequent playthroughs after the first attempt, I maximized the map and played from that. I just checked the 3D world now and then to make sure the ships were firing chaff.
CMO
First thing I did was build a zone along the Syrian coast. Then assigned the Israeli boats to a Sea Control mission with radar and DECM active in the zone. Set the speed for the mission. Also set opportunity fire as on and investigate contacts in weapon range. All units had tight fire control. Hit start at 15x time. The blue units went about their business. Styx came in and were either shot down or spoofed. Killed all Syrian boats. Most with missiles, but a couple with guns. Then fired the rest of the missiles at shore targets.
Conclusion
My familiarity with CMO was a distinct advantage here. Any new player would probably micromanage the blue boats. But the would have ended up with the same results. Just like in real life. This is just validation that Sea Power is still a long way from being ready as anything other than a 3D graphical representation of small naval unit tactics. Even just 5-6 boats in Latakia were a little overwhelming to manage at times when the action starts. There is no really planning or planning tools that allow you to focus on the bigger picture. Probably the most surprising thing with my play of Sea Power was my using the map view 90% of the playthrough.
Another patch was just released this morning, but it doesn't seem o impact this playthrough. The final result is that Sea Power was fun but has a VERY long way to go to rival either harpoon or CMO as a simulation of air and naval warfare.
Re: Sea Power
I have now played Latakia a couple times with the new patch. The main change for me is making the status bar at the bottom of the screen somewhat more useful to manage radar and ROE. But its still very awkward to manage a "group" or formation.
There is a modicum of self-defense. As the Styx gets very close, the boats will fire some chaff and AAA. But there is no automatic radar for self-defense. With no intervention all the blue boats get sunk eventually and never attack the red boats. Even with intervention of turning on radars, I still lose more than half of the boats. Needs significant improvement.
There is a modicum of self-defense. As the Styx gets very close, the boats will fire some chaff and AAA. But there is no automatic radar for self-defense. With no intervention all the blue boats get sunk eventually and never attack the red boats. Even with intervention of turning on radars, I still lose more than half of the boats. Needs significant improvement.
Re: Sea Power
I had to go into the editor and change the time of day to mid morning Local. It was way to dark to see anything in the "3D Display". Yah it's just eye candy but the Dev's seem to have spent WAY too much time in their 3D models, may as well use it.
Re: Sea Power
I noticed that also. Had to increase brightness to max to see anything.MauriceB wrote: Fri Nov 15, 2024 6:34 pm I had to go into the editor and change the time of day to mid morning Local. It was way to dark to see anything in the "3D Display". Yah it's just eye candy but the Dev's seem to have spent WAY too much time in their 3D models, may as well use it.
btw, I have a i9-13980 cpu and a 4090 laptop gpu. Sea Power at high settings brings it to its knees in small scenarios, like Latakia. Another thing that will near-term limit battle sizes.
-
HalfLifeExpert
- Posts: 1332
- Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2015 3:39 pm
- Location: California, United States
Re: Sea Power
I did briefly look at the Latakia scenario in Sea Power on release day (spent most of my playtime so far with Dong Hoi).
The thing that stuck out to me was that I immediately lost one of my Israeli Missile Boats to a Styx missile, and I could not locate any sort of OECM/DECM settings.
The Key to Israeli victory in that battle was ECM and Chaff, as the Styx missiles used by the Syrians out-ranged the Gabriel missiles used by the Israelis, allowing them to close the distance with near impunity to engage and resoundly defeat the Syrians.
The thing that stuck out to me was that I immediately lost one of my Israeli Missile Boats to a Styx missile, and I could not locate any sort of OECM/DECM settings.
The Key to Israeli victory in that battle was ECM and Chaff, as the Styx missiles used by the Syrians out-ranged the Gabriel missiles used by the Israelis, allowing them to close the distance with near impunity to engage and resoundly defeat the Syrians.
Re: Sea Power
The ECM interface is odd in Sea Power. The "weapon" is labeled Offensive ECM but when you hover over it it says "Defensive ECM". The biggest oddity is you have to treat it like a weapon, u click "Offensive ECM" then right click a target you want to Jam (i.e. one target at a time). I think DECM would just spam "radar noise" and affect any missile coming inside it's cone.
Re: Sea Power
Really trying to like this game, but its eluding me. Every time I get frustrated, I have to tell myself its EA. But I also find myself realizing CMNAO/CMO basically did this out-of-the-box, without the graphics. I did note that there some grousing on the forums on not being able allocate weapon/ranges, aircraft defensive actions, and no ability to automate any part of missions. Some of these will sound familiar from CMNAO fans circa 2013.
Re: Sea Power
A question to those who tried SP.
Excluding the graphics part, what feature of SP could be added to CMO?
Excluding the graphics part, what feature of SP could be added to CMO?
Re: Sea Power
At this point in early access, besides the graphics, there is nothing in Sea Power that I would add to any game i play currently.Nikel wrote: Wed Nov 20, 2024 7:37 pm Excluding the graphics part, what feature of SP could be added to CMO?
Re: Sea Power
OK 
Perhaps I should have said, besides 3D graphics.
I cannot find the video now, but could sea a graphic of the formation editor that looked good.
Perhaps I should have said, besides 3D graphics.
I cannot find the video now, but could sea a graphic of the formation editor that looked good.
Last edited by Nikel on Wed Nov 20, 2024 8:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Sea Power
As mentioned, excluding graphics, Sea Power is a very hollow and feature lacking of modern naval warfare compared to CMO...or even CMNAO and Harpoon.
Even if they hit their planned roadmap in the next couple of years, there is almost no comparison. And I am more and more convinced with each passing day that the graphics holds them back from expanding the game. They already stated that VLS is being held back due to the inability to animate the hatches opening and closing as needed.
Even if they hit their planned roadmap in the next couple of years, there is almost no comparison. And I am more and more convinced with each passing day that the graphics holds them back from expanding the game. They already stated that VLS is being held back due to the inability to animate the hatches opening and closing as needed.