We're getting a Seawolf!

[DetCord12B]

At least somewhere down the road. Browsing the file structure.

[Unit Reference]
ShipClass=Seawolf
Description=Seawolf-class Nuclear Attack Submarine
History=Placeholder for VLS testing and setup.

[Player Ship Instances]
PlayerClassNames=Seawolf,Connecticut,Jimmy Carter

PlayerClassHullNumbers=SSN-21,SSN-22,SSN-23

[JustKazuma]

Well they already have the foundation for more scenarios for more recent time periods. Seawolf era would be AWESOME IMHO. I remember the old DOS Seawolf game being my first foray into sub games.

[theCarthaginian]

We knew she had to be coming.
They were planned as far back as when RSR was made, but not finished till I was in high school LOL. You can build roughly FIVE of the new Virginia class subs for the cost of the three Seawolfs - they were $3 billion each for the first two, and the Mr. Peanut cost an extra half-a-billion for the mission module, and another 800 million for the work.

[u2336]

It's a shame they ended the production though...
It is supposed to be the most advanced submarine ever built and I can really believe it. Her specs are still classified but it would not surprised me she could overrun the Papa in speed (that is surely a spectacular performance but surely not the only one she can do).

[AbhChallenger]

The seawolf is absolutely too OP for the current game. They were built to attack Soviet boomers in their own waters.

It would be better as part of a DLC pack for a late 90s campaign.

[u2336]

Remember RSR...
And yes, you're right, maybe future DLC will give us the possibility to choose the year (therefore the difficulty...).
1984,1988, 1992 and 1996.
It was always fun to select 1996, for me it represented the distant future...
If you had told me then that I would be writing these BS about RSR in 2017 with a small device that look like a tablet, listening music or watching a streamed video in high quality with this same device, I would have not believed you, believe me ! :-D

[theCarthaginian]

Originally posted by u2336:

Remember RSR...
And yes, you're right, maybe future DLC will give us the possibility to choose the year (therefore the difficulty...).
1984,1988, 1992 and 1996.
It was always fun to select 1996, for me it represented the distant future...
If you had told me then that I would be writing these BS about RSR in 2017 with a small device that look like a tablet, listening music or watching a streamed video in high quality with this same device, I would have not believed you, believe me ! :-D

NO kidding.
'96 was the year I graduated high school.
When some of my friends and I had our little impromptu reunion in 06 after one of us got back from Iraq (my tour ended in 04) we all checked our cell phones after we walked out of a building. We got to talking about how much they had become a part of us, and I asked "what was the first thing you used to do after you walked out of a building before you had a cell?"
I was the only one that could answer.
You see, I smoked.
No one that didn't smoke or dip could remember.
They are an addiction man - and socioty is hooked in a way we could never have imagined 20 years ago.

[johncage]

for additional content i also suggest higher resolution/poly count versions of the subs. because of their relatively simple geometry compared to other objects like ships and whatnot, i think there's room for more detail and rounding on the sub topology.

[theCarthaginian]

Originally posted by AbhChallenger:

The seawolf is absolutely too OP for the current game. They were built to attack Soviet boomers in their own waters.

It would be better as part of a DLC pack for a late 90s campaign.

Seawold WOULD be OP for the 1984 patrols.

But remember, the Sovs had some pretty decent gear coming online in the late 90's.
As things were projected when RSR was built, the RBNF were scheduled to have two nuclear flattops (Ulyanovsk-class) the size of the U.S.S. Kitty Hawk. They would also have had the two Tablisi-class (Adm. Kuznetsov) carriers - which we didn't know at the time would had a total P.O.S. engineering plant - and the four Kiev-class ASW/Point-Defense carriers.
Additionally the Slava-class CGs wouldn't have been scaled back from 12 to 3 had the USSR never crashed, and they'd have probably completed the other 2 Kirovs on a somewhat more reasonable timetable... not to mention refitting their eingineering plants as their tech got better. The Neustrashimyy-class frigates wouldn't have ben stopped at 2, but rather continued to 6 and possibly a second 'flight' resembling the Indian Navy's 'Talwar-class' (a weapons-updated Krivak) would have been started.
As for subs - at least one more Sierra-class was planned, as were 6 more Akula-class boats. The Kilo-class would have recieved many of the improvements that went into later export models, like the radar/sonar/'creature comfort' updates that went into the Vietnamese Kilos... and maybe even pump-jet propulsors like the B-871.

The Seawolf wouldn't be OP for a 1996 game...
she'd probably be right on target, and the Premit-class would probably be held WAY back... or even transfered to the Pacific fleet as a body to allow more advanced boats to shift to the Atlantic. If not, they'd have been in for a short, exciting ride.

[theCarthaginian]

Originally posted by johncage:

for additional content i also suggest higher resolution/poly count versions of the subs. because of their relatively simple geometry compared to other objects like ships and whatnot, i think there's room for more detail and rounding on the sub topology.

Mah... who cares about graphics.
I'm in the for nail-biting tension and high-quality gameplay.
The models are a sideline.... nice, but not necessary.

[u2336]

Me ! I do care...😂
I just love watching my sub and my targets as if it were a Red October sequel. ;)

[Shadow]

The first Seawolf was laid down in the Cold War (1989) but wasn't launched until 1995. It could be pushed back for a hypothetical scenario, but 1984 is too much from my perspective.

Theoretically and with some historical fudging, you could have a 1991 scenario in which the USSR doesn't go down without a fight, which would add the Seawolf and Improved Los Angeles to the US side, and the Akula I and Akula I Improved on the Soviet side.

Then a more fictional scenario could take place in an alternate 1996, adding the Akula II and III to the Soviet side and making things more difficult to the American Seawolves.

There's a lot of classified stuff about the Seawolf, and it's rumoured to be a godlike sub, but likewise there's a lot the public doesn't know about the Soviet/Russian side. The devs could play with that so that the Seawolf isn't terribly OP, like it was in RSR. Stronger tools means stronger or more numerous opposition, from the game balance perspective.

[theCarthaginian]

Originally posted by Shadow:

The first Seawolf was laid down in the Cold War (1989) but wasn't launched until 1995. It could be pushed back for a hypothetical scenario, but 1984 is too much from my perspective.

Theoretically and with some historical fudging, you could have a 1991 scenario in which the USSR doesn't go down without a fight, which would add the Seawolf and Improved Los Angeles to the US side, and the Akula I and Akula I Improved on the Soviet side.

Then a more fictional scenario could take place in an alternate 1996, adding the Akula II and III to the Soviet side and making things more difficult to the American Seawolves.

There's a lot of classified stuff about the Seawolf, and it's rumoured to be a godlike sub, but likewise there's a lot the public doesn't know about the Soviet/Russian side. The devs could play with that so that the Seawolf isn't terribly OP, like it was in RSR. Stronger tools means stronger or more numerous opposition, from the game balance perspective.

That's much the way that RSR handled it... you were always outnumbered (US subs trained that way anyhow) and outgunned.
Of course, Seawolf was designed to fight that way, so even in 96 campaigns Seawolf was sorta 'easy' button.

[Half life Expert]

That's great to hear, I remember KFG saying a while ago that they intend to eventually add the Seawolf Class as well as the Improved Los Angeles Class (which has VLS). That would also mean throwing in the 8 Flight II LA Class boats which had VLS.

This would also require adding a late Cold War or Post-Cold War/Extended Cold War campaign, as the Seawolfs didn't become available until after the USSR dissolved, and only the first few 688i's were available when the USSR dissolved.

[skinner82384]

Seawolf was my first boat. I have no intention of spilling any specs, but I will say that it is one hell of a platform, and to this day there hasn't been a submarine from any other country that could match her for survivability and firepower.

[NeoG]

Originally posted by skinner82384:

Seawolf was my first boat. I have no intention of spilling any specs, but I will say that it is one hell of a platform, and to this day there hasn't been a submarine from any other country that could match her for survivability and firepower.

With the exception of the Jimmy Carter, which is a special ops sub, why were only 2 ever built? If they are so good, why the virginia class?

I think it is wrong to assume the seawolves are "better" than the virginia class, as I am sure the latter has incorporated the best parts of the design and managed to have same or better specs for a lower price, with the possible exception of a specific thing or two (like not being able to go as deep).