IMHO the entire success of this game revolves around the dynamic campaign which is coming Q2 2025. At this time, I do think they will be able to pull it off and with no big studios trying to do games like this, I feel compelled to support it. It's easy to say because the game is fun and I am enjoying it. Let me know what you think of the game below.
I'm getting the game shortly after the dynamic campaign , the aircraft commands/UI and general AI is the main thing. The price is right when the dynamic campaign is out. I'm getting the music first. There's also Doctrines as well, but not as critical but would be nice (more to do with immersion) .
Totalmente y puede que le haga competencia a cmano en un futuro. Al final esto es como un simulador hay que mirar al horizonte que es cuando brillara este juego.
If the developer are reading this comments: I will buy this game for full price as soon as it gehts Multiplayer. One of my friends already got the game and I will join him but I do not see myself playing a game alone for my own.
I purchased the game to support the devs. Mil sim type games are not funded like they used to be. Im new to naval history and naval games but not mil sims, but it's literally the game I never knew I wanted. I am having a great time learning about naval history, its weapon platforms, and testing tactics out with the scenarios. I agree that this game will not reach its full potential without multiplayer but having a dynamic campaign first then integrating multiplayer with the DC would be the best course imho.
It is sad how Mil-Sim community is today (at least in germany). When I was younger, I could play Arma2OA every day with many people on servers with realistic parameters in PvE all day. Today the communitys barely find the players to fill two fireteams in Arma3.
Yeah to me I think this also helps justify the price in some ways. If the game is successful economically it should support the devs into adding "free multiplayer". You kind of have to price it in early because as ultimate admiral dreadnoughts showed us, players really don't like paying for a multiplayer specific add on
@@gamingavalon8784 they have said it’s something they want, but need to add it after they make the game. Most people want multiplayer for a multitude of reasons including longevity of the game, I’d say people are either for it or apathetic
There once was a time when a game was released it was a completely finished game. It may have had a bug or two buried deep inside that you could easily work around, but it was a cake with icing and a candle. Now we get a box of powdery stuff to play with and a promise they will someday have all the ingredients mixed, but they never quite seem to get around to it because they want to sell you too many other things that don't make the game whole. Years pass and the community complains about the same old things and we'll get skins for our ships and sales for our skins. I very much miss getting a game in a box with a manual and a fold out sheet with the key commands. Ah, those were the days.
Every single comment I've seen (on this and other videos) is about the price. A coffee costs $8. McDonald's costs $15. AAA games are $90 now before you drop money for transactions and skins and "season passes". If you dont like getting stuff early access, thats totally valid. But it's $45 for a game that has been universally well reviewed, that sounds totally reasonable to me.
The "cease fire" command will usually let you regain control of ai units that develop a mind of their own. It's bound to the X key, so I spam it a lot.
This is helpful to know. I had an FFG that was my only effective anti-air defense get killed and leave my auxiliaries defenseless because I just couldn't get it to go back to formation!
It’s caused by your formation and telling the flag ship to move the other ships will follow and do what they need to do to get back into formation. So you just have to be aware which the flag ship is and tell the others to move independently if want that. There probably a more efficient way but I not that good myself yet 😂
Sometimes my ships gets a mind of their own on where to go no matter what I do. If nothing else helps you can take direct control of them and at least point them in correct direction.
I bought the game a few hours after release with no regard for the price tag and started questioning if it was a sound financial decision afterwards, but you elaborating what one actually gets in return for that money reassured me greatly. Learning that the devs plan to include most other navies as DLC is indeed a little disappointing. I thought they would gradually complete the navies now in game and add the remaining big players (France, Italy, China and Japan) and then do smaller navies as DLCs, but it is what it is. As you said no big studio would be willing to do a game like this, so in the end it’s one of the best we have right now and we should support the devs to realize the games potential to be even better. Thanks for the videos!
I bought this game to support the developers knowing that games like these are not being funded by the big studios and publishers any longer. I look upon Triassic Games like I do Radian Simulations - the latter making a tank sim in the spirit of the old Microprose with the intent of making a game almost no one any longer want to bankroll. I do believe Triassic is trying to do the same for naval sims making a game which will appeal to a an audience who want to play a realistic game albeit without any minutiae being modelled. I was impressed by the detailed Steel Beasts Pro when I tried that tanksim, I find myself playing GHPC waay more often. I believe I will enjoy Sea Power as much, especially when more content becomes available. The entry fee can seem steep for an early access release, but I do believe the devs are pouring their heart into this project so I do not mind paying the price.
Great summary. As a DCS player who often finds himself playing solo, when I see games like this aimed at the single-player market I actually find that a bonus! While I understand the appeal of multiplayer, it can also make devs lazy when it comes to AI. The "players will fill in the AI gap" mentality I think leads to situations like in DCS where the AI lags. When I see a game is focused on single-player I assume the devs know that any replayability is dependent on a convincing AI opponent and will put the time in to polish it as they can't "fall back" on multiplayer to make the game interesting/engaging. That is of course no guarantee that they'll pull it off. But as more is riding on the AI, I trust the devs know that it is in their best interest to focus on it - unlike with multiplayer titles. As you mention in the video, a lot of existing AI is basic and linear. Good AI is difficult. But, AI is really coming into its own and now is a great time for games to take advantage of it. All that said, I also agree with you in that user made scenario will be a huge part of this games success - especially the quality of them! Having a lot of basic/boring ones won't help. If the mission editor has features that allow a lot of creative storytelling in addition to the tactical components. I can see it being a big success. Being able to easily add voiceovers or detailed briefings/maps for context, etc. will add a level of engagement that single player games need. As always, just my 2¢. Cheers.
Yeah same, game AI development has been pretty sad these last.. well it's basically been a decade now, if not more. One can hope that these devs get the AI right.
I understand the sentiment that MP can make things lazy to not do great AI. I have seen this point made. The only thing I'll say is that I can't think of any AI that has really been competent enough in any game.
I'm glad there is no multiplayer because it's always the case even if the single player is the main game mode the multiplayer community becomes a massive loud minority that takes over the entire games feedback so the devs end up focusing on that and ignoring the single player entirely. The secret to success is to wait until you have a completed product and then release instead of a early access one that will keep breaking all the mods people put effort into.
For me the main thing is the AI. I want to play a challanging and fun game (even though its kind of a sim). I want the AI to hunt me down relentlessly and fight for their lives. I feel that if I play right now I will just stomp the AI because I know about naval combat and know these weapons and so on. I will definitely buy later when there is more content and some fixes. I live in Brazil and games are ridiculously expensive here. I compleatey support the devs and Im very happy that this game exists, if I had the spare money I would have bought it right now.
13:23 one.kf the biggest issues is definitely controlling more than a few aircraft. Just like you said, it is incredibly micro-intensive while also being unpredictable and the way we control the planes isn't very efficient.
I also purchased the game to support the devs. There is simply no other game that does this, If I want to do sub-hunting using an Udaloy class or control and micro a Backfire raid on a carrier, there is no other game, I think they did a great job so far. I really liked the review btw FYI: -With planes I have found for fighters is better to just give them weapons free without micro, they will do well on their own. -With bombers like the Backfire with ASM, it´s better to get them into range and then give them weapons free, although sometimes they will not fire all ASMs. If you shoot before getting into range some planes in the formation will fall behind in speed
People will always find something to complain about, $45 with a dynamic campaign (in a few months) and a mission editor is not a big deal. I do think they made a mistake giving it to UA-camrs though, they ran through a lot of the scenarios and gave up a lot of that content.
imo it was an amazing plan. The youtubers were able to start teaching people before the game came out. The battles are not a walk even knowing what is coming, but having that info lets us focus on learning the mechanics for new missions.
@@Dracomarine Yeah new user-made missions, as good or better than what the game came with (because players have more time on their hands for that than the devs who are currently busy with Dynamic Campaign and bug fixing) are constantly getting added on workshop
The game is only worth for the later updates and supporting the devs, for now the game is not 45€ worth of content so if ur focusing for the content thats in the game right now and nothing else, its not worth 45€ ( my opinion)
I think there is a valid criticism about the almost complete absence of Royal Navy assets. The Falklands War is by far the most significant naval conflict of this period, and I think naval history enthusiasts who might just have come across the game could legitimately be annoyed that they can't recreate the biggest war of the period in a game called "naval warfare in the missile age".
@tangycheeseman3963 they're charging full price and they've said they plan to make the RN playable through DLC. This is not a case of "it will be in the full release".
I largely agree with what's said, the biggest issue is the aircraft management, clicking a wingman rather than lead, forcing you to pause and zoom in each time, the failure to make logical attacks. My major complaint is how passive the AI is, doing a carrier group vs carrier group it was trivial to pick apart the US fleet as they never launched a single fighter, just their AWACS/ASW helos. So i could loiter just out of range to organise, attack and fly home, i could keep my surveillance aircraft close, even beyond my own fighter protection. I do like that aircraft waypoints give a zulu time on target rather than time to, making it easy to sync up aircraft attacks however. But the busy work managing an air assault would cripple my ability to operate the fleet at the same time. I'd also found my migs couldn't shoot down a p-3 orion, with guns, flying straight and level because they full burner in, giving them no time to aim and shoot.
Now that the game is out and the tutorials have been made, I am really curious to see what the difficulty curve is going to look like with people making missions. I would expect that everyone is going to get much better and then that is going to require for harder missions. Until the AI is redone, I am going to guess its really going to come down to mission editors to be able to bake in the difficulty in missions. Wil be curious to see. Thanks for stopping Redkite and congrats on 50K! Good luck on the next 50K 😁
@@Enigma89 50K really snuck up on me! Thanks. Trouble with scripted "AI" difficulty is it only works when the player is expected to be reactive. If you're on the attack, the maker cannot predict and react as cleanly!
The two biggest things keeping me from continuing to play is 1) no randomised mission editor. I want to just tell the game to set up a small scenario that is random. Im someone who doesn’t want to spend an hour making a mission. Im far too picky. This pickiness also means I dislike playing other’s creations too. The 2nd thing keeping me from playing are the bugs. I have not completed 1 mission (other than sub duel and Vietnam bombing run) without my ships ramming into it’s fellow formation ship sinking it, helicopter returning to it’s host ship capsizing the host ship sinking it…, aircraft going to space, aircraft going to the abyss, ships that sail hundreds of miles to attack a bunker on some random island when I want it to just sail a few miles the other direction, my ship disappearing from the game entirely just without warning.
I’ve been waiting for a game like this since I played Jane’s Fleet Command. If somebodies getting their knickers in a twist over £37 (UK price during early bird discount period) they don’t appreciate how rare games like these are now. What I’ve played so far was good fun, despite its early flaws I can see the absolutely insane foundation at work here that could become something absolutely timeless with community support.
Another big bug that wasn’t mentioned in this video is sometimes when your ships seemingly aren’t following engagement orders the helicopter/plane you were trying to engage explodes without any indication of a missile being launched on the map, by voice, or using any of your stores. I think the issue is related to large missions and high time compression
Just to add for people considering buying- Multiplayer hasn't been "Ruled out" as of yet, it's just not on the 1.0 road to release roadmap. The dev's do want to add multiplayer and have stated if there's interest and they have time/money they will add it...
@@doltBmB Maybe they're already designing/coding it in an MP friendly way. I'm very cautious though. Every instance of a game where MP was added afterwards was highly problematic with stability often being the biggest problem. And that even includes turn based games on a grid , where adding stable MP should be easier (relatively. Adding MP is never easy under no circumstance unless it's same screen couch MP)
Great down to earth review, pointing all the relevant pros and cons of this sim. Have not bought it yet, but after seeing this decent review, will now buy it. Hopefully they will cover the Falklands War ( I am biased as English living in UK, and my age group for time ) Again thanks for the time and effort you have put into making this Video. Steve From LONDON
I have about 15 hours at this point. The game is very much my type of game. The price point is still a bit high for the current state. - A save system is needed ASAP - unit and formation AI needs work, right now having a “smart” enemy relies on triggers set by the mission editor. For me, the fun looks to be doing multi phase missions in the 3-4 hour range. Right now, memory leaks will kill your game around the 2 hour mark, depending on hardware. That makes me hesitant to post my missions to the workshop, as they crash around the time things get really interesting.
I agree, the best way to play this game in my opinion is with a big theater and many units. However exactly this is not really possible as both the missing safe feature and the memory leaks make playing long missions impossible.
This game will do well, the devs are active and the community seems dedicated. I'm very happy to see how well it's done so far after watching this game since it was first announced.
Leave your unit list up and you can set waypoints, speed, and altitude from the animated hanger deck. They show there so you can double click to select and off you go like normal. It's also way easier to expand the flight to double click and select individual planes for orders, or collapse and double click the flight lead for group orders.
I'm liking the game so far, but here's my criticisms: 1. The UX needs some work, and is responsible for units having a mind of their own. They often have orders that give them a mind of their own and it's hard to figure out exactly what you need to do to fix it. 2. The way submarines work is completely unrealistic. Once a submarine is far enough underwater it cannot relay sonar contacts to other vessels or receive contacts from other vessels. I'm not entirely sure how one would accommodate this, except by giving the subs some general orders before ordering them to dive, and from then on control is out of the player's hands until the subs come near the surface again. In addition that submarine would not provide position updates to other players. If the player assumes direct control then they can control that sub underwater, but all the other units become automated and the player does not receive position updates from other units. Also, turning comms on near the surface to send/receive position updates should carry some risk of detection. There's a lot to consider here that isn't currently modeled. 3. The game desperately needs a campaign or at least some sort of randomized mission generator. I understand it's coming, and it really needs it. If I create my own missions then I sort of know what's already out there. It defeats a huge part of the detection and stealth of the game.
Janes Fleet Command had that mechanic where you would order your sub and then it would leave comms depth for most of the game. Thats definitely more realistic but less fun I feel. I want to control and engage in sub warfare as if I'm the sub captain. I just think of it as if all my ships and subs have human captains commanding them....I'm not just the admiral sitting back in charge. Definitely needs a random mission generator as you said. But also the AI needs a heavy rework. Not just your own ships who seem to bug out but mainly the enemy AI is dumb as a rock. That is a game killer for a single player experience.
I disagree about the sub providing info once it goes down. It doesn't happen in the real world and should be modeled that way. After all they have modeled 99% of the game based on real world statistics.
Imo, aircrafts should not becontrolled through micromanaging in this game: give them a mission prior to take-off (in addition to the specific loadout), tell them where, and let them go. You already have many vessels to control
The AI will be the big thing...War on the sea has same building blocks-great dynamic campaign,lots of units,detail systems and then AI cant use the simplest of maneuvers to evade an air attack.I hope Sea Power will not be the same.
A couple of hours in and i am overall happy with my purchase. A little surprised that some of the simple stuff like some mission descriptions are missing etc.Thanks for the tip on the Steam workshop!
i found it really intresting that well its focus is on naval warfare, your not limited to building just those types of missions. I tried building a ground forces battle to take a SAM site and it worked great. Like the aircraft though, managing tanks was not smooths but did function.
I'm glad they found the memory leak. I had to quit out of a long mission that was getting really interesting just last night because the game would render about 1s of gameplay, stutter for 1.5s, and render about 1s more. It got really bad!
God, I want this game so bad, but times or tough for the whole family. Buying into a early access game with no MP is a big risk when i hardly have funds for food for my family. BUT, my love for sim games is huge an i want to support small devs willing to go out an make games for such a small gaming community like us. Its a huge risk for them to dump time and resources into a project that likely will only sell to %5 of gamers as a whole.
Bro, if you hardly have enough money to feed your family, this game being the next coming of Jesus isn't enough to justify a purchase. Save up where you can.
Get rid of excess expenses, I've gotten it down to where people are jealous lol. I've been there, you've got issues, cut down on what you don't need. Throw Netflix, HBO, Apple and Amazon out the door on their raggedy A double S'es. Get fiber internet and just watch everything above on the down-low, alternatively tether your PC to the free internet you get on your phone, voila, Sea Power financed within a few days and not really impacting your overall finances. No take out, make cheap & healthy food at home, all it costs is a bit extra time. Got a unreliable daily car sapping your finances, or worse yet, a car with the dreaded downpayment? Get rid of it, buy a cheap car renowned for reliability, if safety is an issue = Speeding never pays off, you save seconds while putting more wear on the car, risking fines, collision, etc, drive accordingly, it's cheaper.
Some units are not modelled considering the 1985 unit cut-off. Without even any other nations, at least these seem very obvious.... - F/A-18 A . We get hypothetical Orels and Naval Mig-23A's, but not Hornets... - Tu-22 Blinder - the one that looks like an alien. - Su-17/22 - Arleigh Burke class - Typhoon class subs What am I missing ?
Really enjoying the game so far. We've needed something like this since Fleet Command. The potential modding is one of the big reason I bought immediately. Cold Waters never put effort into making modding easy, yet we eventually got Dot Mod and Epic Mod. But Sea Power seems to actively be making an effort to support modding. Can't wait for the community to be able to add more modern vessels, more missions, and more campaigns.
I haven't bought it yet, as i'm generally highly cautious about early access, but the game is on my watch list. I don't think the game is overpriced as such, though i do think the early access discount isn't an incentive to get it now, if you are on the fence about it. I would gladly pay 50$ for this if it had the features i would like to see implemented, but definitely wouldn't pay 45$ and then hoping for them. As to what some of those features are, strangely i am willing to wait for the dynamic campaign, but i need to see some automation in unit behavior, part of which you mentioned yourself. Not repeat your statements i would only add that we definitely need "missions" or "roles" for the units. Coming from flight sims as well, a flight or a wing should be able to be given more specific "mindset" that will allow it to follow certain RoE, like CAP, sweep, escort, intercept, BARCAP and the like, all of which should in relation to other objects on the map, say a CAP should be in relation to some position, escort in relation to some other aircraft and so on, and so on. Another behavior automatization should be regarding groups of contacts be they blue or red. We should be able to give orders to a group (say a flight) of planes or to an individual plane, BUT we should also be able to to give those orders in relation to an enemy plane OR group. I.E. those 2 planes should be capable of receiving orders to attack the blob of Bears coming from the north, and need to be individually micromanaged to attack each contact separately. Finally, just like we have weapons free and weapons tight or so, we should have something akin to "handsfree" and "hands-tight" that would allow or keep a plane, or a ship or a boat to ignore mission (as defined above) parameters or prioritize mission above else. If we had all this, i think the game would be on really solid ground, and content, assets and quality of life improvements would be the only thing we would need to wait, but that at least for me, is well inside the early access expectations. Forgive me if some of these features are already in the game, i have based my observations only by watching your and other UA-camr videos. Cheers and have a great weekend.
Not sure if it's already been brought up, but "Weapons free" is apparently more akin to "Free decision making", handing decision making and the prioritisation of orders over to the TacAI. I.e., "Weapons free" basically means "do whatever you think is appropriate, ignore my instructions if you don't see them as proper". I might give that order to planes since I'm not too keen on micro managing them, but I wouldn't give it to surface vessels. Main point though is understanding that it lets the TacAI off the leash, hence why it often appears to ignore you.
Giving wepons free orders to the planes at least in the current version makes them kinda do wacky stuff at times like firing all missiles on one target or flying at like 100ft while the enemy is at 30000 ft. So I only tend to use the "wepons free" when my units are attacked, be it air or sea otherwise I micro them.
@@snapjitzy No, its probably that he's of the same mindset like me: Multiplayer does not keep games alive, if so, why are their dead multiplayer games? Most games like these are kept up through modding or a fanbase that just enjoys the game, look at the STALKER series. Not every game has to have multiplayer but CO-OP is something I enjoy though.
This game had an amazing pre sale build up, and the team really delivered. Its early, but I am having so much fun already. Only up to good from here and I cannot wait. The fact they have a solid plan for a dynamic campaign is all I need to see to be really confident. I am fine with it not having multiplayer. That becomes a huge time sink and would have affected the spirit of the game. Balancing takes dev time, and raises the skill floor to participate.
Great video. I bought the game and I agree with all your takes on it. I loved Cold Waters when it first came out and I put a lot of hours into War at Sea. This is going to be an awesome game. The bones are there. I agree that the steam workshop integration will be key to its success. I also loved the soundtrack (as well as the soundtrack to the other two games mentioned above) and thought the graphics and modeling were fantastic. There are a couple annoying things like the repeated radar call outs and the air units being wonky but these are minor. I agree with your take on the pricing and the current situation of military sims. I also agree with you that the game strikes the right balance between simulator and game. Cold Waters is a little too much sim sometimes and War at Sea is a little too much game sometimes. Thanks for the video and don’t be afraid to do more single player games! Just subscribed to you because of this game.
Firstly this is a modern day fleet command type game (in the spiritual sense) secondly it should not be down to individual players to provide content by way of additional missions to feed the progress of this game for the next 5+ months or longer. I agree this game does have massive potential and the mission editor for is a nice touch for those who want to do that and even better if they want to create missions for other players. That said this project should not be reliant on extra content being delivered by people who bought the game until the dynamic campaign comes out. And as this is an EA there is no guarantee (just like with any EA) that this project will get completed by the Devs, I'm sure they intend to complete the game, but in business or life in general sometimes things just don't work out, and if for some reason this project doesn't work out the Devs get to make a load of cash without any obligation to finish what they started. I hope this project does work out and lives up to the serious amount of potential it does have, but potential is never a guaranteed outcome.
I had the sticker shock a bit at first, but you're right, it is a small price to pay for a unique game like this one. Plus on the upside since it is a smaller studio they may be more responsive to the community.
what a well thought out review. I especially like your comments about price and defending the developers with the amount of factions. as you say, these games don't get funding anymore so we gotta be realistic. and this is made with love. I purchased the game on your recommendation
even if its not ready yet, we all love sims ! and this is a real game, not a BS one like from ubisoft etc.! so we need to support such devs so they keep doing good stuff for us !!!
I think I'll get it, but as it is sold right now, sure the dynamic campaigns and future nations all sound great, but what recent years of EA releases have shown, it's that no matter the size of the studio behind it, you can't ever trust them for anything (looking at you KSP2).
I’d love to see multiplayer come to this game in some fashion or another and I really don’t think it would be out of the world to see it happen. Would ensure there’s a bigger draw to be able to fight your friend in 1v1 scenarios
I am not sure if multiplayer would work too well, because it would be impossible or difficult to implement time compression. Imagine your are 20 nm away from your target and close with 5 knots... would take you almost 4 hours real time to it. The pace would be painfully slow. That said, I wish they would remake Dangerous Waters. Such a great "DCS on Ships and Subs"! Still play it every now and then, because it has good system depth as well as quite some variety. The good old sims... somehow they managed better the aspect that these are games. DI Tornado or Jet Pilot did that very well, too. With more modern graphics these would steal a lot of time from DCS (for me at least :-))
Very intrigued by this one. The detail of all the assets really intrigues me and the era it all takes place in seems really cool. Never really played RTS type games before so I’m not sure how I’d take to the UI and methods for controlling everything.
This game was clearly inspired by the old Sonalysts Combat Simulations games, just like Cold Waters was (the title alone gives it away, sounding very similar to SCS Dangerous Waters.) And this is very similar to Fleet Command. All of those games, right from the start with 1997's 588i Hunter/Killer had multiplayer and are still playable online on Steam today. So I would say multiplayer is a pretty massive omission.
We have War on the Sea and Victory at Sea, etc, for that. There's also Task Force Admiral, which should be out in not an eternity. Meanwhile let these guys focus on the "Modern" bit in their game title :)
@@ToreDL87 I kind of hope for more WWII entries myself, because War on the Sea has really major flaws with its UX design, airplane spam, submarine warfare, and overall level of tedium. I've not played Victory at Sea but the reviews for it say it's arcadey and not really going for a sim-like experience, in edition to it being 10 years old.
@@mdeerocks6792 Very modern can't be done. The specs around the technologies are literally secret or top secret information. Even Cold War Era stuff is still often classified.
The micromanagement is indeed really strong with this title. As a Command Modern Operations player I really miss the ability to create tasks (e.g. patrol this area) that I can assign units to and set their ROEs, so they can do their thing without me having to micro them. And yeah, not having an MP mode is a huge loss!
One feature I'd like to see implemented is better pre-launch aircraft management. If I have a carrier in my battle group I'd like to be able to set which aircraft start on the deck and how many, it just bugs me how everything has to be brought up from the hangar piecemeal. If a carrier is anywhere near a combat engagement its jets should be fueled, armed, and staged on the deck ready to sortie on short notice.
For me it's a (very) rough diamond, because of its technical limitations and issues, it has a great core and lots of potential. Devs seem passionate and hard-working. Price is steep, but if that's a problem, you can wait for a discount and by then the game will be more refined.
Been waiting for this and eager to purchase. If other navies are going to come as DLC it would be nice to know at what cost. I’d love more RN coverage, Falklands missions sound good especially if there was an option with the previous generation Ark Royal with Phantoms, Buccaneers etc
Very good review. to me not having multiplayer is a huge plus. So many times games rely on multiplayer and ignore single player. The Dynamic campaign sounds idea! I used to play Harpoon a lot in the past.
There's a learning curve, I'm still trying to figure out all the controls but I know when I get it down I'm going to have a lot of fun. They need to have a better tutorial like Cold Waters did. I just start a mission and have no idea what to do.
From the very first moment I saw this game I wanted it. Reminds me of the different Janes type milsim games in the 90s but at the time the computing power was just not there.
The French military including the French Navy has so many ships and equipment unique to France, I know there's bad blood between French and English speakers but it would be nice that for once we'd be included in a military simulation.
As usual I really like your take here & after about 10 hours with the game agree with most of it. I do think you're generous in saying that the scenarios can be completed in 90 min. Sure I've done a couple that were less than an hour but others that went far past two. So my biggest gripe right now is the no saving in progress. Leaving the game on pause for hours on end is not an option in my book so having to 'schedule' enough time in front of the pc in one go is a turn off. I much prefer being able to jump into something for 30-60 minutes at a time if possible. Next is certainly the clicking fest you allude to. My experience is unit wide, not just planes, but it always seems like there is one unit that I have to resort to "direct control" to get it to go where I want it to. Those are really my major gripes for the current state at this price. I haven't had performance issues at all on my, while not a potato, far from latest spec (i7 9700k/6800XT/32mb DDR4) system on a UWQHD monitor. Look I'm weary of the whole early access state of gaming but I get it, especially for niche genres. But I'm old and thus nostalgic about when I bought new game it was finished, mostly bug free and came on some sort of media, in a box with a nice printed manual etc. (in this regard I like TFA's approach to fund generation better despite the increased wait). Still though, just like you, this game is very compelling & I find myself wanting to get back into all the time... and that save feature will only make it all the more possible for me.
Watch them use that game as a base project just to develop a better game with more stuff to do other than the stock standard scenarios! Kinda like how "Call to Arms" did to their player base.
I like this game find it very similar the old jane's fleet command and also command modern ops. Improvements need to be made to how aircraft are handled, set up patrols, intercepts, strikes, and other tasks. For scenario's those who have Command could take some of those scenarios and make them on sea power.
The price surprised me because it was a little higher than I expected. I was waiting for this game for about four years, so I always intended to buy it, but I do understand the reaction. That being said, I agree with you for the most part. Huge companies charge twice the price for unimaginative games they release on a biennial schedule (or worse for madden/NBA fans). I'm not supporting those practices, but smaller studios do have smaller margins, and sims in particular can be very man-hour intensive for a product with limited appeal. I am on the pessimistic side when it comes to the campaign and future expansion; I've gotten my hopes up too many times. The steam workshop integration and the mission editor are the real big factors to me.
I really love to concept of this games especially of one how played Jane’s fleet Command ages ago and super enjoyed it. But my huge concern is the damage model I have seen for ships getting hit by missiles getting hit by a plane launched ASM and the fire spreads and kills the whole ships. Ships are built with compartmentalization and being able to seal off parts of the ship that are hit so damage control teams can deal with the fires. Just having seen many videos so far of this happening would be frustrating to play. Also the early access price seems a little steep for this one also.
Great review. If I wanted to start playing something like this, where do I start with tactics? Seems like a sim modeled at this scale would require you know something about surface warfare?...
I totally agree that by far the biggest issue with this game is the aircraft control. Maybe I am missing something, but a lot of times aircraft simply will not attack specific targets that I tell them too (i.e., they'll turn away, fly over harmlessly, or get distracted by something else.) Also, when I set them to weapons free or turn their radars on, they will usually turn their radars off and or go weapons tight again within 30 seconds or so. Also, in mission editor, it is sometimes borderline impossible to get the AI to attack. Sometimes, they'll just circle around like idiots or fly straight over whatever I want them to attack. I get that it is early access, but there are still basic standards of playability that people are gonna expect considering it's almost $50. Gunnner Heat PC, for example, was like $30 and did not feel as buggy. Nevertheless, given that it is really one of a kind and that no really significant game studio will touch a game of this type, I still support it wholeheartedly and find it fun despite all of the micromanaging involved.
How does Sea Power compare to CMANO? The pages where you can check sensor ranges look very similar. I got the feeling, Sea Power trades 3D units and graphics for complexity. It is not a bad thing and also CMANO has a multiple year head start. I am excited about how it will continue to develop. Thanks for the honest review!
Great points in letting the AI control things. I've found it wastes weapons quite often so I've just decided to use pause or to slow the game down to 0.5speed and handle matters manually. In some ways it can be too much micro, but in other ways it's more fun.
DEVS should go all out and create a SAVE command.. This may be the only game I own (200+) that I can't save progress and come back to it. THIS is a priority at this time. This cant be all that complicated as compared to the graphic success and gameplay in general.. It's kinda weird actually.
it has a lot of potential but in the little play time I've had just setting all the fleet to weapons free takes care of everything with not much for me to manage, I'll have to play more for sure
like you, my big regret is that there's no multiplayer mode... but otherwise it reminds me of the hours I spent playing “Fleet Command”. Let's hope that the success of this game will encourage them to develop multiplayer... let's hope!
A working adult gamer who doesn't buy pricey games every week should have no issue with the pricetag. Cook for the wife one night instead of going out and that's it. As mentioned in the video, we favor a niche for which there's very few offerings. And this one is solid. If we want the niche larger and/or richer, we need to be willing to support the people keeping it alive. These things don't descend from the heavens by God's grace.
I'm loving it so far but there are some issues. Main one being, units ignoring my orders. Found that ceasing fire or getting direct control can fix it but when SHTF happens, it's a micro issue that is unnecessary. Hoping it gets honed down and more stream lined.
The big one for me is that the Aircraft Carrier AI doesn't work. They don't launch anything sensible. But as long as you aren't fighting an enemy carrier it's a blast, even if it can get feeling a bit slow paced at times.
I'm loving this game period. I wish DCS would take some notes, the right amount of arcadish sprinkling is so addictive, DCS in other had had no arcadish little features around the Sim and it is getting boring, dont get me wrong i love DCS and their modules (i have all) are on point and im not speaking doing some arcade modules or nothing like it, but DCS came to a point you do these big missions and in the end you have the just the close button, and that's a deal breaker, anyone who sucede loves to get some kind of a reward, from XP to some kind of unlocking liveries or whatever, im really bored with DCS at this point after 4000hours of Simplay, the Developer after 15 years didn't implement something like weekly or daily challenges where you would be facing hard missions with nice rewards..i dont know, something more interesting, prestige everyone likes to progress and prestige...but nothing has been done, each pilot should had a progression system..., well all of this to say it is very refreshing to be now playing Sea Power, im enjoying a lot.
DCS is for us study level nerds. That's why we like it. Multiplayer is where you get longer lived satisfaction with DCS (when it works or the development don't release a patch that ruins it).
Hey @Enigma89, thanks for this review. I've watched a few other videos this week for this title, because I think it might be worth it to purchase the game; yours is the one that gave me the answers I was looking for. I tend to want to encourage good sim makers because there aren't enough of them out there, so I think I'll buy this one. I'm also slightly disapointed in the lack of multiplayer in Sea Power, but I think I may be able to enjoy this game in singleplayer form. I happen to be quite confortable making scenarios in DCS and other titles like ARMA 3, so I guess this could turn out to be a nice sandbox-type of place to have fun with ships.
4 hours of play so far. A dozen workshop scenarios waiting to be tried. Price per hour of play is already fine and will only improve the longer I play. A few bugs? Absolutely. If I didnt expect and understand that I wouldnt bother with EA at all. Too many people crying because they cant get a cheap fix NOW!
Theyve been pumping out hotfixes too. I've already put more than 12 hours into it and i've loved every second, were there some bugs? Yes, were they completely game or immersion breaking, no. Looking very bright for me, I feel like i've already gotten my money's worth. Granted i spend hundred of dollars on combat mission titles too, niche titles like this I am willing to pay for because they are truly what I want to play.
IMHO the entire success of this game revolves around the dynamic campaign which is coming Q2 2025. At this time, I do think they will be able to pull it off and with no big studios trying to do games like this, I feel compelled to support it. It's easy to say because the game is fun and I am enjoying it. Let me know what you think of the game below.
I'm getting the game shortly after the dynamic campaign , the aircraft commands/UI and general AI is the main thing. The price is right when the dynamic campaign is out. I'm getting the music first. There's also Doctrines as well, but not as critical but would be nice (more to do with immersion) .
We had maybe 5 decent naval games in the past two decades. This is a godsend.
Totalmente y puede que le haga competencia a cmano en un futuro. Al final esto es como un simulador hay que mirar al horizonte que es cuando brillara este juego.
Couldn't are less whether they have a campaign. The mission editor is all I need.
If the developer are reading this comments: I will buy this game for full price as soon as it gehts Multiplayer. One of my friends already got the game and I will join him but I do not see myself playing a game alone for my own.
I purchased the game to support the devs. Mil sim type games are not funded like they used to be.
Im new to naval history and naval games but not mil sims, but it's literally the game I never knew I wanted. I am having a great time learning about naval history, its weapon platforms, and testing tactics out with the scenarios.
I agree that this game will not reach its full potential without multiplayer but having a dynamic campaign first then integrating multiplayer with the DC would be the best course imho.
Agreed. I would have even paid Gary grigsby price for this gem.
It is sad how Mil-Sim community is today (at least in germany). When I was younger, I could play Arma2OA every day with many people on servers with realistic parameters in PvE all day. Today the communitys barely find the players to fill two fireteams in Arma3.
Please!!! MicroProse is far from broke they didn't need any charity from you!!!
The texture memory leak was patched this morning along with a lot of other bugs.
Thanks for the FYI
Thank God, complex missions now playable.
Workshop support will single handedly keep this game afloat. Mulitplayer will be huge when they get to it
Yeah to me I think this also helps justify the price in some ways. If the game is successful economically it should support the devs into adding "free multiplayer". You kind of have to price it in early because as ultimate admiral dreadnoughts showed us, players really don't like paying for a multiplayer specific add on
i dont think there will be multiplayer, the devs said that its currently not being looked at in this roadmap, so who knows, not everyone wants MP
@@gamingavalon8784 they have said it’s something they want, but need to add it after they make the game. Most people want multiplayer for a multitude of reasons including longevity of the game, I’d say people are either for it or apathetic
While the workshop support is cool, relying on the community as a crutch to fill in missing content is not a good argument in favor of the game imo.
There is no multiplayer planned rn
There once was a time when a game was released it was a completely finished game. It may have had a bug or two buried deep inside that you could easily work around, but it was a cake with icing and a candle. Now we get a box of powdery stuff to play with and a promise they will someday have all the ingredients mixed, but they never quite seem to get around to it because they want to sell you too many other things that don't make the game whole. Years pass and the community complains about the same old things and we'll get skins for our ships and sales for our skins. I very much miss getting a game in a box with a manual and a fold out sheet with the key commands. Ah, those were the days.
Every single comment I've seen (on this and other videos) is about the price. A coffee costs $8. McDonald's costs $15. AAA games are $90 now before you drop money for transactions and skins and "season passes". If you dont like getting stuff early access, thats totally valid. But it's $45 for a game that has been universally well reviewed, that sounds totally reasonable to me.
I like buying early acces stuff because those tend to be cheaper.
I completely agree. You’re getting a game that will be actively fixed as issues pop up for half of what games used to be $60-$70, let alone $90.
@@matthewmaier2854unless you are ready or not. Then your quote on quote finished product is complete garbage
$45 on a game that has no cemented future is too much.
@ I’ve spent $40 bucks in dumber ways.🤷♂️
The "cease fire" command will usually let you regain control of ai units that develop a mind of their own. It's bound to the X key, so I spam it a lot.
This is helpful to know. I had an FFG that was my only effective anti-air defense get killed and leave my auxiliaries defenseless because I just couldn't get it to go back to formation!
It’s caused by your formation and telling the flag ship to move the other ships will follow and do what they need to do to get back into formation. So you just have to be aware which the flag ship is and tell the others to move independently if want that. There probably a more efficient way but I not that good myself yet 😂
Sometimes my ships gets a mind of their own on where to go no matter what I do. If nothing else helps you can take direct control of them and at least
point them in correct direction.
I bought the game a few hours after release with no regard for the price tag and started questioning if it was a sound financial decision afterwards, but you elaborating what one actually gets in return for that money reassured me greatly.
Learning that the devs plan to include most other navies as DLC is indeed a little disappointing.
I thought they would gradually complete the navies now in game and add the remaining big players (France, Italy, China and Japan) and then do smaller navies as DLCs, but it is what it is.
As you said no big studio would be willing to do a game like this, so in the end it’s one of the best we have right now and we should support the devs to realize the games potential to be even better.
Thanks for the videos!
Thanks for sharing your POV
Same here. I dont want this game to turn into a 2nd Hoi4 with each update being a paid DLC..
@@scrawn9721 That's about right, Micropose take not, don't be like Paradox, take more cues from Hello games and Larian Studio.
I bought this game to support the developers knowing that games like these are not being funded by the big studios and publishers any longer. I look upon Triassic Games like I do Radian Simulations - the latter making a tank sim in the spirit of the old Microprose with the intent of making a game almost no one any longer want to bankroll. I do believe Triassic is trying to do the same for naval sims making a game which will appeal to a an audience who want to play a realistic game albeit without any minutiae being modelled. I was impressed by the detailed Steel Beasts Pro when I tried that tanksim, I find myself playing GHPC waay more often. I believe I will enjoy Sea Power as much, especially when more content becomes available. The entry fee can seem steep for an early access release, but I do believe the devs are pouring their heart into this project so I do not mind paying the price.
Great summary. As a DCS player who often finds himself playing solo, when I see games like this aimed at the single-player market I actually find that a bonus! While I understand the appeal of multiplayer, it can also make devs lazy when it comes to AI. The "players will fill in the AI gap" mentality I think leads to situations like in DCS where the AI lags.
When I see a game is focused on single-player I assume the devs know that any replayability is dependent on a convincing AI opponent and will put the time in to polish it as they can't "fall back" on multiplayer to make the game interesting/engaging. That is of course no guarantee that they'll pull it off. But as more is riding on the AI, I trust the devs know that it is in their best interest to focus on it - unlike with multiplayer titles. As you mention in the video, a lot of existing AI is basic and linear. Good AI is difficult. But, AI is really coming into its own and now is a great time for games to take advantage of it.
All that said, I also agree with you in that user made scenario will be a huge part of this games success - especially the quality of them! Having a lot of basic/boring ones won't help. If the mission editor has features that allow a lot of creative storytelling in addition to the tactical components. I can see it being a big success. Being able to easily add voiceovers or detailed briefings/maps for context, etc. will add a level of engagement that single player games need.
As always, just my 2¢. Cheers.
Yeah same, game AI development has been pretty sad these last.. well it's basically been a decade now, if not more.
One can hope that these devs get the AI right.
I understand the sentiment that MP can make things lazy to not do great AI. I have seen this point made. The only thing I'll say is that I can't think of any AI that has really been competent enough in any game.
I'm glad there is no multiplayer because it's always the case even if the single player is the main game mode the multiplayer community becomes a massive loud minority that takes over the entire games feedback so the devs end up focusing on that and ignoring the single player entirely. The secret to success is to wait until you have a completed product and then release instead of a early access one that will keep breaking all the mods people put effort into.
Amen, this is for me a sunday afternoon locked in my office/mancave alone. I couldn't care less about MP on this one.
For me the main thing is the AI. I want to play a challanging and fun game (even though its kind of a sim). I want the AI to hunt me down relentlessly and fight for their lives. I feel that if I play right now I will just stomp the AI because I know about naval combat and know these weapons and so on. I will definitely buy later when there is more content and some fixes. I live in Brazil and games are ridiculously expensive here. I compleatey support the devs and Im very happy that this game exists, if I had the spare money I would have bought it right now.
watching Fleet Command, a game I found randomly and completely adore, get some recognition brings me such joy
13:23 one.kf the biggest issues is definitely controlling more than a few aircraft. Just like you said, it is incredibly micro-intensive while also being unpredictable and the way we control the planes isn't very efficient.
I also purchased the game to support the devs. There is simply no other game that does this, If I want to do sub-hunting using an Udaloy class or control and micro a Backfire raid on a carrier, there is no other game, I think they did a great job so far. I really liked the review btw
FYI:
-With planes I have found for fighters is better to just give them weapons free without micro, they will do well on their own.
-With bombers like the Backfire with ASM, it´s better to get them into range and then give them weapons free, although sometimes they will not fire all ASMs. If you shoot before getting into range some planes in the formation will fall behind in speed
CMANO.
Its like buying stuff on farmers market. Sure the prices are higher than in the supermarket but the guys doing the work gets the money.
People will always find something to complain about, $45 with a dynamic campaign (in a few months) and a mission editor is not a big deal. I do think they made a mistake giving it to UA-camrs though, they ran through a lot of the scenarios and gave up a lot of that content.
imo it was an amazing plan. The youtubers were able to start teaching people before the game came out. The battles are not a walk even knowing what is coming, but having that info lets us focus on learning the mechanics for new missions.
@@Dracomarine Yeah new user-made missions, as good or better than what the game came with (because players have more time on their hands for that than the devs who are currently busy with Dynamic Campaign and bug fixing) are constantly getting added on workshop
The game is only worth for the later updates and supporting the devs, for now the game is not 45€ worth of content so if ur focusing for the content thats in the game right now and nothing else, its not worth 45€ ( my opinion)
In Q2 2025 it'll be £45 for what you say, but until then you just paid £45 for 30 scripted scenarios and a mission editor tool.
I think there is a valid criticism about the almost complete absence of Royal Navy assets. The Falklands War is by far the most significant naval conflict of this period, and I think naval history enthusiasts who might just have come across the game could legitimately be annoyed that they can't recreate the biggest war of the period in a game called "naval warfare in the missile age".
It's not really a valid criticism when it's in early access though is it?
@tangycheeseman3963 they're charging full price and they've said they plan to make the RN playable through DLC. This is not a case of "it will be in the full release".
I largely agree with what's said, the biggest issue is the aircraft management, clicking a wingman rather than lead, forcing you to pause and zoom in each time, the failure to make logical attacks.
My major complaint is how passive the AI is, doing a carrier group vs carrier group it was trivial to pick apart the US fleet as they never launched a single fighter, just their AWACS/ASW helos. So i could loiter just out of range to organise, attack and fly home, i could keep my surveillance aircraft close, even beyond my own fighter protection. I do like that aircraft waypoints give a zulu time on target rather than time to, making it easy to sync up aircraft attacks however. But the busy work managing an air assault would cripple my ability to operate the fleet at the same time.
I'd also found my migs couldn't shoot down a p-3 orion, with guns, flying straight and level because they full burner in, giving them no time to aim and shoot.
Now that the game is out and the tutorials have been made, I am really curious to see what the difficulty curve is going to look like with people making missions. I would expect that everyone is going to get much better and then that is going to require for harder missions. Until the AI is redone, I am going to guess its really going to come down to mission editors to be able to bake in the difficulty in missions. Wil be curious to see.
Thanks for stopping Redkite and congrats on 50K! Good luck on the next 50K 😁
Middle mouse button auto-switches to the lead of the formation, so you can click on any of the planes/ships then hit middle mouse.
@@skymonster92 Ah Great tip, thanks. I still think it should auto select lead if you're so zoomed out they overlap though!
@@Enigma89 50K really snuck up on me! Thanks.
Trouble with scripted "AI" difficulty is it only works when the player is expected to be reactive. If you're on the attack, the maker cannot predict and react as cleanly!
The two biggest things keeping me from continuing to play is 1) no randomised mission editor. I want to just tell the game to set up a small scenario that is random. Im someone who doesn’t want to spend an hour making a mission. Im far too picky. This pickiness also means I dislike playing other’s creations too.
The 2nd thing keeping me from playing are the bugs. I have not completed 1 mission (other than sub duel and Vietnam bombing run) without my ships ramming into it’s fellow formation ship sinking it, helicopter returning to it’s host ship capsizing the host ship sinking it…, aircraft going to space, aircraft going to the abyss, ships that sail hundreds of miles to attack a bunker on some random island when I want it to just sail a few miles the other direction, my ship disappearing from the game entirely just without warning.
I’ve been waiting for a game like this since I played Jane’s Fleet Command. If somebodies getting their knickers in a twist over £37 (UK price during early bird discount period) they don’t appreciate how rare games like these are now.
What I’ve played so far was good fun, despite its early flaws I can see the absolutely insane foundation at work here that could become something absolutely timeless with community support.
Good video. I agree with all you say. For me I want far more Royal Navy units and the Falkland's DLC.
Another big bug that wasn’t mentioned in this video is sometimes when your ships seemingly aren’t following engagement orders the helicopter/plane you were trying to engage explodes without any indication of a missile being launched on the map, by voice, or using any of your stores. I think the issue is related to large missions and high time compression
Just to add for people considering buying- Multiplayer hasn't been "Ruled out" as of yet, it's just not on the 1.0 road to release roadmap. The dev's do want to add multiplayer and have stated if there's interest and they have time/money they will add it...
If multiplayer has not been designed for from the start, then it will take basically rewriting the entire game to add it, which they will not do.
@ that’s not true at all, and not at all what they’ve said
@@doltBmB Maybe they're already designing/coding it in an MP friendly way. I'm very cautious though. Every instance of a game where MP was added afterwards was highly problematic with stability often being the biggest problem. And that even includes turn based games on a grid , where adding stable MP should be easier (relatively. Adding MP is never easy under no circumstance unless it's same screen couch MP)
Really enjoying this sim. Looking forward to its future!
Great down to earth review, pointing all the relevant pros and cons of this sim.
Have not bought it yet, but after seeing this decent review, will now buy it.
Hopefully they will cover the Falklands War ( I am biased as English living in UK, and my age group for time )
Again thanks for the time and effort you have put into making this Video.
Steve From LONDON
I have about 15 hours at this point. The game is very much my type of game.
The price point is still a bit high for the current state.
- A save system is needed ASAP
- unit and formation AI needs work, right now having a “smart” enemy relies on triggers set by the mission editor.
For me, the fun looks to be doing multi phase missions in the 3-4 hour range. Right now, memory leaks will kill your game around the 2 hour mark, depending on hardware.
That makes me hesitant to post my missions to the workshop, as they crash around the time things get really interesting.
I agree, the best way to play this game in my opinion is with a big theater and many units. However exactly this is not really possible as both the missing safe feature and the memory leaks make playing long missions impossible.
Wait it doesn't even have a save system!??
This game will do well, the devs are active and the community seems dedicated. I'm very happy to see how well it's done so far after watching this game since it was first announced.
Leave your unit list up and you can set waypoints, speed, and altitude from the animated hanger deck.
They show there so you can double click to select and off you go like normal.
It's also way easier to expand the flight to double click and select individual planes for orders, or collapse and double click the flight lead for group orders.
I agree, I think this game is the future - its like what Homeworld was to space fleet combat, but now to Naval fleet combat.
I have 20 hours on it so far. Gotta be honest, I would wait a little bit before buying.
I'm liking the game so far, but here's my criticisms:
1. The UX needs some work, and is responsible for units having a mind of their own. They often have orders that give them a mind of their own and it's hard to figure out exactly what you need to do to fix it.
2. The way submarines work is completely unrealistic. Once a submarine is far enough underwater it cannot relay sonar contacts to other vessels or receive contacts from other vessels. I'm not entirely sure how one would accommodate this, except by giving the subs some general orders before ordering them to dive, and from then on control is out of the player's hands until the subs come near the surface again. In addition that submarine would not provide position updates to other players. If the player assumes direct control then they can control that sub underwater, but all the other units become automated and the player does not receive position updates from other units. Also, turning comms on near the surface to send/receive position updates should carry some risk of detection. There's a lot to consider here that isn't currently modeled.
3. The game desperately needs a campaign or at least some sort of randomized mission generator. I understand it's coming, and it really needs it. If I create my own missions then I sort of know what's already out there. It defeats a huge part of the detection and stealth of the game.
Janes Fleet Command had that mechanic where you would order your sub and then it would leave comms depth for most of the game. Thats definitely more realistic but less fun I feel.
I want to control and engage in sub warfare as if I'm the sub captain. I just think of it as if all my ships and subs have human captains commanding them....I'm not just the admiral sitting back in charge.
Definitely needs a random mission generator as you said. But also the AI needs a heavy rework. Not just your own ships who seem to bug out but mainly the enemy AI is dumb as a rock. That is a game killer for a single player experience.
I disagree about the sub providing info once it goes down. It doesn't happen in the real world and should be modeled that way. After all they have modeled 99% of the game based on real world statistics.
@@Piper44LMF Ya, that's what I'm trying to get at. It's one of the major disadvantages of submarines.
Imo, aircrafts should not becontrolled through micromanaging in this game: give them a mission prior to take-off (in addition to the specific loadout), tell them where, and let them go. You already have many vessels to control
My biggest problem is the lag when playing the bigger scenarios
This supposedly has been solved as of this morning, the devs implemented the community sourced fix for the memory leak
@@LennieThePolarBear I hope so. I was trying to do the Strawberries Can Kill scenario, and after two hours, it was lagging so hard, it was unplayable.
The AI will be the big thing...War on the sea has same building blocks-great dynamic campaign,lots of units,detail systems and then AI cant use the simplest of maneuvers to evade an air attack.I hope Sea Power will not be the same.
I agree with these thoughts. It would be great if the map also gave you easier control over the air units.
A couple of hours in and i am overall happy with my purchase. A little surprised that some of the simple stuff like some mission descriptions are missing etc.Thanks for the tip on the Steam workshop!
i have been Dieing for a New "Janes Fleet Command" this is literally like a spiritual sucsesor
i found it really intresting that well its focus is on naval warfare, your not limited to building just those types of missions. I tried building a ground forces battle to take a SAM site and it worked great. Like the aircraft though, managing tanks was not smooths but did function.
This review is 100% is spot on for the pros and cons.
Mission editor needs separate factions to segment/isolate and randomized range radius.
I'm glad they found the memory leak. I had to quit out of a long mission that was getting really interesting just last night because the game would render about 1s of gameplay, stutter for 1.5s, and render about 1s more. It got really bad!
God, I want this game so bad, but times or tough for the whole family. Buying into a early access game with no MP is a big risk when i hardly have funds for food for my family. BUT, my love for sim games is huge an i want to support small devs willing to go out an make games for such a small gaming community like us. Its a huge risk for them to dump time and resources into a project that likely will only sell to %5 of gamers as a whole.
Bro, if you hardly have enough money to feed your family, this game being the next coming of Jesus isn't enough to justify a purchase. Save up where you can.
@@Cplblue😅 Thx, that is why i have not bought it.
Get rid of excess expenses, I've gotten it down to where people are jealous lol.
I've been there, you've got issues, cut down on what you don't need.
Throw Netflix, HBO, Apple and Amazon out the door on their raggedy A double S'es.
Get fiber internet and just watch everything above on the down-low, alternatively tether your PC to the free internet you get on your phone, voila, Sea Power financed within a few days and not really impacting your overall finances.
No take out, make cheap & healthy food at home, all it costs is a bit extra time.
Got a unreliable daily car sapping your finances, or worse yet, a car with the dreaded downpayment? Get rid of it, buy a cheap car renowned for reliability, if safety is an issue = Speeding never pays off, you save seconds while putting more wear on the car, risking fines, collision, etc, drive accordingly, it's cheaper.
You had me at Mission Editor and Steam Workshop integration
Some units are not modelled considering the 1985 unit cut-off. Without even any other nations, at least these seem very obvious....
- F/A-18 A . We get hypothetical Orels and Naval Mig-23A's, but not Hornets...
- Tu-22 Blinder - the one that looks like an alien.
- Su-17/22
- Arleigh Burke class
- Typhoon class subs
What am I missing ?
Really enjoying the game so far. We've needed something like this since Fleet Command. The potential modding is one of the big reason I bought immediately. Cold Waters never put effort into making modding easy, yet we eventually got Dot Mod and Epic Mod. But Sea Power seems to actively be making an effort to support modding. Can't wait for the community to be able to add more modern vessels, more missions, and more campaigns.
I haven't bought it yet, as i'm generally highly cautious about early access, but the game is on my watch list. I don't think the game is overpriced as such, though i do think the early access discount isn't an incentive to get it now, if you are on the fence about it. I would gladly pay 50$ for this if it had the features i would like to see implemented, but definitely wouldn't pay 45$ and then hoping for them.
As to what some of those features are, strangely i am willing to wait for the dynamic campaign, but i need to see some automation in unit behavior, part of which you mentioned yourself. Not repeat your statements i would only add that we definitely need "missions" or "roles" for the units. Coming from flight sims as well, a flight or a wing should be able to be given more specific "mindset" that will allow it to follow certain RoE, like CAP, sweep, escort, intercept, BARCAP and the like, all of which should in relation to other objects on the map, say a CAP should be in relation to some position, escort in relation to some other aircraft and so on, and so on.
Another behavior automatization should be regarding groups of contacts be they blue or red. We should be able to give orders to a group (say a flight) of planes or to an individual plane, BUT we should also be able to to give those orders in relation to an enemy plane OR group. I.E. those 2 planes should be capable of receiving orders to attack the blob of Bears coming from the north, and need to be individually micromanaged to attack each contact separately.
Finally, just like we have weapons free and weapons tight or so, we should have something akin to "handsfree" and "hands-tight" that would allow or keep a plane, or a ship or a boat to ignore mission (as defined above) parameters or prioritize mission above else.
If we had all this, i think the game would be on really solid ground, and content, assets and quality of life improvements would be the only thing we would need to wait, but that at least for me, is well inside the early access expectations. Forgive me if some of these features are already in the game, i have based my observations only by watching your and other UA-camr videos.
Cheers and have a great weekend.
Definitely agree a save feature would be nice.
@@Corsair37 yep, that too!
Not sure if it's already been brought up, but "Weapons free" is apparently more akin to "Free decision making", handing decision making and the prioritisation of orders over to the TacAI. I.e., "Weapons free" basically means "do whatever you think is appropriate, ignore my instructions if you don't see them as proper".
I might give that order to planes since I'm not too keen on micro managing them, but I wouldn't give it to surface vessels. Main point though is understanding that it lets the TacAI off the leash, hence why it often appears to ignore you.
Giving wepons free orders to the planes at least in the current version makes them kinda do wacky stuff at times like firing all missiles on one target or flying at like 100ft while the enemy is at 30000 ft. So I only tend to use the "wepons free" when my units are attacked, be it air or sea otherwise I micro them.
Air wings should be tasked and then the AI should Micro them. It does not sound find controlling individual aircraft.
Multiplayer is not a concern for me. Dynamic campaign and mod support are the keys.
I completely DISAGREE regarding multiplayer. I avoid MP in all games.
Why? Skill issue or something else?
@@snapjitzy No, its probably that he's of the same mindset like me: Multiplayer does not keep games alive, if so, why are their dead multiplayer games?
Most games like these are kept up through modding or a fanbase that just enjoys the game, look at the STALKER series.
Not every game has to have multiplayer but CO-OP is something I enjoy though.
Sea power is amazing, it’s bringing back the og sims of the good old days
This game had an amazing pre sale build up, and the team really delivered. Its early, but I am having so much fun already. Only up to good from here and I cannot wait. The fact they have a solid plan for a dynamic campaign is all I need to see to be really confident.
I am fine with it not having multiplayer. That becomes a huge time sink and would have affected the spirit of the game. Balancing takes dev time, and raises the skill floor to participate.
Great video. I bought the game and I agree with all your takes on it. I loved Cold Waters when it first came out and I put a lot of hours into War at Sea. This is going to be an awesome game. The bones are there. I agree that the steam workshop integration will be key to its success. I also loved the soundtrack (as well as the soundtrack to the other two games mentioned above) and thought the graphics and modeling were fantastic. There are a couple annoying things like the repeated radar call outs and the air units being wonky but these are minor. I agree with your take on the pricing and the current situation of military sims. I also agree with you that the game strikes the right balance between simulator and game. Cold Waters is a little too much sim sometimes and War at Sea is a little too much game sometimes.
Thanks for the video and don’t be afraid to do more single player games! Just subscribed to you because of this game.
Firstly this is a modern day fleet command type game (in the spiritual sense) secondly it should not be down to individual players to provide content by way of additional missions to feed the progress of this game for the next 5+ months or longer.
I agree this game does have massive potential and the mission editor for is a nice touch for those who want to do that and even better if they want to create missions for other players.
That said this project should not be reliant on extra content being delivered by people who bought the game until the dynamic campaign comes out.
And as this is an EA there is no guarantee (just like with any EA) that this project will get completed by the Devs, I'm sure they intend to complete the game, but in business or life in general sometimes things just don't work out, and if for some reason this project doesn't work out the Devs get to make a load of cash without any obligation to finish what they started.
I hope this project does work out and lives up to the serious amount of potential it does have, but potential is never a guaranteed outcome.
I had the sticker shock a bit at first, but you're right, it is a small price to pay for a unique game like this one. Plus on the upside since it is a smaller studio they may be more responsive to the community.
what a well thought out review. I especially like your comments about price and defending the developers with the amount of factions. as you say, these games don't get funding anymore so we gotta be realistic. and this is made with love. I purchased the game on your recommendation
Microprose is re-releasing Harpoon 97. Some of those missions would make nice conversions to this platform.
even if its not ready yet, we all love sims ! and this is a real game, not a BS one like from ubisoft etc.! so we need to support such devs so they keep doing good stuff for us !!!
I think I'll get it, but as it is sold right now, sure the dynamic campaigns and future nations all sound great, but what recent years of EA releases have shown, it's that no matter the size of the studio behind it, you can't ever trust them for anything (looking at you KSP2).
I’d love to see multiplayer come to this game in some fashion or another and I really don’t think it would be out of the world to see it happen. Would ensure there’s a bigger draw to be able to fight your friend in 1v1 scenarios
I do hope that modding especially using steam workshop becomes a thing. Cold Waters had great mod teams, lots of potential for Sea Power
I am not sure if multiplayer would work too well, because it would be impossible or difficult to implement time compression. Imagine your are 20 nm away from your target and close with 5 knots... would take you almost 4 hours real time to it. The pace would be painfully slow.
That said, I wish they would remake Dangerous Waters. Such a great "DCS on Ships and Subs"! Still play it every now and then, because it has good system depth as well as quite some variety.
The good old sims... somehow they managed better the aspect that these are games. DI Tornado or Jet Pilot did that very well, too. With more modern graphics these would steal a lot of time from DCS (for me at least :-))
Very intrigued by this one. The detail of all the assets really intrigues me and the era it all takes place in seems really cool. Never really played RTS type games before so I’m not sure how I’d take to the UI and methods for controlling everything.
This game was clearly inspired by the old Sonalysts Combat Simulations games, just like Cold Waters was (the title alone gives it away, sounding very similar to SCS Dangerous Waters.) And this is very similar to Fleet Command.
All of those games, right from the start with 1997's 588i Hunter/Killer had multiplayer and are still playable online on Steam today.
So I would say multiplayer is a pretty massive omission.
I really hope we see a WW2 dlc in the future or some sort of workshop mod.
We have War on the Sea and Victory at Sea, etc, for that.
There's also Task Force Admiral, which should be out in not an eternity. Meanwhile let these guys focus on the "Modern" bit in their game title :)
@@ToreDL87 I kind of hope for more WWII entries myself, because War on the Sea has really major flaws with its UX design, airplane spam, submarine warfare, and overall level of tedium. I've not played Victory at Sea but the reviews for it say it's arcadey and not really going for a sim-like experience, in edition to it being 10 years old.
Yawn. I'd rather see current platforms.
@@mdeerocks6792 Very modern can't be done. The specs around the technologies are literally secret or top secret information. Even Cold War Era stuff is still often classified.
The micromanagement is indeed really strong with this title. As a Command Modern Operations player I really miss the ability to create tasks (e.g. patrol this area) that I can assign units to and set their ROEs, so they can do their thing without me having to micro them.
And yeah, not having an MP mode is a huge loss!
One feature I'd like to see implemented is better pre-launch aircraft management. If I have a carrier in my battle group I'd like to be able to set which aircraft start on the deck and how many, it just bugs me how everything has to be brought up from the hangar piecemeal. If a carrier is anywhere near a combat engagement its jets should be fueled, armed, and staged on the deck ready to sortie on short notice.
I’ll bet their Dynamic Campaign will still beat DCS’s DCE and even with a several year head start.
I really do wish there was a bigger market for these type of games there soo fun once you learn them.
For me it's a (very) rough diamond, because of its technical limitations and issues, it has a great core and lots of potential. Devs seem passionate and hard-working. Price is steep, but if that's a problem, you can wait for a discount and by then the game will be more refined.
Been waiting for this and eager to purchase. If other navies are going to come as DLC it would be nice to know at what cost. I’d love more RN coverage, Falklands missions sound good especially if there was an option with the previous generation Ark Royal with Phantoms, Buccaneers etc
Very good review. to me not having multiplayer is a huge plus. So many times games rely on multiplayer and ignore single player. The Dynamic campaign sounds idea! I used to play Harpoon a lot in the past.
There's a learning curve, I'm still trying to figure out all the controls but I know when I get it down I'm going to have a lot of fun. They need to have a better tutorial like Cold Waters did. I just start a mission and have no idea what to do.
From the very first moment I saw this game I wanted it.
Reminds me of the different Janes type milsim games in the 90s but at the time the computing power was just not there.
Bought it this week and so far I like it...All the rest will come in time. Its £35 (discounted) here in the UK.
The French military including the French Navy has so many ships and equipment unique to France, I know there's bad blood between French and English speakers but it would be nice that for once we'd be included in a military simulation.
As usual I really like your take here & after about 10 hours with the game agree with most of it. I do think you're generous in saying that the scenarios can be completed in 90 min. Sure I've done a couple that were less than an hour but others that went far past two. So my biggest gripe right now is the no saving in progress. Leaving the game on pause for hours on end is not an option in my book so having to 'schedule' enough time in front of the pc in one go is a turn off. I much prefer being able to jump into something for 30-60 minutes at a time if possible.
Next is certainly the clicking fest you allude to. My experience is unit wide, not just planes, but it always seems like there is one unit that I have to resort to "direct control" to get it to go where I want it to. Those are really my major gripes for the current state at this price. I haven't had performance issues at all on my, while not a potato, far from latest spec (i7 9700k/6800XT/32mb DDR4) system on a UWQHD monitor.
Look I'm weary of the whole early access state of gaming but I get it, especially for niche genres. But I'm old and thus nostalgic about when I bought new game it was finished, mostly bug free and came on some sort of media, in a box with a nice printed manual etc. (in this regard I like TFA's approach to fund generation better despite the increased wait). Still though, just like you, this game is very compelling & I find myself wanting to get back into all the time... and that save feature will only make it all the more possible for me.
Is there a manual for this thing? I cannot find any written instructions on how things work. Just You Tube?
Watch them use that game as a base project just to develop a better game with more stuff to do other than the stock standard scenarios! Kinda like how "Call to Arms" did to their player base.
I like this game find it very similar the old jane's fleet command and also command modern ops. Improvements need to be made to how aircraft are handled, set up patrols, intercepts, strikes, and other tasks. For scenario's those who have Command could take some of those scenarios and make them on sea power.
The price surprised me because it was a little higher than I expected. I was waiting for this game for about four years, so I always intended to buy it, but I do understand the reaction. That being said, I agree with you for the most part. Huge companies charge twice the price for unimaginative games they release on a biennial schedule (or worse for madden/NBA fans). I'm not supporting those practices, but smaller studios do have smaller margins, and sims in particular can be very man-hour intensive for a product with limited appeal. I am on the pessimistic side when it comes to the campaign and future expansion; I've gotten my hopes up too many times. The steam workshop integration and the mission editor are the real big factors to me.
I really love to concept of this games especially of one how played Jane’s fleet Command ages ago and super enjoyed it. But my huge concern is the damage model I have seen for ships getting hit by missiles getting hit by a plane launched ASM and the fire spreads and kills the whole ships. Ships are built with compartmentalization and being able to seal off parts of the ship that are hit so damage control teams can deal with the fires. Just having seen many videos so far of this happening would be frustrating to play. Also the early access price seems a little steep for this one also.
Great review. If I wanted to start playing something like this, where do I start with tactics? Seems like a sim modeled at this scale would require you know something about surface warfare?...
As an ex EWD, I'd like to see ESM bearings implemented rather than just putting in an ESM track. It's a pretty specific desire, so not a game breaker.
I totally agree that by far the biggest issue with this game is the aircraft control. Maybe I am missing something, but a lot of times aircraft simply will not attack specific targets that I tell them too (i.e., they'll turn away, fly over harmlessly, or get distracted by something else.) Also, when I set them to weapons free or turn their radars on, they will usually turn their radars off and or go weapons tight again within 30 seconds or so. Also, in mission editor, it is sometimes borderline impossible to get the AI to attack. Sometimes, they'll just circle around like idiots or fly straight over whatever I want them to attack.
I get that it is early access, but there are still basic standards of playability that people are gonna expect considering it's almost $50. Gunnner Heat PC, for example, was like $30 and did not feel as buggy.
Nevertheless, given that it is really one of a kind and that no really significant game studio will touch a game of this type, I still support it wholeheartedly and find it fun despite all of the micromanaging involved.
Nearly 60 bucks CAD , even with the sale. For comparison, Cold waters now is 45 CAD. Unless you REALLY want it, save it.
Yeah mission editor is what i spent hundreds of hours playing in arma 3. I'm buying this today just because of that lol
How does Sea Power compare to CMANO? The pages where you can check sensor ranges look very similar.
I got the feeling, Sea Power trades 3D units and graphics for complexity. It is not a bad thing and also CMANO has a multiple year head start.
I am excited about how it will continue to develop. Thanks for the honest review!
Great points in letting the AI control things. I've found it wastes weapons quite often so I've just decided to use pause or to slow the game down to 0.5speed and handle matters manually. In some ways it can be too much micro, but in other ways it's more fun.
I hope it sells well. Looking fwd to campaign. MP can wait. Good vid.
DEVS should go all out and create a SAVE command.. This may be the only game I own (200+) that I can't save progress and come back to it. THIS is a priority at this time. This cant be all that complicated as compared to the graphic success and gameplay in general.. It's kinda weird actually.
I will buy it when it leaves ea status and there's a campaign included.
it has a lot of potential but in the little play time I've had just setting all the fleet to weapons free takes care of everything with not much for me to manage, I'll have to play more for sure
like you, my big regret is that there's no multiplayer mode... but otherwise it reminds me of the hours I spent playing “Fleet Command”. Let's hope that the success of this game will encourage them to develop multiplayer... let's hope!
Did they fix the bugs where some units never fire back or where Russian anti ship missions are like twice as effective as anything else?
A working adult gamer who doesn't buy pricey games every week should have no issue with the pricetag. Cook for the wife one night instead of going out and that's it. As mentioned in the video, we favor a niche for which there's very few offerings. And this one is solid. If we want the niche larger and/or richer, we need to be willing to support the people keeping it alive. These things don't descend from the heavens by God's grace.
I'm loving it so far but there are some issues. Main one being, units ignoring my orders. Found that ceasing fire or getting direct control can fix it but when SHTF happens, it's a micro issue that is unnecessary. Hoping it gets honed down and more stream lined.
The big one for me is that the Aircraft Carrier AI doesn't work. They don't launch anything sensible.
But as long as you aren't fighting an enemy carrier it's a blast, even if it can get feeling a bit slow paced at times.
I'm loving this game period. I wish DCS would take some notes, the right amount of arcadish sprinkling is so addictive, DCS in other had had no arcadish little features around the Sim and it is getting boring, dont get me wrong i love DCS and their modules (i have all) are on point and im not speaking doing some arcade modules or nothing like it, but DCS came to a point you do these big missions and in the end you have the just the close button, and that's a deal breaker, anyone who sucede loves to get some kind of a reward, from XP to some kind of unlocking liveries or whatever, im really bored with DCS at this point after 4000hours of Simplay, the Developer after 15 years didn't implement something like weekly or daily challenges where you would be facing hard missions with nice rewards..i dont know, something more interesting, prestige everyone likes to progress and prestige...but nothing has been done, each pilot should had a progression system..., well all of this to say it is very refreshing to be now playing Sea Power, im enjoying a lot.
DCS is for us study level nerds. That's why we like it. Multiplayer is where you get longer lived satisfaction with DCS (when it works or the development don't release a patch that ruins it).
Hey @Enigma89, thanks for this review. I've watched a few other videos this week for this title, because I think it might be worth it to purchase the game; yours is the one that gave me the answers I was looking for. I tend to want to encourage good sim makers because there aren't enough of them out there, so I think I'll buy this one. I'm also slightly disapointed in the lack of multiplayer in Sea Power, but I think I may be able to enjoy this game in singleplayer form. I happen to be quite confortable making scenarios in DCS and other titles like ARMA 3, so I guess this could turn out to be a nice sandbox-type of place to have fun with ships.
4 hours of play so far. A dozen workshop scenarios waiting to be tried. Price per hour of play is already fine and will only improve the longer I play. A few bugs? Absolutely. If I didnt expect and understand that I wouldnt bother with EA at all.
Too many people crying because they cant get a cheap fix NOW!
Theyve been pumping out hotfixes too. I've already put more than 12 hours into it and i've loved every second, were there some bugs? Yes, were they completely game or immersion breaking, no. Looking very bright for me, I feel like i've already gotten my money's worth. Granted i spend hundred of dollars on combat mission titles too, niche titles like this I am willing to pay for because they are truly what I want to play.