READY STATES FOR AIRCRAFT TYPES

[HofVanStrudel]

Have ready states for aircraft and depending on the type it will take x amount of prep time.

[whatdoesthisbuttondo?]

Originally posted by richardscholes50:

I think a lot of these comments are being made forgetting the game as only just been released in EA, perhaps the comments need to be saved for a years time and then see.

Good point, and maybe even give the devs a bit of credit.

They've already stated they don't intend on making the same mistakes again that were carried over to CMO all the way back from the first Harpoon 35 years ago.

That doesn't mean they don't intend on doing anything, and certainly not that they aren't acutely aware of the same old ideas that only marginally work.

[Thewood]

I think the biggest long-term issue is the 3D graphics focus. That makes expansion significantly harder and slower. Its the same thing that limited Fleet Command in the end.

[whatdoesthisbuttondo?]

Originally posted by Thewood:

I think the biggest long-term issue is the 3D graphics focus. That makes expansion significantly harder and slower. Its the same thing that limited Fleet Command in the end.

Disagree here, having worked with Unity myself that is comparatively easy compared to other engines, or (god forbid) a self-developed engine.

The big issue will be scalability, that is something Unity isn't exactly great at, and there are quite a few caveats when it comes to fully leveraging multi-threading.

I guess we will see, but I somewhat doubt that scenarios with a couple thousand units are going to be feasible without considerable development effort.

Not a problem for me personally, I prefer smaller scenarios anyway, but something that might eat quite a bit of resources depending on the scale envisioned.

[Ghojo]

Originally posted by richardscholes50:

I think a lot of these comments are being made forgetting the game as only just been released in EA, perhaps the comments need to be saved for a years time and then see.

So many people commenting on this topic shows that ready-states or a more realistic approach to carrier operations is something a lot of people feel missing, and it's perfectly reasonable to voice this concern right after release.

That's exactly what Early Access is for, no one asked the devs to make it happen tomorrow.

[Redmarkus4]

Originally posted by moonlightavenger:

If this was an aircraft carrier simulator, I'd agree. It would not be too difficult to work with, but it would just be busywork. Like people wanting submarines to not recieve orders or report enemy positions without going to periscope depth and raising antenas. It would be realistic, btu also annoying.

I kind of agree with this but would be happy if there was a ready state option in settings that allowed me to select None | Short | Medium | Realistic. Ready states and time to change states were a key factor at Midway in 1942. I imagine this would still have been true in the Cold War if it turned hot.

[HofVanStrudel]

Originally posted by Thewood:

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-mkaing 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.

AMEN

[HofVanStrudel]

this game isnt cmo so i do not expect it to be cmo. even though i never played cmo or harpoon series before. but comparing to fleet command because thats how similar this game is to it. anmd allot of features i want to be better or refined from that game

[Ruanuku]

Originally posted by Triassic Games:

No offense but what for? It adds another level of micro management and with aircraft being in the air within 1-2 minutes what would be the use case for a ready state?

I mean it makes sense in real life but in this game? Afaik it wasn't used much in Fleet Command either as it simply didn't make much sense to use that feature?

/Martin

If micro management is a problem with aircraft then you need to review how aircraft work in the game. They're micromanagement heavy because there is little to no automation or QoL when dealing with them. You typically have to break air groups to allow all aircraft in a flight use all their weapons or target independently for instance. You can send a flight of 3 aircraft and as soon as one has used all their weapons the entire group will RTB... Or you can target 3 tracks to attack and they'll attack one at a time instead of splitting the targets between the entire flight. You can't preset way points to change speed or altitude. No UI elements or voice elements to notify you when an aircraft is ready (after landing or taking off currently), no voice elements to notify when they pass a way point, They auto RTB without orders (it's a pain if you need to follow flight paths to avoid anti-air), Etc, etc.

I think there should be an arming time and refuel time. It adds strategic thinking and limits aircraft from a spam "I win option" to more of an option of "do I use them here or not" and prevents them from being used as a "oh ♥♥♥♥ button" with instant launching. That said, I don't for a moment think the times should be reflective on RL air operations. I'm talking of minutes, with maybe 15 to 30 minutes being the upper end of this timer with 2-8 minutes being the norm.

I would maybe think of something like this: The arming time would be the "ready state" and refuel time would be a "cool down". The cool down time would help prevent aircraft spam, which is currently so overpower that it breaks missions. The cool down should reflect based on remaining weapons and fuel. The more weapons left on the aircraft the more time is added to the cool down, while the more fuel that's left over the less time is added. Ready State time would be the time it takes to arm an aircraft. The more weapons or larger weapons should add time.

[tONii-chan]

Please add ready states! Aircraft are way too overpowered without it. Consider Tu-22 bombers launching a Kh-22 (AS-4 Kitchen) strike. Should they be able to takeoff, launch, land, and then takeoff and launch again within 10 or so minutes?

[whatdoesthisbuttondo?]

Originally posted by tONii-chan:

Please add ready states! Aircraft are way too overpowered without it. Consider Tu-22 bombers launching a Kh-22 (AS-4 Kitchen) strike. Should they be able to takeoff, launch, land, and then takeoff and launch again within 10 or so minutes?

They shouldn't be able to take off again for quite some time, something like 30 minutes of downtime definitely doesn't cut it.

[Bambi]

Originally posted by Triassic Games:

No offense but what for? It adds another level of micro management and with aircraft being in the air within 1-2 minutes what would be the use case for a ready state?

I mean it makes sense in real life but in this game? Afaik it wasn't used much in Fleet Command either as it simply didn't make much sense to use that feature?

/Martin

Fleet Command did have it, and it's a very, very, very very important tactical decision to make.

[Bambi]

Originally posted by moonlightavenger:

If this was an aircraft carrier simulator, I'd agree. It would not be too difficult to work with, but it would just be busywork. Like people wanting submarines to not recieve orders or report enemy positions without going to periscope depth and raising antenas. It would be realistic, btu also annoying.

Fleet command also had subs reporting in every 30 minutes, it was not annoying at all.

[Bambi]

Originally posted by whatdoesthisbuttondo?:

Originally posted by richardscholes50:

I think a lot of these comments are being made forgetting the game as only just been released in EA, perhaps the comments need to be saved for a years time and then see.

Good point, and maybe even give the devs a bit of credit.

They've already stated they don't intend on making the same mistakes again that were carried over to CMO all the way back from the first Harpoon 35 years ago.

That doesn't mean they don't intend on doing anything, and certainly not that they aren't acutely aware of the same old ideas that only marginally work.

They are literally doing worse than Harpoon with this decision. They are making even worse mistakes than the old game.s It will absolutely kill the game.

[Bambi]

Originally posted by Julhelm:

Readiness states will not solve the primary exploit of spammy aircraft carriers that results from having no downtime post-recovery. So we'd add this rather than ready states.

Ready states solve exactly that problem by putting a hard limit on how many planes can be ready to launch at any given moment, and how quickly those planes can get in the air. It's an extremely simple system that solves the problem.

[Bambi]

I cannot stress enough how much this game will suffer from this ♥♥♥♥♥♥ attitude.