Sea Power

[thewood1]

Like everything with SP right now, the formation editor looks superficially good. But functionally, you can see it still needs development. Thats my own experience and from reading Steam forums. ESM and contact management is at the same level.

[Nikel]

The hatches, well if they are busy with that... Nothing left to the imagination?

They should apply this latin maxim:


De minimis non curat praetor

[sfbaytf]

Finally picked this up and played a little. Needs lots of work, but it is early access so not surprised. Absolutely needs mission management tools or it will remain severely hamstrung once you get into medium to larger sized operations with many assets.

Basically a 2024 version of Fleet Command that comes with same limitations as original Fleet Command. Something to play when you need a change of pace so long as you understand limitations.

As for graphics and CMO I would look at the recently released Armored Brigade 2 for inspiration. You have a base games that was very good the the addition of not overly complicated 3D graphics has really enhanced the game over the original that really add to the experience. That looks like something that could potentially work in CMO.

[thewood1]

I have played AB2 a lot as a beta tester. The 3D aspect has some benefits, but again, I find myself going top down maybe 75% of the time. It is good to just enjoy the show and it can be useful to position troops, but all the decision-making happens on the top-down view.

[SWHodges22]

Have been war gaming since MS-DOS days including the Gary Grigsby classics and Harpoon, Kampgruppe, and on and on. Have the Command games and Hearts of Iron but these days more into the beer and pretzel than the hardcore military college level. SP could become that. I play Cold Waters quite a bit else the SH series. SP has a ways to go and lacking some things even that level should have, assignable patrol zones, WayPoint orders etc. but is still a works in progress. Heck I'd like to see it modded down to WW2 level too.

Are the graphics necessary no but entertaining. I actually worked on the early Spruance class DDG's when they were being built at Ingalls in Pascagoula MS and fun to zoom in on them and command! Yea it was expensive for an early release but after Cold Waters I'll support the dev and the mods that will come out for the platform.

[thewood1]

Whenever someone says they have been playing since MS-DOS days, my response is config.sys and autexec.bat.

I've been following the Steam discussion on ready times for aircraft. Right now they are insta-ready. Players are complaining about aircraft spamming battles. It shows a few things:

1) The types players SP is attracting...a lot of players want to blow things up now.

2) The devs are deadset against some basic realism and automation around it. You can build variable ready times and automate it to eliminate the micromanagement. I think the devs are just against the general principle and feel its an over-complication.

3) The constant comparison to Fleet Command/Harpoon/CMO is telling in the above discussions.

[MauriceB]

1) The types players SP is attracting...a lot of players want to blow things up now.

Even the scenario creators are hyper-focused on this. 95% of scenarios I've seen are already at, or committed to, engagement ranges. There are no Strategic decisions to make, the shooting is gonna start in less that 2 minutes, better get those planes in the air.

[thewood1]

I'm kind of done with Sea Power at this point. Its obviously very immature as a game and the progress to address the micromanagement does not seem to be a high priority. I posted this on the Steam thread around aircraft ready times.

"I think the dev's stance on mission/loadout is emblematic of the focus of Sea Power. The player's expected decision-making is one level above the Eugen-like games. A lot of micromanagement combined with only a modicum of real planning.

Having variable ready times, with the automation to alleviate the workload of the play, brings some real decision-making even without carriers. All those ASW helos and airbases suddenly become a big part of the OODA loop. It immediately, to me, relegates Sea Power to that one step above a Eugen clickfest game built more for competitive play and cool graphics than a decision-making sandbox.

And thats OK if the devs want that. Its why early access is sometimes an important way to go. I can move on to something else without investing a lot time into a forlorn hope."

I've put more time than I should have into it and will move on.

[bbqofdoom]

If Sea Power brings more people to the genre, that's definitely a good thing. I get the sense that is probably what will happen once people become overwhelmed with the micromanaging.

So I bought CMO last week after about 15 hours with SP. I didn't dabble too much in the genre back in the day (some JFC, no Harpoon) but playing SP made me realize I wanted a bit more from the genre in terms of scale and depth, which led me to here (of course, CMO is mentioned quite a lot in discussions re: SP). The micromanaging, for me, kind of thwarted any desire to play with a ton of units because so much occurs that it's a bit overwhelming. While I am learning (slowly) CMO and its own systems, I can already see a lot of advantages in its automations and how it handles group concepts and the play area generally.

SP is very pretty at parts and I really enjoy the graphics and immersion they bring to the table, but I think I'll be playing CMO more and waiting to see what SP adds (or doesn't) in the next few months/years.

[HalfLifeExpert]

If Sea Power brings more people to the genre, that's definitely a good thing. I get the sense that is probably what will happen once people become overwhelmed with the micromanaging.

So I bought CMO last week after about 15 hours with SP. I didn't dabble too much in the genre back in the day (some JFC, no Harpoon) but playing SP made me realize I wanted a bit more from the genre in terms of scale and depth, which led me to here (of course, CMO is mentioned quite a lot in discussions re: SP). The micromanaging, for me, kind of thwarted any desire to play with a ton of units because so much occurs that it's a bit overwhelming. While I am learning (slowly) CMO and its own systems, I can already see a lot of advantages in its automations and how it handles group concepts and the play area generally.

SP is very pretty at parts and I really enjoy the graphics and immersion they bring to the table, but I think I'll be playing CMO more and waiting to see what SP adds (or doesn't) in the next few months/years.

Welcome aboard!

I too feel that Sea Power, at this stage, relies a bit too much on player micromanagement, whereas Command does a much better job of automating routine tasks or allowing the player to setup routine tasks for their forces. I don't regret purchasing SP simply because I really wanted to reward the excellent work they put into the animated ship and aircraft models, but pending further improvements in Early Access, I don't see myself playing it all that much.

[bbqofdoom]

If Sea Power brings more people to the genre, that's definitely a good thing. I get the sense that is probably what will happen once people become overwhelmed with the micromanaging.

So I bought CMO last week after about 15 hours with SP. I didn't dabble too much in the genre back in the day (some JFC, no Harpoon) but playing SP made me realize I wanted a bit more from the genre in terms of scale and depth, which led me to here (of course, CMO is mentioned quite a lot in discussions re: SP). The micromanaging, for me, kind of thwarted any desire to play with a ton of units because so much occurs that it's a bit overwhelming. While I am learning (slowly) CMO and its own systems, I can already see a lot of advantages in its automations and how it handles group concepts and the play area generally.

SP is very pretty at parts and I really enjoy the graphics and immersion they bring to the table, but I think I'll be playing CMO more and waiting to see what SP adds (or doesn't) in the next few months/years.

Welcome aboard!

I too feel that Sea Power, at this stage, relies a bit too much on player micromanagement, whereas Command does a much better job of automating routine tasks or allowing the player to setup routine tasks for their forces. I don't regret purchasing SP simply because I really wanted to reward the excellent work they put into the animated ship and aircraft models, but pending further improvements in Early Access, I don't see myself playing it all that much.

Thank you for the welcome and for your guides on Steam! I actually grabbed a couple of recommended books from one of them, has been really helpful in getting my head around a few concepts!

I do think SP has a lot of potential and I think there's an enthusiasm around it that should help it carry, so I'm pretty content with my purchase and support. Also the soundtrack rips.

[Nikel]

The devs (Triassic games) will add the USS Enterprise.


IN CMO, in the 80s appears in at least 2 scenarios:

Top gun, 1986 (controlled by the AI).

Praying Mantis, 1988

469534928_1135364878592314_6625569081555714303_n.jpg (407.16 KiB) Viewed 1489 times

[thewood1]

https://steamcommunity.com/app/1286220/ ... 275830578/

This discussion sure sounds familiar. It actually took a little longer than I expected.

[thewood1]

There is an acknowledged memory leak that is limiting map size, unit count, and scenario length in some combination. A few patches have tried to address it, but the devs just stated its a known Unity issue and might be a long term problem. They think they might be able to work around it.

I noticed on Reddit that several people are having issues with FPS and choppiness as you go longer into scenarios. Might be related or just an issue with a graphically intensive game.

Just an observation-based opinion and over-generalization; The people with the warmest opinion of the game seem to be coming over from DCS. CMO/Harpoon players seem to be in the camp of more mission features needed. Not unexpected. People with a negative opinion of CMO and Harpoon seem to tend to want more simplification of game play and less obvious fidelity. The devs are patching like crazy, but it has a very long way to go before its even close to feature complete.

[Mgellis]

Exactly. I've watched a number of the Sea Power videos and they can be a lot of fun. (Sometimes, this is because the person who made the video makes ME look like a tactical genius...and that is a very bad thing, but it can also be very funny.)

One of the people making Sea Power videos made an interesting point. He didn't like how overpowered some of the American ships were...for him, regardless of whether or not it was realistic, it spoiled some scenarios. It spoiled the game. That's what Sea Power is and was meant to be: a game.

It's the same with another game I enjoy, Idol Manager. I cannot imagine this is a very realistic simulation of running a music agency, although I'm sure it gets some things right, but it is a lot of fun.

I suspect some "errors" in Sea Power, like how fast helicopters are readied for action, will never be "fixed" because they would make the game less fun.

CMO is in a class of its own and can simulate on a scale that Sea Power probably can't handle.

Sometimes though you want a "lighter" sim/game to play. From what I've seen its pretty engaging to see missiles in the air while ships put out missile, AA fire and chaff.

While you'll see helos coming out of hangars it look like you won't be waiting on realistic time to take off, but we'll just have to wait and see. Damage models and realism who knows but I don't think most people are going to care too much. I did see that when ships are hit and sinking life rafts with survivors appear so we may see helos picking up survivors.

Also looks like lots of land based air assets will be included.

[sfbaytf]

Saw results of survey and they are going to work on AI as well as accessibility and controls. What all that translates in reality remains to be seen. As creator of thread and initial enthusiast of game I've purchased and yet to have put many hours into SP. Ironic but not surprising. That's life.

Just waiting and seeing how it actually unfolds after more time to bake. I seriously doubt it will match CMO on an operational level. Graphics alone would probably bring a system to it knees simulating a Desert Storm operation on a operational/strategic scale.

But we shall see.

[JFS737]

Might be off topic, but isn't "Modern Naval Warfare" what we are all (seemingly) waiting for? Is it dead, is it coming? Will it make Sea Power an immediate second-ran? Maybe it's too far off or cancelled but I was thinking that it looked really good, if initially limited in scope. I understood the scope would be widened though.

I don't own SP but it's hard to believe they'll do a near 180 and go the Command with 3d route. Maybe MNW is too limited to compare with SP or Command for that matter. Just fishing for news I guess.

Merry to all

[Tcao]

MVW can be considered as a sequel of “Dangerous Waters" . It is a different game compared to CMO or SP.

[JFS737]

Different as it is a quasi study sim? Are SP and Command then much more similar to one another? I need to play SP (and MNW!! when it comes).
Hasta

[thewood1]

To use an over-used trope...The natives are getting restless. A good thread that has finally drawn the devs into some form of more open discussion.

https://steamcommunity.com/app/1286220/ ... 815/?ctp=2

The post by SHVAKS is very much spot-on. A lot of good will getting burned up quickly. This is almost a textbook case of setting improperly high expectations and then cocking up the post-release comms on it. There are finally enough people realizing the game was very much functionally incomplete that the devs have started recognizing it. My confidence meter is slowly dropping on if the devs can manage their way out of this.