Both of those quotes were from me. It's not the fact you posted this here, but that you took it from another forum, made up stuff to give yourself sympathy, and in the meantime, the developers had already promised to fix the issues. You played the "victim card", and then got upset when people called you on it and out thoughts are, "why be a jerk to honest hard-working people?" You totally missed my point. I NEVER compared this thread to death, my point was: spend that anger & energy on something that deserves it.

Maybe (I hope) this is all a language issue since English may not be your first language. If so, I'll be happy to explain (in pm's) what I was trying to say so it won't be misinterpreted.

Daniel,

I know exactly what you are feeling as I got the same treatment from the guys of Paradox when, before the game was release, I complained about differents topics such as the lack of NTDS symbology or of ice cap on the North Pole.
As a former Harpoon, FC and DW player, I thought that in 2012 we would get a simulation that will beat the old ones, but I just saw a pale copy of those old but very sophisticate ones.
I then exrpress my doubts to Paradox, explaining that if they don't add some features they are going to lose a lot of customers (the hard-core ones), and I just got laughts from Janh and worsely from future customers.

so, I decided not to buy this game, and I see now that I WAS RIGHT.

I finished campaign mission 6 over the weekend. There are a few bugs and missing features, but on the whole this is one solid simulation: radar modeling, air ops, refueling, weapon effects, AI are all very well handled.

If the developpers keep nurturing this one and every indication is that they will, NWAC is well on its way to be a classic.

+1

It lacks what Kotler calls Brand Positioning.
“act of designing the company’s offering and image to occupy a distinctive place in the minds of target market.” Kotler

Currently it holds no positioning. Its neither a simple fun game like Naval Fields, nor is a complex simulator like Harpoon. It only tries to simplify/imitate simple games like Fleet Command, which it does poorly!

My friend, what do you call radar modeling, when you can guide your F-35´s AMRAAMs using the information provided by that "Einsteinian Quantum Physics" datalink from a non-wire guided torpedo? Do you call that good radar modeling?

This is really the blind leading the blind. Two posters who don't play the game discussing what they imagine it is about.

very useful guys, keep it up. :ping:

NWAC was not even on my Radar screen until it was released. I thought it was just some "command&Conquer/Age of Empire" type RTS. I was pleasantly surprised when I found it is an actual simulation of modern naval warfare, and a blast to play.

It's this same kind of idiocy that hurt the sim genre back in the Microprose days and saw the huge collapse of the sim genre. How easily people forget (or don't care). I know many people from Microprose and the game mags that reviewed them. The #1 thing that killed the genre were its own fans. After a while developing games for ungrateful, hate-mongering, death-threat spewing grognards became terribly unappealing for the low pay.

Wow, there is just so much wrong with this, I don't know where to start.....

1. Radar modeling: At first I thought this was a simple on/off affair like Falcon 4, but I was pleasantly surprised to see it is much more intricate. Radar detection is influenced by many factors: height, type of radar, type of target, RCS, target aspect, etc. Radar can even be blocked by land (something which is rarely modeled in sims) allowing you to use RL tactics. All in all, it is very sophisticated, targets will appear or disappear based on various factors and can even come quite close before they are detected.

2. Datalink is modeled: Considering U.S. forces have already been using a simpler system for years, full datalink of air/sea forces as modeled in NWAC should exist well before 2030;

3. "Datalink from a torpedo?": You must be thinking about how it works in "Command". :ping: There is no such thing in NWAC, you can only detect a submerged sub by sonar/sonobuoys. Currently, sub detection is a bit too easy for my taste, but the basic system is well modeled.

All in all, this is a surprising little sim. :arrgh!:

To be honest, I started to have doubts about this product with the way its devs answer to my questions. Always referring to their lack of time, human resources and money, meaning that this simulation would/could not be very develop.
I think you can understand me, used to play with harpoon and DW that those facts did not encourage me to buy it.
You are right on one thing, this is a little sim! So do not expect any good feedbacks from hard-core naval sims players that were probably disapointed that such small game cames on when already so few naval simulations are in the market nowadays. At least, I was myself, and very much because I was really waiting for the "ultimate one".
And one thing more about the price, I think the argument it is only 20 $, so you cannot expect more is not valid. I would have been ready to pay three times this price to get something good. In this case, the price is not relevant, it is the product that you bring to the future players.

Not to mention that active sonar can listen farther than...a towed array!
lol

and the time every player is going to spend, first to learn then to start playing and soon to see that this simulation does not respond to the expectations => time-consuming for not much at the end! :down:

Perhaps an adjustment of expectations is in order? :roll:

The aim of it is and was a balance between realism and playability. If you go in expecting something else, than yes, you will be disapointed. Not any fault of the game though.

That´s why it was released without a mission editor, otherwise people would notice earlier them many many ultimate flaws. :damn:

Your full of crap. The mission editor isn't released because they're working on the game itself. Mission editor is an extra.

BTW - how come none of you naysayers commented on my post? About simmers being our own worst enemies and a big part of good talent leaving the genre? I LOVE how you ignore any valid arguments and just keep going. This was NEVER billed as Fleet Command 2 nor Harpoon. It is its own game. Get over it and go back to the chunky, ugly, mess of Fleet Command.

But you´re really a little prick ain´t ya? It doesnt matter who, you keep insulting! Who do you think you are? Defend your own points of view but dont cross the line. How old are you anyway?

I understand your point of view. I also have my doubts about this sim and see certain aspects which are unfinished. For now, I am giving them the benefit of the doubt, but time will tell whether it has a long term future on my hard drive.

Once again, I did not insult you and you are the one(s) instigating issues. For goodness sakes, this is a thread with the word "bitch" in its title. You call me a "prick" AND you have the gall to say I'm childish?

If anyone crossed the line it was you sir, as you just violated the TOS here at subsim.

:up:

Keep waiting, is all I can say. I don't think we're going to see any big ultrahardcore or even lite sim anytime soon, for all of the reasons that have already been outlined in this thread and elsewhere.

It's occurred to me before that if people took all the time they spent bitching and complaining about sims into something constructive like programming, the sim genre wouldn't be as dead as it is. I for one have never been able to find a programmer interested in subs to collaborate with but there seems to be no shortage of people who spend copious amounts of their spare time complaining about the lack of this or that feature.

In the end you can either bitch and spew bile at big publishers who don't care or get down and dirty and DIY.

So, if I follow you, I don't have the right to complain and just buy what is coming even if it is bad!!:hmmm:

BTW, I am waiting for Command and hope that I will get to heaven with it. :yeah: