http://store.steampowered.com/app/414260/
This is new I think. Strategic layer added to an older game ?
Might be worth a look
I kind of liked their earlier games but the one off engagements detracted from it a little.
It does look familiar. It also looks and very beer-and-pretzel-ish, having just speed and direction input. Perhaps the strategic layer adds more to it?
I like the look of the two trailer videos....appears battles can be automated or fought out like the Total War series. Nice find.
I think it has been around for awhile. Its just new to steam.
This doesn't look too bad. I tried the demo of the original and didn't really the battles without any strategic decisions as Zulu1966 mentioned so I didn't buy the game.
But the trailers do show the game having some real promise.
http://www.totemgames.ru/ (http://www.totemgames.ru/)
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on November 05, 2015, 12:18:38 PM
I think it has been around for awhile. Its just new to steam.
The tactical game has JH - but they have added a strategic layer which adds context to the battles and it adds quite a bit from what I have read.
Though (yes I know its RPS) this may give more of a buy decision ... date says august so think JH is right - I just hadn't seen the new one before.
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2015/08/07/the-flare-path-now-even-harrier/
(Bottom of the page)
Quote from: Zulu1966 on November 05, 2015, 01:04:59 PM
Though (yes I know its RPS) this may give more of a buy decision ... date says august so think JH is right - I just hadn't seen the new one before.
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2015/08/07/the-flare-path-now-even-harrier/
(Bottom of the page)
Yes. It has definitely been available on the developers website since at least August.
IIRC, the game engine was used in some other 19 century naval wargames, including European and possibly South American.
I have their other games, and this looks like they've only really added a strategic layer. I don't know if it matters that much as apart from the Monitor vs CSS Virginia bash historically there wasn't much in the way of ironclad actions apart from fort bombardments. The first real ironclad action was at Lissa in 1866, and even then gunfire was pretty irrelevant, the decisive action coming from ramming!
Quote from: Boggit on November 08, 2015, 03:32:20 AM
I have their other games, and this looks like they've only really added a strategic layer. I don't know if it matters that much as apart from the Monitor vs CSS Virginia bash historically there wasn't much in the way of ironclad actions apart from fort bombardments. The first real ironclad action was at Lissa in 1866, and even then gunfire was pretty irrelevant, the decisive action coming from ramming!
I recall their earlier games also providing the appropriately long drawn-out ironclad battles where almost no damage was being done to the other side, eventually ending in a stalemate. Of course, wooden ships would go down but the ironclad-vs-ironclad bit would be long and ineffective.
Didn't make me much of a fan. Especially since the only commands you give are for steering and throttle. Having a proper dynamic campaign layer should be a nice improvement, but it sounds like the battles are the same long drawn-out steering affairs of it's predecessors.
In regards to damage, remember that Weehawken took out the Atlanta with just four shots.
Monitor and Merrimac/Virginia could have been totally decisive. Fears of the effect of two cannon firing inside the turret, resulted in only being allowed to use half charges of powder for Monitor. If you read the damage done with only half the recommended propellant, it is pretty certain that Virginia would have been wrecked with regular charge.