Having read the debate between missile defense under x overpowered, and being myself a hardcore harpoon fan myself and addicted to everything naval I came to a strange situation myself.
I´ve been watching Naval War´s development since its beginning and wasn´t really expecting much of it. But I bought Naval War despite knowing of its simplicity flaws (to a hardcore naval gamer) and discovered that in fact its a very fun and enjoyable game to play while waiting "Command: Modern Naval/Air Ops" currently under development.
I was playing that Baltic encounter mission and had successfully completed it a couple of times, but I came to the conclusion that the damage model is either unfinished or way to simple. If one look back in time when HMS Sheffield was struck by a single Exocet ASM, it came to a complete halt while burning about instantly. The missile itself didn´t caused any critical damage to HMS Shefffield, but it was still taken out of action completely mainly due to secondary fxs. In Naval War, having had one of my missiles successfully hit one of those rusky frigates, and reducing its "armor" to about 40%, I´d noticed it didnt have any real effect on its combat effectiveness. It kept coming and shooting down incoming missiles just like a perfectly operational ship to my disappointment. Any comments on that?
A few things that I would like to address here. People complain about depth measure but it doesn´t really matters here when sound layers are basically unchangeable. But ranges is the big deal for me. Naval Warfare is basically the realization of weapon/platform capabilities and its ranges. For me not being able to precisely measure ranges and plot references in the map is the current big flaw.
I´ve been watching Naval War´s development since its beginning and wasn´t really expecting much of it. But I bought Naval War despite knowing of its simplicity flaws (to a hardcore naval gamer) and discovered that in fact its a very fun and enjoyable game to play while waiting "Command: Modern Naval/Air Ops" currently under development.
I was playing that Baltic encounter mission and had successfully completed it a couple of times, but I came to the conclusion that the damage model is either unfinished or way to simple. If one look back in time when HMS Sheffield was struck by a single Exocet ASM, it came to a complete halt while burning about instantly. The missile itself didn´t caused any critical damage to HMS Shefffield, but it was still taken out of action completely mainly due to secondary fxs. In Naval War, having had one of my missiles successfully hit one of those rusky frigates, and reducing its "armor" to about 40%, I´d noticed it didnt have any real effect on its combat effectiveness. It kept coming and shooting down incoming missiles just like a perfectly operational ship to my disappointment. Any comments on that?
A few things that I would like to address here. People complain about depth measure but it doesn´t really matters here when sound layers are basically unchangeable. But ranges is the big deal for me. Naval Warfare is basically the realization of weapon/platform capabilities and its ranges. For me not being able to precisely measure ranges and plot references in the map is the current big flaw.
