What Great Potential! But....

[miller7219]

First off, let me say I highly suggest every naval enthusiast buy Command today. The database itself is worth many times Matrix's humble asking price and the scenario editor is ground breaking without a doubt. For everyone that kept wanting Harpoon to become what it just never did and those that had high hopes for Jane's Fleet Command, Command has the potential to meld the two approaches to modern naval/air warfare into one finally complete experience. The influences of both Harpoon II and Jane's Fleet Command are extremely evident in Command's design.

Now, with all of that said and at the risk of offending the delicate skins of some within the naval simulation community, I have to express some views that are critical of the opening act of Command's journey towards becoming the "One". I believe it will become just that one day, but it just ain't ready yet for that high honor (IMHO, of course).

After playing, or more accurately watching the AI play, I have some initial general observations:

1. The interface is clunky at best and overly complicated

2. Too many windows and boxes to check or uncheck, and if you miss one window or one box then nothing happens the way you intended.

3. As much public relations time that has been spent on Command's AI, I have to say it ain't that bright. The "Auto" attack just doesn't do it. Essentially all it seems to be programmed to do is make sure the platform is within launch parameters of its weapon(s) and then make a bead line to the selected target. I will give props to the mission editor. Although I don't think there's enough tailoring options when you create a mission, it does feel more robust and smarter than Harpoon II's ever was. I'd like to be able to use the "Auto" attack feature and see a pop up window that let's me check boxes to tailor how the AI will conduct the attack (what should the attack profile be? EMCON status?...that kind of stuff).

4. I can't figure out if there is the ability to edit behavior by way point. Maybe there is and I just missed it in the manual and haven't stumbled onto how to do it yet. Setting a path and then editing the speed/altitude and EMCON status by way point just seems like it should be a given. Hopefully I'm just missing it and someone will set me straight.

5. Neither the AI or the tools to effectively manually manage platforms feels right. My gut tells me the design objective of Command was to create a simulation that would appeal to both the micro managers and those that prefer a more high level strategy role. It feels to me that neither is as polished and capable as what I hoped they would be. In fact, I may go a step further and suggest that the design feels like it's kind of nudging the player to adopt more of the high level strategy role with all the emphasis on AI and behavior scripting.

I hope the sheer anticipation we've all felt leading up to the long awaited release of Command and just how darn impressive the database is and the capabilities of its inspired and ground breaking scenario editor doesn't divert serious dialogue and constructive scrutiny of the simulation itself. I think that would be a tragedy, because I see an incredibly exciting ride ahead as Command continues to evolve and become the "One" that in my opinion it just isn't yet.

I've followed the naval simulation community quietly for many years. The degree of fervent and sometimes destructive behavior I've watched has always kept me unwilling to express an opinion. But, I have to admit that even though I have some critical opinions of Command at this time I've never been more enthusiastic about any naval simulation as I am with Command.

[ExMachina]

1. The interface is clunky at best and overly complicated

It's definitely involved, but not sure if "overly complicated" is accurate. The learning curve here is steep but I see the "why" behind a lot of the interface decisions

2. Too many windows and boxes to check or uncheck, and if you miss one window or one box then nothing happens the way you intended.

True. I find myself chasing boxes a lot and wish that there was a more integrated way to see what was happening (for example, if a friendly unit was radiating, to have a visual cue other than a radar range ring...a cue that was more easily ascribable to the unit's icon)

The "Auto" attack just doesn't do it. Essentially all it seems to be programmed to do is make sure the platform is within launch parameters of its weapon(s) and then make a bead line to the selected target.

Completely agree. The auto attack is poorly implemented. Manual attack is the only way to go at this point. The ideal solution (for me) would be to have the manual and auto attack integrated so that if you select "auto" you get a menu of what the AI intends to do and then have full power to veto its decision.

In fact, I may go a step further and suggest that the design feels like it's kind of nudging the player to adopt more of the high level strategy role with all the emphasis on AI and behavior scripting.

Interesting. I see what you mean but am not sure I can agree completely...the micro management IS [/i]there and I think that most of us (me at least) will lobby for improvements in that area..the AI is a weak link at this point but it looks like it's fix-able.

So far I've been encourage with the responses from the Command developers so I'm optomistic about what will happen in the next 6 months.

[Primarchx]

I'm not offended by your post and am glad you've taken the time to play and provide some good, critical feedback.

I will say that I have a lot of faith that what we see with Command today - which for us air/naval nuts is proving to be THE platform-packed, time-spanning, globe-trotting, publicly-available, high-fidelity sandbox to create any situation our fevered little brains can think of - will only be getting better.

Strap in and enjoy the ride! [:D]

[mikmykWS]

Thanks for the input guys. We really do appreciate it.

Mike

[milkweg]

ORIGINAL: miller7219

First off, let me say I highly suggest every naval enthusiast buy Command today. The database itself is worth many times Matrix's humble asking price

Yea, right, I wasn't born yesterday! I will have to wait for Christmas sale because poor Timmy's Dad can't afford this price. Until then the D&D Anthology I just bought for $4.99 from GamersGate will suffice.

[miller7219]

$79.99 for 70 years of naval history is a bargain for me. Check the price of a current edition of Jane's Fighting ships and you'll see what I mean. That's just for ONE edition! I'm confident when I say these guys spent thousands (maybe in the 10's of thousands) of dollars gathering the reference material from over 70 years of naval history and then thousands of man hours compiling it all to create Command's unprecedented database. There are spec/tech guys out there within the community that are all database and don't too much play the games themselves. For anyone interested in naval history, weaponry, or platform specs $79.99 can't be beat for such a complete reference work.

I will admit I have a $50/month game budget and I spent it all and then a little extra this month to buy Command. I'll cut a corner or two to compensate, but it was money well spent for me I probably would have spent twice the purchase price and then Ramen noodled it for the next couple of months!

[Talon_XBMCX]

ORIGINAL: milkweg

ORIGINAL: miller7219

First off, let me say I highly suggest every naval enthusiast buy Command today. The database itself is worth many times Matrix's humble asking price

Yea, right, I wasn't born yesterday! I will have to wait for Christmas sale because poor Timmy's Dad can't afford this price. Until then the D&D Anthology I just bought for $4.99 from GamersGate will suffice.

And just how much of the $4.99 do you think the developer sees?