!942!

[FrenchName]

Guys, please stop asking the developers for ships that didn't exist in 1942.
The Iowas didn't hit the scene until late 43 and she was in the Atlantic for a few months before she was moved to the pacific, which would put her in the 44' roster at best.
This game clearly states it coves the campaigns of 1942 only. Victor at Sea has Iowas. Play that game. :)

[Average Phoenician Enjoyer]

They are planning on adding campaigns covering more time spans, so there's that. I mean there's a 1944 Yamato refit in the roster.

[Neogenex]

I think seeing the 1944 refit for the Yamato is making people wonder where the Iowa classes are. And from what I have seen, I dont think all the ACTUAL classes are there for both sides anyway. (Not counting UK, only ♥♥♥ and US forces)

[juanchopancho]

Agreed keep the OOB realistic.

[Flip]

I hope they expand the game to either include later campaigns or a larger pacific theatre that that goes from 1942 - 1945. Personally I have little interest in the Atlantic campaign but know a lot of people want this.

[Markus1987]

Well, a Mediterranean campaign could also be interesting _)

[Flip]

True, that could be fun

[Lestrad]

Originally posted by Markus1987:

Well, a Mediterranean campaign could also be interesting _)

There is so much that can be done DLC wise, especially with a game called "War at Sea" and not "The Pacific: War at Sea". They don't even necessarily have to restrict themselves to Theatre-wide DLC packs. They could do individual nations.

Personally, I would love to see this game or some other offer the chance to pit Bismarck up against Yamato.

[VaLKyrieR1D3r]

At some point it has been said that they would include later campaigns from Pacific (1943-1945). Killerfish did point to the idea of an Atlantic Campaign being added in the future. He also did mention the idea of modding tools as well. However, that is once all the mechanics and the base game are refined and worked out; which I would prefer. Though we have quite a wait until then.

As for Ships. I was surprised that the Lexington class (Lady Lex and Saratoga), U.S.S. Wasp, as well as Hiyo and Junyo were not added. Since they all took place in battles like Santa Cruz, and the Eastern Solomons. I expect they will be added later.

That being said, I do wish to see ships like the Iowas, Standard class BB's, Ise class, Fuso class, Alaska Class, etc. make it into the game at some point. Just not now. Luckily I am patient for such things.

Originally posted by Lestrad:

Originally posted by Markus1987:

Well, a Mediterranean campaign could also be interesting _)

There is so much that can be done DLC wise, especially with a game called "War at Sea" and not "The Pacific: War at Sea". They don't even necessarily have to restrict themselves to Theatre-wide DLC packs. They could do individual nations.

Personally, I would love to see this game or some other offer the chance to pit Bismarck up against Yamato.

Although some people have an utter hatred for "never-were" ships I personally would really like to see some mods at some point for such ships like the Kii, Tosa, Number 13, A-150, Montana, South Dakota (1920), Tillman class battleships. Project B-65 (Azuma & Yoshino), Amagi, and Lexington class battlecruisers. Heavy cruisers like the never completed Ibuki and the too late Des Moines class would be interesting to have ONLY IN custom fictional "what-if" scenarios. Plus, carrier aircraft like the F7F, F8F, and A7M Reppu would be cool to have in a fictional 1948 battle with the too late Midway-class carriers.

IMO unique ship and aircraft camouflage would be a neat addition at some point too.

[Average Phoenician Enjoyer]

Originally posted by VaLKyrieR1D3r:

At some point it has been said that they would include later campaigns from Pacific (1943-1945). Killerfish did point to the idea of an Atlantic Campaign being added in the future. He also did mention the idea of modding tools as well. However, that is once all the mechanics and the base game are refined and worked out. We have quite a wait until then.

As for Ships. I was surprised that the Lexington class (Lady Lex and Saratoga), U.S.S. Wasp, as well as Hiyo and Junyo were not added. Since they all took place in battles like Santa Cruz, and the Eastern Solomans. I expect they will be added later.

That being said, I do wish to see ships like the Iowas, Standard class BB's, Ise class, Fuso class, Alaska Class, etc. make it into the game at some point. Just not now. Luckily I am patient for such things.

Originally posted by Lestrad:

There is so much that can be done DLC wise, especially with a game called "War at Sea" and not "The Pacific: War at Sea". They don't even necessarily have to restrict themselves to Theatre-wide DLC packs. They could do individual nations.

Personally, I would love to see this game or some other offer the chance to pit Bismarck up against Yamato.

Although some people have an utter hatred for "never-were" ships I personally would really like to see some mods at some point for such ships like the Kii, Tosa, Number 13, A-150, Montana, South Dakota (1920), Tillman class battleships. Project B-65 (Azuma & Yoshino), Amagi, and Lexington class battlecruisers. Heavy cruisers like the never completed Ibuki and the too late Des Moines class would be interesting to have in custom fictional "what-if" scenarios. Plus, carrier aircraft like the F7F, F8F, and A7M Reppu would be cool to have in a fictional 1948 battle.

Judging by all the negative reviews bombs and people refunding, game will die way before they will be able to make the game stable or make DLC

[VaLKyrieR1D3r]

Originally posted by F L A M E R:

Originally posted by VaLKyrieR1D3r:

At some point it has been said that they would include later campaigns from Pacific (1943-1945). Killerfish did point to the idea of an Atlantic Campaign being added in the future. He also did mention the idea of modding tools as well. However, that is once all the mechanics and the base game are refined and worked out. We have quite a wait until then.

As for Ships. I was surprised that the Lexington class (Lady Lex and Saratoga), U.S.S. Wasp, as well as Hiyo and Junyo were not added. Since they all took place in battles like Santa Cruz, and the Eastern Solomans. I expect they will be added later.

That being said, I do wish to see ships like the Iowas, Standard class BB's, Ise class, Fuso class, Alaska Class, etc. make it into the game at some point. Just not now. Luckily I am patient for such things.



Although some people have an utter hatred for "never-were" ships I personally would really like to see some mods at some point for such ships like the Kii, Tosa, Number 13, A-150, Montana, South Dakota (1920), Tillman class battleships. Project B-65 (Azuma & Yoshino), Amagi, and Lexington class battlecruisers. Heavy cruisers like the never completed Ibuki and the too late Des Moines class would be interesting to have in custom fictional "what-if" scenarios. Plus, carrier aircraft like the F7F, F8F, and A7M Reppu would be cool to have in a fictional 1948 battle.

Judging by all the negative reviews bombs and people refunding, game will die way before they will be able to make the game stable or make DLC

While I get people NOT wanting to play an unfun game or getting ripped off by the dev. early game negative reviews can leave a lot of toxicity. Personally I was surprised the dev released the game this early. Yes, the game is clunky, but considering (as far as I know) it was developed by one person, I can let some of those things slide unlike major games developers who have more than enough resources to get it right the first time (Cyberpunk 2077). It is FAR FAR from the worst release I have played.

Perhaps the dev was a bit too early on the release?

If that is the case, then we should be worried for games like Sea Power and Task Force: Admiral?

[Tellashim[GIF]]

Canadian DLC? *points at you Canadian DLC?? *points at another you Canadian DLC?? *points at another another you Canadian DLC.

[Chachi]

Originally posted by Markus1987:

Well, a Mediterranean campaign could also be interesting _)

KG, give us late African theatre and invasion of Sicily and I will become a happy guy.

[Chachi]

Originally posted by Lestrad:

Originally posted by Markus1987:

Well, a Mediterranean campaign could also be interesting _)

There is so much that can be done DLC wise, especially with a game called "War at Sea" and not "The Pacific: War at Sea". They don't even necessarily have to restrict themselves to Theatre-wide DLC packs. They could do individual nations.

Personally, I would love to see this game or some other offer the chance to pit Bismarck up against Yamato.

This game has the great boon of not having a restrictive name. Assuming they stick to WWII era (as there is a game in development right now by the lead designer of Atlantic Fleet that is basically this game set in the Cold War era), they have a MASSIVE amount of options for future campaigns. I mean for starters, imagine getting a campaign for the second invasion of the Philippines and the Battle of Leyte Gulf? Maybe the Typhoon of Steel (Invasion of Okinawa)? Maybe even where the British got slaughtered by the Japanese around Singapore? We could even get hypothetical campaigns/battles such as a hypothetical battle for Wake or (if they decide to go to other oceans) a campaign centered around the Canary Islands. It all depends on how far they want to take this game. We will see.

[Chachi]

Originally posted by VaLKyrieR1D3r:

Originally posted by F L A M E R:

Judging by all the negative reviews bombs and people refunding, game will die way before they will be able to make the game stable or make DLC

While I get people NOT wanting to play an unfun game or getting ripped off by the dev. early game negative reviews can leave a lot of toxicity. Personally I was surprised the dev released the game this early. Yes, the game is clunky, but considering (as far as I know) it was developed by one person, I can let some of those things slide unlike major games developers who have more than enough resources to get it right the first time (Cyberpunk 2077). It is FAR FAR from the worst release I have played.

Perhaps the dev was a bit too early on the release?

If that is the case, then we should be worried for games like Sea Power and Task Force: Admiral?

As much as I was wanting to play this I still didn’t expect it too come out this early, I was expected it to be in the second half of this year. There is definitely work to be done, I feel like having an open beta in the summer then releasing the 1.0 version in the fall may have been a smart move.

As for Sea Power and TF: A, well I think that concern is reasonable. Remember that Sea power is being deved by the head designer of Atlantic Fleet; I’m sure he has been watch WotS closely and has seen the good and bad. As for TF: A, I am unfamiliar with the devs and don’t know what to tell you, but last time I looked into that game the devs seemed to be intent on taking their time so it should be fine.

P.S. They definitely have more than one person on this game. They hired MonkeyStack to make all of the in-game models , and they have multiple people on coding if I remember their devlogs correctly.

[Flip]

People need to remember small studios are tight on cash, they sometimes don't have a choice but to release now. These are not AAA studios releasing early to increase shareholder earnings, these are studios releasing so they can pay the rent.

Early game negative reviews are also very bad for these kind of nieche games that already have a small audience and limited growth potential. I am just dissapointed that a lot of the nagativity on the forums and reviews show people either didn't spend 2 mins on the tutorials or had expectations way out of sync with reality.

This game needs polish I think we all agree but I would say if we want to see this game grow and also see more games in this area be released we need to be constructive in our critisisms and supportive, not utter things like "It's trash, refund" as that is not helpful.

Anyways I hope this expands, I love these type of games and would like to see the scope and amount of ships increase.