Sea Power Gameplay - Carrier Group Fights Soviet Navy!

[@wastelander89]

Thank u for making the videos. I really enjoy your sea power videos. I cant wait for more videos. Good job on thr videos

[@ramjb]

I really appreciate your kind words! It means a lot to know that you enjoy the videos. More sea power content is on the way!

[@georgeb65412]

Have seen a few creators mistake the Algol for an at sea replenishment ship, she's not, she is a fast sealift, taking heavy equipment at 30knots from CONUS to Europe, which would be an interesting convoy scenario in this game

[@ramjb]

Guilty as charged. Then again, in the mission editor IIRC it was listed as a "Fleet Auxiliary". I believed it to be one of the replenishment vessels that were common in US carrier groups and didn't think beyond that. In fact I didn't even bother reading it's description so... ;). Thanks for the correction!

[@migueltito8581]

Buen video, muy entretenido. Por cierto, ¿eres español? solo por curiosidad

[@ramjb]

Gracias! Y si, bueno, ya son varios los que como tu han adivinado mi nacionalidad gracias al acento, jajajajajajja

[@migueltito8581]

@@ramjb jajaja, no te preocupes, tienes buen ingles

[@forcea1454]

The Algols are high-speed sea loft ships, meant to carry AFVs for the US Army, they don't carey ammunition or fuel, and are incapable of underway replenishment, hence they would not accompany US Carrier Task Groups. That job was for multi-product replenishment ships like the Sacramento class AOEs and Wichita class AORs, along with various single product replenishment ships including the Neosho and Cimarron class oilers, Kilauea class ammunition ships and Mars class combat stores ships.

[@ramjb]

Yep, in other comment other viewer commented on that. The reason is that I'm not familiar with the Algol class, and as I made the scenario in a rush (my playing/recording time is very limited atm), I just picked all the warships that would make sense in a Carrier Group, plus a "Fleet Auxiliary". I picked the first one labelled as such, turned out to be Algol. Didn't give it a second thought, I expected it to be an AOE or something similar. Something that...seems wasn't the case ;). Knowing now what that class actually was, I think they should re-label is as "fast transport" or something like that. Certainly not a "fleet auxiliary" :) Thanks for the heads up, hope you enjoyed the video :)

[@vincebagadonis8016]

Just like in DCS, its HARD as hell to hit a helicopter with a fox 1 or 3!

[@filipearthur5379]

And just like RL, the first Phoenix was fire against a Heli by Iran which missed, the pilot then changed to guns and downed it later.

[@TheCharlemang]

In all the vids ive watched, the AIM-7 seems to be the best missile for Air-to-Air. The Aim-54 seems to miss as much as it hits, but the venerable Sparrow soldiers on.

[@ramjb]

The AIM-54 was designed as a very long range (for the era) big missile to hit unmaneouverable big aircraft such as bombers. It was never tested in real life combat conditions so we won't know for sure, but I'm not surprised to see a Phoenix (at least the initial marks present up to 1985) miss a rather small helicopter such a Ka-25. The Sparrow-M was by all accounts and finally (previous versions were notoriously problematic) a trustable air to air weapon. But SARH guidance is a serious downgrade from the active radar homing of the Phoenix. Not only because the much more limited range, but because while with a phoenix you could theoretically acquire 6 targets and shoot at all 6 (loadout permitting), with the Sparrow you needed to keep a lock on a single target up to the moment the missile hit (or miss). Not truly a fan of it to be honest... but it's not as if NATO has any better weapons beyond the range of the AIM-9 so...

[@cladecq]

I caaaaaaan't wait for this game...

[@ramjb]

Couple of weeks before it goes early access. Soon! :D

[@filipearthur5379]

ECM is 100% broken as of now. I recommend you to avoid using it to make a more realistic scenario. ECM, yes, can confuse the Radar but it is not magic. A good operator and especially a powerful Radar like the ones in the Kirov and Moskva will easily defeat any ECM, especially the one in the prowler.

[@adamtruong1759]

I hope one day we'll get full control of the carrier flight deck and be able to set different levels of aircraft readiness (like keeping F-14s ready to launch from the catapults). For the past few weeks, I've been trying to figure out cold war Carrier formations (like should the AA ships be in front of the ASW ships or how far apart ships were). I also heard that it's standard NATO doctrine to operate 4 carriers in one group in the Atlantic/Artic. If I had the game I'd experiment with this a lot. Btw, ECM can prevent the enemy from using SAMs??? I thought they were really powerful before, but now it's plain broken. There needs to be some kind of anti-jamming.

[@ramjb]

Yep, some things can be improved. Setting alert times is one of them. Giving max range information in the weapons popup when choosing loadouts would be another. Then again, the game is in development right now so there's plenty of time for more detail to be included...as it is is already very very good. I think the Carrier Group I put in the editor is a good representation of a more or less standard carrier formation for the era, at least for a single carrier formation with the caveat that I didn't put any subs in in this scenario, and usually a carrier group would be expected to have at least one attack sub moving with it. Ship positions would be decided upon threat axises (direction from which the most likely threats would be attacking from), and again I think I represented a good formation for just that. I know in other videos I've had comments from people who served in the USN and probably will know more about both topics than myself (my knowledge only extends to whatever I've read about navies of the cold war, and extensively playing Harpoon-like games in the past). Let's see if any of them sees these comments, they might be able to give more information about it. And ECM does not prevent missile launches, as far as I know. What it does is to mess up and limit the range of the jammed systems. Then again, I don't really know the inner workings of the game, oECM might be overpowered and I wouldn't know. We'll have to trust the developers on this particular topic.

[@adamtruong1759]

​@@ramjb I'm quite sure Kirov didn't fire a single SAM in her defence while being jammed, otherwise she'd be pumping out missiles like there's no tomorrow. I also wonder if Sea Power is in a state to handle a full scale "Dance of the Vampires" fleet without dying, because the NATO fleet in that chapter had like +30 ships in it

[@ElGordodeAlemana]

Of course I had to click

[@ramjb]

And of course you'll have to do so on the next one too!!! may the clickfest continue!!! :D

[@scottparker4568]

In most RTS strategy games, your individual units gain XP points, which makes them better fighters. For example, in Call To Arms, the individual soldiers in your squads gain XP that help their proficiency with weapons such as Rifles, SMGs, etc. By gaining XP, their hit % rises, thus making them more accurate when using weapons they may find on the battlefield that they didn't start off using. I've been watching Sea Power videos for several weeks now but haven't seen any indication XP exists. Does anyone know if the game will have an XP component for either the player or their units?

[@ramjb]

units have a veterancy level, from green up to insanely elite. You set each unit's veterancy when designing the scenario the game currently offers a handful of scenarios, and then a mission editor. Given that each battle is a scenario , XP gain makes no sense there. In the future there will be a dynamic campaign. I don't know about XP gain in that one tho, but it'd make sense there. Currently there's no way to win XP, but in the future, there might be.

[@scottparker4568]

@ramjb thanks, I was just wondering. I keep forgetting this isn't the final product because it looks so sharp.

[@MyBjornE]

Have also seen others play and the opponents (AI) don't send up their planes which makes it quite easy to attack, hope it will be fixed by early access

[@ramjb]

Was surprising for me that I saw no Forgers around. Maybe that's the reason, can't say for sure.

[@filipearthur5379]

They never detect or confirm that there was an enemy force nearby, so the IA simply waits for confirmation. That's why you don't see many CV vs CV videos yet. GrimReappers had made one very recently where he activated all radars in his ship (and didn't use the broken ECM prowler) and the outcome was something else...

[@pinelandsound]

Jesus Loves You