Your choice on next playable platform in DW?
 

My vote goes to the Arleigh Burke-class Flight IIA (Oscar Austin-class). Take command of arguably the most powerful surface combatant in the world today. In terms of tradeoffs, the Flight IIAs lost their Harpoons (and TACTASS, possibly) in exchange and both CIWS mounts on the all units past the USS Shoup (DDG-86).

The upside however, is that it gains a hangar bay for two embarked helos, additional helo handling equipment, and the RIM-162A Evovled SeaSparrow Missile, in quadpacks mounted inside the VLS, which is significantly more effective against modern seaskimming missiles than CIWS.

I wonder what everyone else is thinking? Since I can only have so many poll options, my first runner up would be an Oscar II-class SSGN.

The priority really ought to be to add the Russian/Chinese equivalents of the American ASW platforms that DW added to SC, or, by the same logic, a Western diesel-electric. This would round-out the ASW battlespace, which is rather incomplete without the counterparts being in the game.

After that, expanding the game into a better surface and air warfare makes sense. That would be the time to start adding more multirole surface vessles. :|\

I would love to see an Arleigh Burke DDG or a new Western Diesel add-on. :cool: I definitely voted Arleigh Burke. :up: But if we get a western diesel, I was thinking Japanese Oyashio or Harushio. Even a RAN Collins. And I would love a Virginia SSN add-on as well. But since we only get one vote....I gotta say Arleigh Burke. :up:

Sea Demon

Edited to add a comment and spell-check.

Udaloy II all the way for me, and equally a western diesel. Think 212A. :cool:

Other.

I would love...
RAN Collins class subs
RN type 23 Duke class frigates
RAN OHP FFG, that is with the VLS launched ESSM forward of the mk13

Other,

A western surface or sub platform that is not American but could be from NATO.

id love to get into an alfa but then again i thinik the burke class destroyers are great and id love to command one of them

Udaloy with Ka-27PL Helx and Bear-F support :rock:
And a Western SSK, either Upholder/Victoria or Scorpene (AIP) class.

I would prefer initialy more balance in the gameplay by introducing Russian/Chinese equvalents to the current platforms.

in saying western SSK what about the german 212 / 214 ?

Yep. Probably the most silent subs in service today.

Else: give me a carrier!

serious: a russian equivalent to the sim's frigate, helo, recce plane would be politically correct. :-j But I personally would welcome sub stuff more than any surface or flying things - these simply do not catch my interest.

But I do not even guess about addons. These will take many years to realize, judging by the ridiculously slow pace at which they do their patch - which goes first of any addons. Fix what is there before mess it up again by adding new things.

I know... I'd love to see them all. I'm not particularly worried about Western D/E boats being playable, though. Maybe that's just because of my specific interests.

Something I'm curious nobody brought up:

What about an Ohio SSGN?

For multiplay, Russian/Chinees equivalent of the FFG,MH-60 and P3, unquestionably!
And some AI Dutch ships, sub. :rock:

Rounding out the ASW battlespace has nothing to do with political correctness. It's about finishing what was started. Right now, we have a choice of platforms that allows sub v. sub games and Russian/Chinese sub v. US ASW. Adding the counterparts to the new playables gets US subs v Russian ASW in. Being able to turn things around makes for a much better game.

Currently, surface and air warfare are crudely modeled, but the ASW battlespace is close to where it needs to be. It's just more efficient for SCS to finish the ASW component of the game before hitting the surface and air warfare hard. DW (or possibly its sequel) is an evolutionary project which will eventually fully integrate all battlespace into one game. It's not easy to do right, so skipping around is not going to produce as good a product as finishing the parts they started will.

I definitly agree with that.