anyone play this game? personally i've put a few hundred hours into it and i've found it *really* fun, mostly the smaller/lower intensity scenarios

for those who play, what missions do you like? what sort of features are you most wanting in the game?
im sort of a sucker for the hornet, so it's excited me a lot that the devs have considered it a 'when and not if' addition

also, even for those who dont play, do you prefer NATO or USSR gear?

>>2036928 (OP)
About to sink this MFer right now in fact. The game is a lot of fun but I do feel like it's somewhat overpriced in it's current state.
I prefer the smaller missions, anti sub is pretty fun but I'm not very good at using the subs myself. They're so slow it feels impossible to get into position in time to do anything without revealing yourself. Small scale air operations are fun to but micro managing planes is still pretty bad even after the recent patch.
I prefer the Soviet stuff a little bit. It's much simpler than using a carrier effectively and the missiles are so fast that battles go by a lot faster. NATO ship on ship missile combat isn't very fun to me. If you don't have any EA-6Bs up running jammers harpoons feel completely useless.

the whole USN theory on how to sink soviet ships is using submarines for the prime threats and catching small, vulnerable groups with aircraft
unfortunately this falls apart when you're just given a carrier group and some escorts, or just some destroyers to take on carrier-killing cruisers with minimal air support, so mission makers making crappy missions (including some of the base game ones) are to blame here

air AI obviously has a long way to go but im hopeful that they'll get it right eventually, they talk about allowing pretty much hands-free air ops in the future but i have no clue if they'll be able to manage it

I have it on my wishlist, but I'm a bit hesitant to buy it. Is there an in-game tutorial? I'm retarded and need some guidance. Also, how are Japanese units?

>>2037056
no ingame tutorial yet, price of EA, but it's definitely planned in the future
the JMSDF, JGSDF, and JASDF are all ingame, although the JASDF is a little barren given we're waiting on F-104 and F-1, but the navy has a pretty sizeable selection of boats (moreso than other nations) and there's a handful of fun ground units too

>>2036928 (OP)
seaaaaaaa

It has no unit AI

wished it took place in a parallel reality like ace combat, real world nations are too limiting for scenarios

>2024 fleet command but no multiplayer, fewer nations and worse AI

>>2042264
Yes, right now there's little sense to play this over CMO or sonalysts games.

>>2036928 (OP)
Is there a Houthi DLC yet? Can’t wait to hear people crying about balancing when F/A-18s go missing.

>>2042510
The game takes place in the Cold war. Dumbass.

>>2041732
MAN
https://youtu.be/MbowF6rR7JA?si=gG0jzKrFTjpk_zfB&t=5

>>2036928 (OP)
It looks pretty expensive for an early access, what's the quality like?

>>2050683
If the AI wasn't braindead then it would be okay.

>>2050683
don't fucking buy it, it's alpha alpha stage shitfest, saves don't even work half the time and the other half they break something

>what missions do you like?
missions where you're not already within firing range of submarines or enemy ships and you're given some time to reshape your formation and plan, tired of all these "hunt enemy X" that can be ended within 10 minutes because the target is already well within your firing and spotting range

I make scenarios to sate my autism

this looks fun but I dont like the era. Why cant they make games like this for the early 1900s - 1920s

>>2060205
yea because it'd be extremely fun attempting to pilot a wooden rowboat on your own completely at the mercy of the wind whilst trying to hurl rocks at nearby fishermen

>>2036928 (OP)
Wake me up when it has a campaign like War on the Sea

>>2042264
I tolerate it exclusively because I've been waiting for SOMETHING to take over the throne of Jane's Fleet Command that doesn't look like ass

No one wants to play naval games without any strategic campaign.

>>2060205
>not liking cold war era arsenal covering land, air, surface, and undersea assets
are you gay?

>>2060416
The devs already said they're working on a dynamic campaign.

have you niggers made any scenarios?

>>2061019
Nah I just make little tism missions where I try to time my strikes

>>2066116
EW makes any battle so painfully easy. It's literally "I win" button.
Is this also how it works IRL?

>>2066118
yes but competent navies will also use it against you
it's why the game is so shit right now, until AI is functional it'll keep being an "I win" button

>Victor class beaches itself running from a torpedo
>In The Air Tonight starts playing

>>2042264
fleet command is better because you can run it on any computer, and you don't lose out on anything since the nature of these games is the map, not the 3d graphics.

>>2066118
All modern militaries invest a ton of money into it, it has to be at least somewhat effective. The issue for gaming though is that how it actually works is about as classified as anything gets. What range it's effective out to, what exactly it's capable of jamming, how you actually use it, all of that is classified, so games can only guess.