What I would like to see for 1.0 and beyond.

[Krombopulos Michael]

Wargamer's wish-list for implementation

Hello, I'd like to just post my 2 cents on what I really want from Sea Power in the long term. I've done a lot of wargaming/simulators in my life dating back to games like Combat Air Patrol and other Windows 95 entries, through to Cold Waters and DCS. Obviously I am aware that the suggestions here could already be worked on by the devs or suggested elsewhere, so I'm not trying to steal anyone's thunder.

Weapons

• AIM-120 early variants at least, it entered service right at the beginning of the 90's so I'm hoping it will come to offer a better alternative to the AIM-7. For balance concerns, adding the R-77 on the Russian side would be good too.
  
• Much of the weapons and systems in the New Threat Mod that are too numerous to list here, such as VLS Ticonderoga.
  
• Radar Decoys such as the ADM-20 Quail (could balance with Russian Kelt KSR-2 missile, which theoretically could be converted to decoy drone such as in Tom Clancy's Red Storm Rising)
  
• AGM-65 Air-to-Ground Missiles
  
• AGM-114 Air-to-Ground Missiles for AH-64 (obviously requiring laser designation)

Vessels

• Seawolf and Virginia class submarines
  
• Typhoon class submarine
  
• Akula Class Submarine
  
• Ohio Class Submarine
  
• Arleigh Burke-class destroyer
  
• Yassen Class Submarine (built in '93)

Aircraft

• Air-to-air refueling aircraft for all major powers. Both land and carrier launched variants. I feel this is a requirement for this game as real life naval air operations hinge heavily on air-to-air refueling.
  
• F-117 Nighthawk
  
• Su-27 Flanker
  
• MiG-29 Fulcrum
  
• Mi-24 Hind (airbase only)
  
• Ka-50 (airbase only) and Ka-52k (naval variant)
  
• F-111 for multi-role and EW operations
  
• European fighters such as Gripen, Rafale, Mirage, Tornado (incl. EW variant)
  
• A-10 Warthog (airbase only)
  
• AH-64 Apache (airbase only)
  
• F-16 Falcon (airbase only)
  
• B-1 Supersonic Bomber
  
• F/A-18 Super Hornet

Game mechanics

• air-to-air refueling, as stated earlier, inclusion of this mechanic and aircraft is a must for me.
  
• adding the ability to customize loadouts for aircraft and even ships. The loadouts that are there are quite good, but I would love to be able to fine tune loadouts for specific missions.
  
• fixing vessels going flank speed during air operations. This can become a real problem when landing multiple aircraft as it makes your carrier uncontrollable for a long period of time. In reality carriers can conduct air ops and almost any speed and even minor course corrections.
  
• either removing auto-dropping of fuel tanks during combat or adding a toggle for it other than in the F10 menu.
  
• Basic ground troops to include Strela and Stinger equipped variants. Also could include a laser designator variant? Could also provide a capture mechanic with them??
  
• functional landing ships that can actually deploy ground units for objectives that require capturing.
  
• Aegis system for later ships.
  
• Satellite recon as a sensor for things like campaign?
  
• Weapon seeker selection. Much like in Cold Waters where you could select various seeker and search settings on missiles and torpedoes, it would make sense to select them here too. It makes a massive impact on strategies when you are able to select between active or passive seekers on a mk-48. Or selecting search/attack pattern on a harpoon missile.

These are just some of my ideas for now. As I said, I know you devs are hard at work on this game and I love what's there even now.

[MekStark]

What you compiled is a "go to" list of every single "Cold War" strategy. While all of those you mentioned are well known platforms most titles really focus on last years of five decades long period. Internally we are discussing looking at covering (post 1.0) less common timeframes of Cold War, that is early to mid 60s for example, or even earlier hotspots or would have beens.
Speaking of aviation alone: is sending squadrons of F-16s to intercept enemy MiG-29s or conducting low level strikes with Aardvarks more appealing than defending CONUS relying on F-102 and F-94s against waves of enemy M-4s or Tu-4? Or even M-50s or Il-54s if we want to explore "what ifs" route? One of those scenarios you can do in numerous other strategy games (as those usually focus on late 80s-early 90s) the other haven't really been done before.

[plasm@n]

Thank you for these clarifications. In this case you might consider these popular aircrafts:

Douglas A-4 Skyhawk (with its dozen variants)
Vought F-8 Crusader (with its French Navy and PhAF variants)
Douglas AD Skyraider (with again a lots of variants)
Douglas A-3 Skywarrior
Grumman Tracker and E-1 Tracer
Lockheed P-2 Neptune
Grumman F-11F Tiger
Sikorsky CH-53 Sea Stallion
Sikorsky H-34 Chocktaw

The first 4 aircrafts of this list would be a good addition for Vietnam War scenarios.

[whatdoesthisbuttondo?]

Originally posted by MekStark:

What you compiled is a "go to" list of every single "Cold War" strategy. While all of those you mentioned are well known platforms most titles really focus on last years of five decades long period. Internally we are discussing looking at covering (post 1.0) less common timeframes of Cold War, that is early to mid 60s for example, or even earlier hotspots or would have beens.
Speaking of aviation alone: is sending squadrons of F-16s to intercept enemy MiG-29s or conducting low level strikes with Aardvarks more appealing than defending CONUS relying on F-102 and F-94s against waves of enemy M-4s or Tu-4? Or even M-50s or Il-54s if we want to explore "what ifs" route? One of those scenarios you can do in numerous other strategy games (as those usually focus on late 80s-early 90s) the other haven't really been done before.

Really depends on what you want to achieve at the end, early '60s up to '85 is a great timeframe as far as variety goes, and it hasn't been done over and over.

And if we are being honest, '85 as a cutoff is already a bit of a stretch in terms of realism due to information publicly available.

And apart from outright inventing scores of what-if units, going further towards '90s and beyond doesn't hold much more than scenarios along the lines of "can a single Arleigh Burke defeat an entire Soviet battlegroup".

Meh, might be funny one or two times, but even that has been done to death.

[Krombopulos Michael]

Originally posted by MekStark:

What you compiled is a "go to" list of every single "Cold War" strategy. While all of those you mentioned are well known platforms most titles really focus on last years of five decades long period. Internally we are discussing looking at covering (post 1.0) less common timeframes of Cold War, that is early to mid 60s for example, or even earlier hotspots or would have beens.
Speaking of aviation alone: is sending squadrons of F-16s to intercept enemy MiG-29s or conducting low level strikes with Aardvarks more appealing than defending CONUS relying on F-102 and F-94s against waves of enemy M-4s or Tu-4? Or even M-50s or Il-54s if we want to explore "what ifs" route? One of those scenarios you can do in numerous other strategy games (as those usually focus on late 80s-early 90s) the other haven't really been done before.

Okay, well I wasn't aware that the focus would be solely restricted towards the earlier cold war era. I do agree, that the earlier cold war has not been represented as much, yes. I would hope that between the dev team and modding community that ideally you'd have decades to span from. Perhaps three separate eras to choose from at the start, early mid and late war.

The F-111 was produced in 1967....and the F-16 in 1978 which I feel would be well within the era window of the game.

If you wanted to play with early 60's era tech that would be one selectable decade to play within, then 70's and so on.. There's a lot of gameplay differences between the eras of course which I think would really add to the appeal of the game. There may be other games that feature these eras, but there's also a lot that your game does that I can't do in those. I think Sea Power is a fantastic base game and engine to build upon with more than just a single decade of combat.

I also agree with others that there does need to be a "cut-off" for development sake, and realism as we obviously can't really be accurately portraying F-22's and more modern capabilities. I only threw in some early 90's tech as a possible, but that's the latest I'd go with it. With the end of the USSR in 91 I feel like it could be good stopping point for the game since it is based on Cold War "what if's".

[darknight]

all i can say is oh please F 111

[MekStark]

Originally posted by plasm@n:

Thank you for these clarifications. In this case you might consider these popular aircrafts:

Douglas A-4 Skyhawk (with its dozen variants)
Vought F-8 Crusader (with its French Navy and PhAF variants)
Douglas AD Skyraider (with again a lots of variants)
Douglas A-3 Skywarrior
Grumman Tracker and E-1 Tracer
Lockheed P-2 Neptune
Grumman F-11F Tiger
Sikorsky CH-53 Sea Stallion
Sikorsky H-34 Chocktaw

The first 4 aircrafts of this list would be a good addition for Vietnam War scenarios.

Those we consider a given, yes :)

[Krombopulos Michael]

I'm not really seeing where "this has been done to death" in terms of putting these technologies into a game like Sea Power.

The closest game I can think of that could even come close to this would be Command: Modern Operations, however that game lacks the visuals created here, it could almost just run in a web browser.

Warno and Wargame, are okay, but essentially just deck building games with a HEAVY emphasis on things like logistical supply chains and LAND combat. Is it realistic? sure, but also very heavy on complex mechanics and there is still a lack of naval warfare. Comparing these games to Sea Power, they are VERY different playstyles regardless of unit types.

World in Conflict is a great game but focuses strictly on land battles and linear small campaign missions. Cold waters is strictly subs, and forget playing a modded-in surface ship in that, you get wiped out in seconds by the enemy fleet.

I think Sea Power strikes an excellent balance of realism with game mechanics and designs that are simpler to understand. I don't see why Sea Power cannot have these units, even if they are featured in other games. So what?

[MekStark]

Originally posted by Krombopulos Michael:

Originally posted by MekStark:

What you compiled is a "go to" list of every single "Cold War" strategy. While all of those you mentioned are well known platforms most titles really focus on last years of five decades long period. Internally we are discussing looking at covering (post 1.0) less common timeframes of Cold War, that is early to mid 60s for example, or even earlier hotspots or would have beens.
Speaking of aviation alone: is sending squadrons of F-16s to intercept enemy MiG-29s or conducting low level strikes with Aardvarks more appealing than defending CONUS relying on F-102 and F-94s against waves of enemy M-4s or Tu-4? Or even M-50s or Il-54s if we want to explore "what ifs" route? One of those scenarios you can do in numerous other strategy games (as those usually focus on late 80s-early 90s) the other haven't really been done before.

Okay, well I wasn't aware that the focus would be solely restricted towards the earlier cold war era.
(...)
If you wanted to play with early 60's era tech that would be one selectable decade to play within, then 70's and so on..

Not solely on early 60s, but as one of points of interest.
Having pre-selectable "Eras" is IMO not good idea given how many 50s tech was still present in 80s and would steer from "sandbox" part of the game.

[soldier6661111]

For mechanics I would add a waypoint editor (altitude/depth and speed at given waypoint).

[whatdoesthisbuttondo?]

Originally posted by MekStark:

Not solely on early 60s, but as one of points of interest.
Having pre-selectable "Eras" is IMO not good idea given how many 50s tech was still present in 80s and would steer from "sandbox" part of the game.

Though as far as Soviet Union is concerned, while many units were '60s tech being used way into the '80s and beyond, there were substantial mid-life upgrades just like with USN.

I think you've taken a good approach already with what we can see from the Belknap and Leahy classes, representing upgrades over the years.

I'm preparing a lengthy feedback regarding the development of SA-N-1 family btw, would be nice to see something similar as it affects pretty much all Soviet vessels in the game that carry that system.

[Fire_Spy]

Want I'd want is Factions, So you can have scenarios with multiple countries vessels and you just control yours, Be it US or some other country, The factions would make it so you could have other nations assist you, but you don't control them. same with the "enemy" factions, you could setup diplomatic relations between factions and the nations those factions contain. More than just red and blue and neutral. You could still just use those colours, I just feel, right now, you couldn't make a mission where the "red" team have subs sinking neutral shipping and you have to stop them. As it stands you'd have to have those "neutral" ships in your team for the Red team to attack them.

[whatdoesthisbuttondo?]

Originally posted by Fire_Spy:

Want I'd want is Factions, So you can have scenarios with multiple countries vessels and you just control yours, Be it US or some other country, The factions would make it so you could have other nations assist you, but you don't control them. same with the "enemy" factions, you could setup diplomatic relations between factions and the nations those factions contain. More than just red and blue and neutral. You could still just use those colours, I just feel, right now, you couldn't make a mission where the "red" team have subs sinking neutral shipping and you have to stop them. As it stands you'd have to have those "neutral" ships in your team for the Red team to attack them.

I've though about this one as well, e.g. for scenarios where your force is present purely as an observer initially (or providing limited assistance such as radar coverage), and gets involved in hostilities as the scenario develops.

Example could be alt-history scenario with US and Soviet presence off the cost of Syria during an escalating situation between Syria and Israel.

Would be a lot of potential for interesting nuance here, i.e. assist your allies in combat while preventing direct exchange with the red team and such.

[Fire_Spy]

Originally posted by whatdoesthisbuttondo?:

Originally posted by Fire_Spy:

Want I'd want is Factions, So you can have scenarios with multiple countries vessels and you just control yours, Be it US or some other country, The factions would make it so you could have other nations assist you, but you don't control them. same with the "enemy" factions, you could setup diplomatic relations between factions and the nations those factions contain. More than just red and blue and neutral. You could still just use those colours, I just feel, right now, you couldn't make a mission where the "red" team have subs sinking neutral shipping and you have to stop them. As it stands you'd have to have those "neutral" ships in your team for the Red team to attack them.

I've though about this one as well, e.g. for scenarios where your force is present purely as an observer initially (or providing limited assistance such as radar coverage), and gets involved in hostilities as the scenario develops.

Example could be alt-history scenario with US and Soviet presence off the cost of Syria during an escalating situation between Syria and Israel.

Would be a lot of potential for interesting nuance here, i.e. assist your allies in combat while preventing direct exchange with the red team and such.

Yes, That's the dream.

[Preach_A]

It might sound a bit weird, but I´d love to have more immersion by adding a bridge view and a camera that works a bit like a first person view - imagine walking around on an aircraft carrier´s flight deck!

Don´t get me wrong, I´m not saying "give us a 3d bridge for every ship", I just mean to say how about a (more or less fixed) camera view that puts you in a Captain´s-like position (like in Destroyer command, where you have several fixed first person views where you can look around).

I think this feature could be added very easily, because the camera can already be adjusted that way, but it is too clunky and difficult to set it up.

And speaking of eye candy ... what about a periscope view for submarines?

Cheers!

[Banzinou]

More French and UK vessels