Tides of War

I'm sorry, but I've given up on the Single Player Campaign. I think this game has alot of potential but some of the over-the-top single player missions where I'm sunk twenty to thirty times before moving on is just plain tedious and has really killed the game for me.

I've played alot of naval sims, all the way back to GATO and WARSHIP and I can't tell you how many scripted and threaded mission-type campaigns like this have just ended the fun for me in this genre. I really fail to understand why this type of campaign design is most frequently produced. I would have been very pleased had there been a more dynamic and open ended campaign for those of us not wanting to be forced through a puzzle-type campaign.

I really feel bad about this because I feel the game has some great things going for it, and am disappointed that frustration in going through the campaign has killed the fun for me in an otherwise promising game.

I apologize if this seems like a flame, but this same issue has ended the fun in so many naval sims that I've lost count. In the future, if you are successful with continuing this series I hope that you will consider creating a more varied and open-ended campaign design, it's been along time since we've seen a naval sim with one and it would be great to see in this game.

Sincerely,

CaptStumpy

I'm not (yet) at your level of frustration but take a look at this thread for a similar ongoing conversation.

I think CaptStumpy is spot on.

It was said that the game had to be 'arcade' to appeal to the casual gamer. Though this is regrettable, it makes sense. Hearing it would be an arcade game I initially decided against it, but the demo convinced me that it is a great game. Only when I played for a while, all the frustration became apparent.

Let me be honest. I think right now most missions can only be finished by sheer luck and endless repetition. It's quite obvious that this will drive away many casual and hardcore gamers alike.

No doubt, I like ERT very much, the graphics and athmosphere is the best for any naval sim ever, but if things will not change concerning random campaigns, starting distance from enemy, sub stealth and sub tactics, people like me will not enjoy the game.

Right now I don't touch it any more before the next update, I only hope some of these issues are adressed in the patch, because I really want to play the game.

Hi CaptStumpy & GlobalExplorer,

Its a shame that you dislike this game allready, for how long have you had it, a week or 2?

Im sorry to hear that, but I would say its a failure 40, and not the game.

The game isnt that hard mate, I never ever played any naval game before this, and I find it quite easy, if you stops and thinks for a second before you dives to crush depth to hide... if you fail the same missions 20-30 times, then youre obviously one of those people that doesnt think before making a move. (no offence but many people are like that)

most of the missions are so simple you can actually win them in less than 10-15

minutes, if you read and understand the orders. a few of the missions can be won in less than 60 secs. but if you just click, click, click start game and rushes to sea, then you die (over and over again).

regarding luck to win missions, there is no such thing mate, you just need to be more clever than the AI, which takes a little practice but it not impossible, well it is if you keep on doing the same thin over and over again, which I ofcuz doubt you do.

remember that ERT-SP is build up around the MP, the level of diffeculty and how many ships you face, is to give players some experieence before they go in to a multiplayer battle, and if you think 4-5 AI ships are tough, then imagine how it would be against 2-3 human controlled vessels.

randomness in missions, what are you talking about, I have never seen a game that had random events in a premade campaign, try out the "On Patrol" they are random, and they they vary from super easy to impossible.

-Peace and good luck, remember to practicise

Hi CaptStumpy & GlobalExplorer,
Its a shame that you dislike this game allready, for how long have you had it, a week or 2?

Im sorry to hear that, but I would say its a failure 40, and not the game.

The game isnt that hard mate, I never ever played any naval game before this, and I find it quite easy, if you stops and thinks for a second before you dives to crush depth to hide... if you fail the same missions 20-30 times, then youre obviously one of those people that doesnt think before making a move. (no offence but many people are like that)

most of the missions are so simple you can actually win them in less than 10-15

minutes, if you read and understand the orders. a few of the missions can be won in less than 60 secs. but if you just click, click, click start game and rushes to sea, then you die (over and over again).

regarding luck to win missions, there is no such thing mate, you just need to be more clever than the AI, which takes a little practice but it not impossible, well it is if you keep on doing the same thin over and over again, which I ofcuz doubt you do.

remember that ERT-SP is build up around the MP, the level of diffeculty and how many ships you face, is to give players some experieence before they go in to a multiplayer battle, and if you think 4-5 AI ships are tough, then imagine how it would be against 2-3 human controlled vessels.

randomness in missions, what are you talking about, I have never seen a game that had random events in a premade campaign, try out the "On Patrol" they are random, and they they vary from super easy to impossible.

-Peace and good luck, remember to practicise

Try since Sept.

Yeah I don't think rolleyes: Thanks alot. Most of the games I play are many times more complicated than this arcade style sim, I was weaned on board games and have been playing strategic PC games for 20 years that make this game look like tiddly winks. I can also say I have purchased almost every naval sim ever produced and am a genre enthusiast. I also have beta tested and contributed to several naval type sims having worked on SSI titles and most recently the SFC series (Although Trek based still a naval sim). I even remember creating my own dynamic campaign using Gary Grigsby's WARSHIP using dice and a fleet list.

It has been well documented on this board that there are many missions that must be played repetitively to continue and people are frustrated. This design is common to the genre and only a few games have attempted to break out but there are many examples. Some earlier games, Great Naval Battles series for example, had such a system, although the series in general was deeply flawed in other ways.

As far as deciding to go arcade-style with this game, well, it's the developers or the publishers choice not mine. My own opinion is that naval sims are such a niche market anyway it is pretty much a futile effort to try to make a game with broad based appeal. It has been tried many times, and other than shooters, which are not tactical or strategic war games IMO, they have all failed. There are however many examples of serious wargames that have succeeded. IL Styrmovich comes to mind and has enjoyed great success. The Combat Mission series is another "realistic" war game I feel has done well in the niche market.

There are many things that are going for ERT, and multiplayer could be promising but I can only judge on what I see so far. Promises in game development are many and fleeting, fullfilling those promises are another thing altogether. I truly wish the developers luck on this one and I think graphically and game-feel wise they have hit on something here. I also have enjoyed the alternate universe take on the game, (although I personally wish there was more WWI based ships). Honestly, I took a chance with this title and do not regret purchasing it. I try to support developers in the genre whenever I can. It is a shame that for now it will just go on the shelf with the rest of my obscure collection of naval sims. I will be following the development of the multiplayer version and hope that the new version does well. The market will be the ultimate judge however and neither you or I can change that.

CaptStumpy

CaptStumpy's hitting the nail on the head. I've also added similar comments about USN Sub Mission #8.

I've done plenty of practice but there are campaign missions with absurd odds.

Like I said before, making individual patrol missions like this and clearly marking them is no problem. But incorporating such overkill missions in a campaign just ruins the continuum. It's knocking the wind out of my sails, which is a bad thing for a sub cap.

There would have been a partial consolation if ERT came with an editing program. Then modified official campaigns and new player made ones would become available but this isn't so at the moment.

Now is probably a good time to jump in.

Believe it or not, nearly every campaign mission has been designed with a 15 minute solution - generally based on naval combat tactics and principals. Notable exceptions to this are the last couple of missions on each campaign. These mimic some of the randomness of real life - they can take as long as 40 minutes to complete and often the attack decisions the AI make determine your odds - they aren't fixed.

We are preparing a patch for the game that adds a seriously easy mode - fewer AI, less aggressive AI, more ammo for you and the ability to stay alive longer.

ALL of the missions have been created around a scenario - not a strict scripted performance - the AI has orders and the AI system determines BY THE CURRENT CONDITIONS how it is going to execute them. This let's you have a general idea how the mission will start, but lot's of randomness in how it actually plays out.

Please NOTE: We did expect a strategy guide to have been released by now and we are in the process of making our own.

Our biggest departure in the game is the abilities of the submarines. It was determined early on that in order to increase the attractiveness of playing a submarine and surpassing the poor sales numbers that SHII achieved, we would make them a bit tougher and stage scenarios where a submarine could take on substantially tougher odds than in real life. This is going to be altered back towards reality.

As for the WWI ships - they are on their way. Especially the big WWI ships.

We are a small studio that released a game that has only about 33% of the refinement and development that we wanted it to have. We are addressing this by releasing feature patches and upgrades about every 3 months - for FREE. The UK already had their first one, the US is about to get theirs. This includes another balance pass through the missions, adding content after a mission would normally end and adding Battleships and perhaps a carrier to your potential adversaries in the Patrol missions. You will even be able to command a Battleship should you achieve sufficient rank in the campaigns.

We hoped to make a challenging and deep game that exceeds its "arcadey" label without alienating either simmers or our broader audience. It's a tricky rope to walk and, with a few exceptions, we are doing it. Watch for more real-life controls like torpedo settings, depth charge controls, more fleet and taskforce interaction, etc.

We are trying to make a different type of game - a COMMAND simulator. We are going to miss on some things, but we will keep refining as we go forward.

As for tactics, I would suggest trying different strategies when you are having trouble with a mission - each one has at least 2 good strategies, 1 risky strategy and an infinite number of bad variations.

--East

East,

Thanks for the reply, I think I can appreciate your position and agree with alot you say here. I think I understand what a tight rope you guys are walking here and even though I have some concerns, I am looking forward to the updates and improvements. I have had a great deal of frustration with some of the missions but I haven't given up hope that the game will improve in time and I can come back to it.

What I would have liked to see in the campaign mode, is that a single failed mission doesn't result in a campaign progression halt and more random missions between scripted ones, not a predetermined progression. A mission failure might result in a dressing down or effect chances of promotion but it would be nice if it could still be continuous.

One thing I have enjoyed in SFC, for example, is the ability to assess a situation or withdraw if a situation turns ugly or outgunned. Something real naval Commanders had to face. For me it would add an additional interesting realistic element to command decisions and make each time a campaign is played it would be different each time.

The outcome of each mission could determine whether certain scripted event occur. For example an early mission loss might result in not being promoted to your DD which would lead to the future scripted DD missions to not be played until later but would allow different DE scripted missions to occur. I would even consider a campaign toggle to allow a death, to end the campaign progression (The mission could be replayed of course). If on a surface ship there would be a chance to survive and perhaps be reassigned, or maybe even courtmarshalled! Wouldn't that be interesting? Anyway just some thoughts.

Good to hear about the WWI ships. Any chance well see some Armoured Cruisers like the WWI Gneisenau and British Warrior classes? I would like to see those. I also hope we get some early light cruisers and destroyers in there in addition to the big boys. I guess the period is too late for the pre-dreads...I understand we can't have it all crybaby: .

One other concern, how are you guys planning to handle Ubership inflation in multiplay? This has been a huge issue in SFC as only the best and biggest available ship classes are chosen for multiplay ignoring whole ship type and classes. What keeps everyone from just driving Battleships?

Thanks again for the reply,

CaptStumpy

What keeps everyone from just driving Battleships?

In my case, sheer bloody-mindedness

I am one of a handful of folk who play both surface and sub, but on the surface don't expect to see me in anything larger than a DE. I'm hoping to become an ace in the forthcoming Schellboot, but we shall have to see...

You do have a valid point though. In Iron Wolves, there was a tendency for everyone to either be in a sub or a light cruiser, the 2 ships who generally couldn't have a decent battle together.

/bux

The opinions below are mine and don't necessarily reflect the issues CaptStumpy has brought up or responded to here.

Believe it or not, nearly every campaign mission has been designed with a 15 minute solution - generally based on naval combat tactics and principals. Notable exceptions to this are the last couple of missions on each campaign.

I don't mind 2 hour long missions, if they're good. Mission length is generally not an issue for me, although I could see real life problems playing a game where every mission is hours long.

These mimic some of the randomness of real life - they can take as long as 40 minutes to complete and often the attack decisions the AI make determine your odds - they aren't fixed.

OK....................

We are preparing a patch for the game that adds a seriously easy mode - fewer AI, less aggressive AI, more ammo for you and the ability to stay alive longer.

So are you saying that those of us playing at maximum difficulty will not be affected by this patch?

ALL of the missions have been created around a scenario - not a strict scripted performance - the AI has orders and the AI system determines BY THE CURRENT CONDITIONS how it is going to execute them. This let's you have a general idea how the mission will start, but lot's of randomness in how it actually plays out.

That's good as it obviously allows for replayability. But I understood that this is not the issue here.

Please NOTE: We did expect a strategy guide to have been released by now and we are in the process of making our own.

Will it be a strategy guide, a walkthrough guide or both?

Our biggest departure in the game is the abilities of the submarines. It was determined early on that in order to increase the attractiveness of playing a submarine and surpassing the poor sales numbers that SHII achieved, we would make them a bit tougher and stage scenarios where a submarine could take on substantially tougher odds than in real life. This is going to be altered back towards reality.

Whoa! So then basically all of our training to date is down the drain as there will be dramatic changes in captaining a sub? !!!:

We are a small studio that released a game that has only about 33% of the refinement and development that we wanted it to have. We are addressing this by releasing feature patches and upgrades about every 3 months - for FREE.

I personally wish all game software companies were like TAG. inlove:

The UK already had their first one, the US is about to get theirs.

Confusing. Aren't both versions, when patched, equivalent? I'm in the US but won't you be issuing the same patch for both versions?

This includes another balance pass through the missions, adding content after a mission would normally end and adding Battleships and perhaps a carrier to your potential adversaries in the Patrol missions. You will even be able to command a Battleship should you achieve sufficient rank in the campaigns.

Sounds nice but the main issue here is reasonable playability.

We hoped to make a challenging and deep game that exceeds its "arcadey" label without alienating either simmers or our broader audience.

I think you've succeeded. My gripe is not with the vessels but with some of the campaign mission uber-challenges.

Watch for more real-life controls like torpedo settings, depth charge controls, more fleet and taskforce interaction, etc.

That would make me more that happy unless, I will break my fingers issuing an absurd amount of keyboard commands or having to bark out more voice commands per mission than the number of words in Tolstoy's War & Peace.

We are trying to make a different type of game - a COMMAND simulator. We are going to miss on some things, but we will keep refining as we go forward

Again, to me, the game is very nicely done.

As for tactics, I would suggest trying different strategies when you are having trouble with a mission

Obvious.

each one has at least 2 good strategies, 1 risky strategy and an infinite number of bad variations.

There's the problem. You're essentially saying that in the few ultra-hardcore missions have 2% chance of getting through and you have to keep trying till you succeed. Again, even for decent players, this turns these mission somewhat into a dice rolling contest.