Tides of War first impressions

[Kushan04]

I feel like it's pretty insane that I, the commander of a relatively small naval exercise, would start a war with China because their fishing boats kept meandering into my rather over-sized operation area. I'd at least need President Lam or whoever to be screaming wild-eyed orders at me.

I do feel like this attempt at injecting a roleplaying type scenario into CMO has severe limitations. It was entertaining listening to the fishing boats radio back how mad they were, but the engine isn't designed for serious decision trees and you can see it breaking under that demand in this scenario.

You're free to try and do better.

[SchDerGrosse]

Can only fix issues that were reported in testing. Unfortunately it looks like none of the current issues were.

Color me sceptical but users report bugs that are immediately apparent from either the very start (!) of the very first (!) mission or pop up during only a few hours of play.

Based on the above I highly doubt that a single person ("beta testers" - if there were any) sat down and played through the the entire campaign from start to finish and confirmed that yup, its fine, and thus ready to be released.

But hey, the same thing happened with Ice Breakers. And silly me went ahead and bought it on release.

Consumers should vote with their vallet, but yet again I pulled out my credit card and made the purchuse. So I myself is sadly definately part of the problem.

[Dragnaath]

Consumers should vote with their vallet, but yet again I pulled out my credit card and made the purchuse. So I myself is sadly definately part of the problem.

I did the same thing bought on release because we all love Command and want to show our support do the Devs who seems to get complacent every now and then.

[Kushan04]

As promised, here's the (unofficial) update for scenario 1 - ASEX-25. Should fix most of the known issues with it.

https://forums.matrixgames.com/viewtopic.php?t=416631

[1nutworld]

As promised, here's the (unofficial) update for scenario 1 - ASEX-25. Should fix most of the known issues with it.

https://forums.matrixgames.com/viewtopic.php?t=416631

Knowing there is an official update happening, and from reading other posts, as always my intent is to purchase, but haven't yet due to bugs. When the official one happens, I'll be purchasing. Thanks Kushan and to the Devs for continuing to provide us with plenty of missions to have at our disposal to enjoy.

[Knightpawn]

I played the fist scenario, after Kushan04 update and it was quite good and I enjoy it a lot. Everything worked as expected.

My only comment regarding the boarding special action is that, no matter if it fails, the player can try and try again and again until he makes it. I had my ribs going around, and boarding vessels that did not respond to radio warnings regardless of how many time my guys were clubbed on the head trying to board

Never had to ram as a result.

[Kushan04]

My only comment regarding the boarding special action is that, no matter if it fails, the player can try and try again and again until he makes it. I had my ribs going around, and boarding vessels that did not respond to radio warnings regardless of how many time my guys were clubbed on the head trying to board

Never had to ram as a result.

Good points. Better feedback then we got from most of the beta group TBH. Keeping in mind this wasn't my scenario and I really don't want to completely redo/unmake the original designers concept - how about something like this:
1) Radio Warnings - Initial "get away from here" action.
2) If that fails, then you have the choice between Boarding and Ramming. Boarding would be changed to be 100% successful but you would lose a random amount of points. Ramming would also be a 100% chance of hitting too but you risk damaging your own ship but would not lose points.

I've thought about a new option that would be between radio warning and the current actions, call it warning shot or water cannons. A kinetic warning action that allows players to do something once the PAFMM vessels stop listening to warnings, but doesn't risk the points loss or damage but like radio warning would have a random chance at being successful. I'm split on the idea - it might be a complication that's not really needed.

[Knightpawn]

Campaign feedback: unless I am doing something wrong, while in campaign, the game seems to force the player to move to the next scenario upon achieving the score milestone set for this purpose. One does not seem to have the option to continue playing as the names of the units become corrupt (if this is unclear to the devs reading it I can try and produce a save when I find some time). This results in anti-climax moments. For example, in the second scenario , a few minutes after I was tasked to rescue the crew from the attacked civilian ship, I crossed the milestone and have to move to next scenario. Thus I missed the most interesting turn of events.

I believe ideally the scenario should end
(a) at the end of duration, or
(b) sooner if the player chooses and
at that time to validate the pass or fail score.

[Knightpawn]

how about something like this:
1) Radio Warnings - Initial "get away from here" action.
2) If that fails, then you have the choice between Boarding and Ramming. Boarding would be changed to be 100% successful but you would lose a random amount of points. Ramming would also be a 100% chance of hitting too but you risk damaging your own ship but would not lose points.

I've thought about a new option that would be between radio warning and the current actions, call it warning shot or water cannons. A kinetic warning action that allows players to do something once the PAFMM vessels stop listening to warnings, but doesn't risk the points loss or damage but like radio warning would have a random chance at being successful. I'm split on the idea - it might be a complication that's not really needed.

It is an interesting idea. However please check if response to radio warnings is probabilistic (i.e. it could work after some attempts) or deterministic. From my play I have the feeling that certain Chinese ships were hard wired to disobey and I have to resort to boarding / ramming. But maybe I am wrong (I don't intent to take a peak at the editor before i do a full campaign pass so that i don't spoil the narrative for me)

Warning shots as an option is available at scenario 2. In Sc 1 options are: shout; board; ram. In Sc 2 options are: Warning Shot; Ram

[AreusF]

Campaign feedback: unless I am doing something wrong, while in campaign, the game seems to force the player to move to the next scenario upon achieving the score milestone set for this purpose. One does not seem to have the option to continue playing as the names of the units become corrupt (if this is unclear to the devs reading it I can try and produce a save when I find some time). This results in anti-climax moments. For example, in the second scenario , a few minutes after I was tasked to rescue the crew from the attacked civilian ship, I crossed the milestone and have to move to next scenario. Thus I missed the most interesting turn of events.

I believe ideally the scenario should end
(a) at the end of duration, or
(b) sooner if the player chooses and
at that time to validate the pass or fail score.

I found that you can close the box by selecting the X in the top right corner which allows you to continue. With that being said, it is quite annoying because every time the scenario score changes you need to close it again.

[AreusF]

I am finding some issues with mission 5. Without going into details which can give away spoilers, the issues are as follows:

1) When scenario starts, all of my naval assets from the previous mission are all missing (ships and subs).
2) Air assets lost in the previous mission are all replenished.
3) I can fast track time for the mission duration (double flame) without launching a single aircraft and win the mission (meeting score threshold which is set to 0).
4) The scenario ends if I shoot down a single enemy aircraft since my score is >0, triggering the scenario end and allowing me to continue to mission 6.

It's a little disappointing that the beta testers did not catch any of these items.

[bsmithwins]

I am finding some issues with mission 5. Without going into details which can give away spoilers, the issues are as follows:

1) When scenario starts, all of my naval assets from the previous mission are all missing (ships and subs).
2) Air assets lost in the previous mission are all replenished.
3) I can fast track time for the mission duration (double flame) without launching a single aircraft and win the mission (meeting score threshold which is set to 0).
4) The scenario ends if I shoot down a single enemy aircraft since my score is >0, triggering the scenario end and allowing me to continue to mission 6.

It's a little disappointing that the beta testers did not catch any of these items.

Given the quality of previous DLCs I'd not be assuming there were beta testers

[Kushan04]

how about something like this:
1) Radio Warnings - Initial "get away from here" action.
2) If that fails, then you have the choice between Boarding and Ramming. Boarding would be changed to be 100% successful but you would lose a random amount of points. Ramming would also be a 100% chance of hitting too but you risk damaging your own ship but would not lose points.

I've thought about a new option that would be between radio warning and the current actions, call it warning shot or water cannons. A kinetic warning action that allows players to do something once the PAFMM vessels stop listening to warnings, but doesn't risk the points loss or damage but like radio warning would have a random chance at being successful. I'm split on the idea - it might be a complication that's not really needed.

It is an interesting idea. However please check if response to radio warnings is probabilistic (i.e. it could work after some attempts) or deterministic. From my play I have the feeling that certain Chinese ships were hard wired to disobey and I have to resort to boarding / ramming. But maybe I am wrong (I don't intent to take a peak at the editor before i do a full campaign pass so that i don't spoil the narrative for me)

Warning shots as an option is available at scenario 2. In Sc 1 options are: shout; board; ram. In Sc 2 options are: Warning Shot; Ram

It’s completely random. At the start, no ship is specifically programmed to not obey them. However, there is a point where the radio warnings stop working all together and no PAFMM will obey them.

[schweggy]

There were beta testers for Tides of War. I'm one. Several of the reported issues were identified early on. However a decision was made to shift to Discord to report issues during the early testing. Some testers, like myself, had never used Discord and found its interface a bit of a challenge to use at first. That might have contributed to some of the issues falling through the cracks. Other than that, I've no idea why issues identified were not addressed, or if they were affected by the base game update that coincided with the release.

[AreusF]

There were beta testers for Tides of War. I'm one. Several of the reported issues were identified early on. However a decision was made to shift to Discord to report issues during the early testing. Some testers, like myself, had never used Discord and found its interface a bit of a challenge to use at first. That might have contributed to some of the issues falling through the cracks. Other than that, I've no idea why issues identified were not addressed, or if they were affected by the base game update that coincided with the release.

I noticed that the campaign scenarios were all using DB3K_512 which made me wonder if an earlier build of the campaign / missions may have been uploaded inadvertently. All other campaigns were updated to DB3K_514 with the latest update.

[FTBSS]

The latest official update and new tides download are great for me. the sim keeps getting better and better thanks for all your hard work and dedication. great job guys

[AudentesFortunaJuvat]

So I really enjoyed the first mission... but it is definitely a work in progress. The scale seemed enormous, and I will echo the frustration that all impressions are that this was relased for sale prematurely. If Matrix wants to build a solid reputation around its product, then the products should be fun and completely playable on release...especially when people are paying for them. Otherwise, call it beta, limited release....or better yet....release the scenarios like episodes of a TV series. The initial buyers get the first few scenarios...and then additional ones are periodically released as they are finished.

I personally love this concept of a conflict in the South China Sea. Where a group of regional powers with drastically different capabilities and equipment types work together. I think this is much more feasible than the typical South China Sea scenario of the US coming in with unfathomable air and sea power, and a few regional powers providing token capabilities that don't really matter.

A few points that I based on my first impressions that could take this concept and make it phenomenal.

#1. As others have noted, the scoring seems off. For all the scenarios, I get prompted to end the scenario and continue to the next one after scoring the first few points, with an Average score. This should be an easy fix, just messing with the point thresholds would fix it....or you could insert an end scenario prompt when a certain objective is accomplished or time limit reached....then the point tally would give us our "grade".

#2. The idea of damage and unit loss continuing between scenarios is an amazing idea...I would extend it to weapons as well. The scenario that I played has unlimited munitions for air...but in reality, the powers that are being simulated would have significant limitations on munitions. It could also provide an opportunity for external support from the US. Would it be possible to choose between scenarios in which munitions could get replenished? i.e. the US is pledging limited logistic support, the player can decide between air-to-air, stand-off anti-ship, or stand-off strike. Just an idea.

3. When Singapore gets involved, it seems almost overpowered, with the main limitation being air refueling.

4. China seems to be purely on the defense and gives the player the ability to create a set-piece battle. It would be a much more dynamic and realistic scenario if China was more aggressive, causing the player to have to make tough decisions on allocation of limited resources.

5. A few scenario-specific notes: The Kilo-class submarines in the middle scenarios do not have an anti-ship torpedo. Is this accurate? When I researched the torpedos that were loaded, it seems like they should have an antiship capability....this may be a database issue.

6. The Battle of the South China Sea is unfinished; China doesn't have any missions built so it is just a matter of wearing away at the SAM rings and stationary ships.