Things you like about CW, Things you don't like.

[PL_Harpoon]

Originally Posted by Tinman764

There are improvements to be made there, for sure.

For one thing, I'm not sure how realistic it is to expect a sub to patrol the Denmark Strait, then head over to the Barents Sea and then down to southern Norway. I don't think the campaign takes into account the distances you need to travel.
Or I could be wrong and this could be totaly expected in war time for a nuke boat.

We also need a way to request an RTB for rearm and repairs.

I'd also like to be able to focus into an area of the map and get intel on known and projected movements. When to expect the next observation, etc. to help plot intercept courses or avoid ASW units.

As RAMJB said on Steam forums, treat it like the admiralty telling you what needs to be done. As a captain it's up to you to decide whether you want to engage target with limited stores or risk mission failure and refit.

One thing I'd like to see improved in campaign though is fixed number of enemy ships. I know the original RSR had them, because I remember that at the beginning of war I was fighting Sierras and Victor IIIs but then near the end I almost exclusively encountered low-end diesel subs.

[gord96]

Originally Posted by Tinman764

For one thing, I'm not sure how realistic it is to expect a sub to patrol the Denmark Strait, then head over to the Barents Sea and then down to southern Norway. I don't think the campaign takes into account the distances you need to travel.

We also need a way to request an RTB for rearm and repairs.

This. I really enjoy the game and the campaign, but the campaign needs to be a bit 'smarter'. I have 24% hull and 1 torpedo left and I get orders to go find and sink multiple subs. If I go home for repair and refit, I fail the mission and possibly lose the war.

Would be nice if you could click a 'Return to Base' button and it would delay the next mission (simulating Command giving it to another submarine) until you get back to base.

Other then that I don't have many complaints. I find it very well done.

[bstanko6]

I never played red storm, I played SSN. Similar.

I do like the simplicity of how the boats are driven.

I do not like how courses and depths cannot be "set".

Other than that... bravo!

[Leemon]

As 19th post gonna be third on topic.
Not sure or I can keep same amount Like vs Dislike as OP did, will try.

Likes
1. Simplicity - I immediately got surprised how simulator/game can be at same time so simple and realistic. I can give .play this game for a kid explaining mechanics in just few sentences and im sure in short time he would be as good on this game as any hardcore subsimer.
2. Developers - activity in patching game and contact with community. Havent seen developers beeing that close to community. Love this part !
3. Operations manual and training missions. I remember DW hundreds page manual and lack of SH manual where had to do research - these 2 games was my introduction to naval gaming. Great job on that! As game itself - short and simple.
4. Campaign map. Even tho idea was from Red Storm Rising, but damn I like campaign map mode. Fast acceleration, 3 clicks/modes, simplest textures at it can be - love it. Most boring part of naval game made so quick and simple. DW didnt had campaign, SH had tedious open world - and CW have jackpot.
5. Pending for dislikes input
6. Pending for dislikes input
7. Pending for dislikes input
8. Pending for dislikes input
9. Pending for dislikes input
10. Pending for dislikes input
...

Dislikes
1. No multiplayer - Im fan of MMOs, where other players and them skills is part of game content, so I get bored quickly playing against AI. And thinking about it, all games I played in last few years was MP.
2. Pricing vs state/quality. I can understand it, all simulation games have higher pricing, but game state felt like early access. Not that Im complaining, I have good feeling about what is coming in future, but worried that it might backfire with rest of players with such success on release. on fast reacting and fixing issues!
3. Now im starting hard to think of dislikes to keep up with likes. Give me a moment...... This is fraking hard!....... Damn it, there so much to write on likes, and I cant think of dislikes.... FFS!... Ok, i think I got one: Difficulty levels. Hull points, sensor strength ranges etc. that something I think shouldnt be affected by difficulty levels, it doesnt make that much difficult. While disabling some features on higher difficulties would make sense, like 3D, F1-F4 cameras, Sensors data COMP and the other one, AI behavior, weather/sea conditions, slower TMA calculations etc.
4. I might end up only with 4, because 4th dislike is lack of dislikes about game, so I couldnt write more things about what I like

[LoBlo]

Originally Posted by Onkel Neal

Interesting, we haven't heard much praise about the dynamic campaign or randomly generated adversaries. Imagine if the campaign had been heavily scripted....

So I just finished a 1st run through of the campaign and its really fun and interesting. I like what KillerFish did there. Dynamic and immersive.

Bravo KF.

[tirta]

The only thing I do not like about CW is:

When I am at 1/3 speed, shift-s and below the layer, in the shadow zone then suddenly out of nowhere a torpedo dropped right above my sub.
And these happens quite a few times without knowing what I have done wrong.
Tinman suggests that this is caused by distance scale bug 1:1,
I think he maybe right, I hope they will fix this issue with future patch.

Or maybe in the future patch, make a detection probability setting so that we can choose the probability % of getting detected (without doing something noisy ourselves) by ourselves.

[Lanzfeld]

I like the same things that everyone else likes.

Some of the things that I think really need improvement are...

1. I don't like knowing exactly when Im detected and when I'm not. There should be some human factor in there.

2. For some strange reason every battle seems just like the last one. Somethings missing in the mix and I don't know what it is.

3. It's too easy to classify the targets. I wish that part of the game was more involved and difficult.

4. I guess looking at what I've listed above I'm wanting this to be more on the simulator side than it really is. I'm very much enjoying the game however.

5. The overuse of active sonar by the enemy in almost every scenario. I know the DEVS found one reference to this in the history books but I hope they did not construct the artificial intelligence based around this one example. Submarine warfare in the 80s was really more often a game of being quiet.

6. Please let us scroll through the campaign introduction and exit screens quicker. Once you've read them once that little pause really hurts.

[ollie1983]

I would like more and varied one off scenarios, or the ability to setup your own, choose the area, the conditions, the time and the opposing platforms.

Shouldn't be too hard to setup.

I want the sonar side of the game to be enhanced. We want to hear hull popping, transients, launches, blade counts etc. The ability to listen to the world would be ace.

The game manual needs to be far more detailed as well.

[PL_Harpoon]

Originally Posted by Lanzfeld

5. The overuse of active sonar by the enemy in almost every scenario. I know the DEVS found one reference to this in the history books but I hope they did not construct the artificial intelligence based around this one example. Submarine warfare in the 80s was really more often a game of being quiet.

Actually with this one I believe them. The reason for this is this quote from another thread:

Originally Posted by Julhelm

I would suggest starting with the books we used for reference:

Friedman, N. (1994). US Submarines Since 1945
Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press

Vego, M. (1992). Soviet Naval Tactics
Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press

Polmar, N. (1983). Guide to the Soviet Navy 3rd ed.
Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press

Polmar, N. Breyer, S. (1978). Guide to the Soviet Navy 2nd ed.
Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press

Polmar, N., Moore, K.(2004). Cold War Submarines
Dulles, VA: Potomac Books Inc.

Jordan, J. (1992). Soviet Warships 1945 to the Present
London, UK: Arms and Armour Press

Jordan, J. (1989). Soviet Submarines 1945 to the Present
London, UK: Arms and Armour Press

Jordan, J. (1982). Guide To The Modern Soviet Navy
London, UK: Salamander Books Ltd.

Jordan, J., Miller D. (1987). Modern Submarine Warfare
London, UK: Salamander Books Ltd.

Miller, D. (1982). Modern Submarines
London, UK: Salamander Books Ltd.

Clancy, T. (1993). Submarine
London, UK: HarperCOllinsPublishers

Sontag, S., Drew, C. (1998). Blind Man's Bluff
London, UK: Random House UK Ltd.

Sasgen, P. (2009). Stalking The Red Bear
New York, NY: St Martins' Press

I never read any of those books, but I suspect at least some of them explain why Soviets were using active sonar a lot. This one example you mentioned is probably just that - a single example.
At least I hope I'm not wrong here.

Originally Posted by Lanzfeld

6. Please let us scroll through the campaign introduction and exit screens quicker. Once you've read them once that little pause really hurts.

Just spam spacebar

[Lanzfeld]

WOW!

I had no idea.

[Badger343rd]

I would like an AAR report. Not knowing what got me and how is frustrating.
Having ALL buttons on the interface clickable so I don't need to touch the keyboard.


A sonar station
Tma station
I understand the reason for a simple game mode, but it should be optional.

Being able to disable a torp after enable.
Allow us to stream towed array at will
I should be able to order turns per knot so I can make maximum speed but stay below cavitation.

An option to make all interfaces auto disappear and reappear based on mouse position...the reason for this is it would allow me to play it on a bigscreeen PLASMA tv and not worry about "burn in" on the screen.If an interface is too static it creates a ghost in the plasma.

[tirta]

Yes, a quite detailed AAR report is a very good idea.
Or maybe a mission replay like the old RSR.

[Jace11]

The campaign is pretty decent and something a game like DW didn't have. It's random, but I don't like the land attack missions (cause its pretty unrealistic to sail right up to the target) but everything else is fine and feels legit.

Did you notice that if you are spotted on the campaign map by satellites or air assets, the nearby hunter groups make a B-line for you! That's pretty nice...

I agree about the 25 KYD starts being too close, I've looked to see if it can be modded, but it doesn't look like it at the moment.

Enemy evade AI needs some work. Subs just turn and run, some dive to the seafloor and get stuck etc. The turning away from torps often just seals their fate, more lateral evasion and depth changes would be nice, although the Alfa is fast enough that just plain running might be worthwhile. Surface ships evade into landmass, a problem!

The AI aircraft are a bit better after recent patches and the MAD nerf. Explosions in the water (from dead torps, depth charges, hits on targets etc etc) should seriously nerf all sonar detection for a short period, at the moment it doesn't seem to.

Torpedos are lead homing like SAMs at the moment... not sure about that! Lag homing might be more realistic, especially for passives and would make evasion for AI easier I think.

There is no speed of sound above water, you hear explosions at distance instantly. I hope this isn't mirrored underwater, but that's harder to test.

[ollie1983]

The torpedos do seem a bit too clever than realism might suggest. As you say, lag homing should be default. Perhaps alter it for harder difficulties?

I generally wire steer every one of my fish, where I can.

[Lanzfeld]

And yes spamming the space bar zips you right through all those campaign storytelling still shots. Thank you for that!


EDIT... I have 20/20 vision but I still have trouble reading the ESM meter. Please make it easier to read.