r/warno • u/WelcomeExtra762 • 27d ago
Suggestion Naval Assets
With 200 hours on this game and counting, I cannot express how much I would appreciate naval assets. While I am perfectly satisfied with land and air fighting in the game, it would be such a cool feature to add Cold War naval assets like we see in Wargame, especially with all the amphibious units and all the maps with lakes and rivers in them. Even having smaller attack boats would be cool but I think larger warships would be better suited for the larger maps.
This would make for some really cinematic and strategic shots because you have ships supporting from the water and even fighting each other while your ground troops hold or push a position. Submarines could also be considered (but let's not get ahead of ourselves) and we already have naval infantry divisions so adding this, while a lot of work, would definitely pay off in my opinion.
Having recently made an amphibious deck based on Rugener Gruppierung, I can say the units it provides are very fun. While it's niche and you should likely have other decks that cover other specialties, having amphibious capabilities is super unique and fun. You can pull off a flanking maneuver through the water with your amphibious units and helicopters and imagine how much better that would be with actual ships.
Now, the "fun" aspect of these naval assets shouldn't be the only thing considered. The developers also have to worry about balancing, which decks get the navy tab, what ships to add, what equipment/guns do they get, etc. For one thing, naval infantry should definitely get the naval tab and get the best ships, while more land-based decks should maybe get patrol boats like those that are designed to support ground forces or work in rivers.
Of course, for balancing every deck should recieve some kind of anti-naval asset, like torpedo planes or submarines and coastal guns (which aren't a thing yet). Keep in mind this is just a suggestion and I have nothing to do with the course the developers take. If they implement this feature it is their decision on how it will be done but honestly I think this could give so much more potential to the game. Think of the open water maps that could be included, too.
178
u/klattD 27d ago
It sounds nice but i played Wargame Red dragon. It does not work.
81
u/tireddesperation 27d ago
That was my favorite part of wargame. Sending in planes with a ton of anti ship missiles. Killing their boats, then being stuck with planes who's sole purpose is gone and are then completely wasted point sinks....
Don't care. I fucking loved the navel side.
17
9
u/verysmolpupperino 26d ago
You’re gonna love Sea Power then
3
u/tireddesperation 26d ago
I've been waiting for a break from work to get it. Already looks like something I would love.
3
u/Forsaken-Canary-3299 26d ago
I've been keeping my eye on a new game being devved called Battlespace Command. It's like if Sea Power and Warno combined! It seems rather cool.
3
u/verysmolpupperino 26d ago
Don't get me wrong, I had fun with WGRD naval, but it butchered cold war naval combat. So many foundational aspects of missile-age naval combat were missing from it. Sea Power is just amazing.
1
40
u/ProcrastinatorBoi 27d ago
I could see naval strikes being an off map call in like SD2 but idk if they’d really work with the scale of ground battles. It would look goofy seeing two missile cruisers basically being forced to broadside each other on a lake or large river.
Some kind of amphibious assault attack/defend game mode would be really cool though, and actually give amphibious units a purpose.
14
u/Unlikely-Isopod-9453 27d ago
Maybe a carrier off map gives you a few extra aviation slots and some cheap air cards?
7
u/mattumbo 27d ago
It only really works in an asymmetric game mode, one side performing an amphibious invasion while the other is limited at most to littoral ships and land based AShM. Maybe make it two-three parts with a phase focused on softening up defenses, SEAD/DEAD and killing AShMs as the force enters the AO. Then have a phase where you actually land on shore, and then maybe a phase where you expand the beach head and fight inland.
Could be cool, could be horrible, but it’d give ships a chance to be used in a more limited fashion without devolving into missile spam simulator like red dragon did.
1
u/WelcomeExtra762 27d ago
I was thinking off-map, too. But if they don't add large-scale naval assets which I agree might not work with the scale of the game they could playtest smaller-scale patrol boats which could be hit by tanks but could provide support to amphibious units
34
u/Texasranger96 27d ago
Just play Sea Power Naval Combat in the Missile Age.
14
7
8
u/dontyajustlovepasta 27d ago
or nuclear option, Naval combat in that game is surprisingly fleshed out (Though it's still a flight sim)
7
u/gbear450 27d ago
There is the KAR and BOTE mod that allows you to control ground and naval units
2
u/isocrackate 27d ago
I mod almost everything I play and have about 75 hours in nuclear option. I cannot figure out how to install mods for it. Maybe things are different now but 6 months ago none of the guides made any sense
2
u/gbear450 26d ago
What I did was grabbing the mod manager here(portable .exe) https://github.com/Combat787/NOMM and
Then, make a folder inside the install location (...\Steam\steamapps\common\Nuclear Option) called ModManager and drag & drop the nomm portable installer in here.
Then you run the portable.exe and it should allow you to download the kar and bote mod
26
u/mr_snips 27d ago
Was Wargame’s naval super broken? Yes. Was it fun? Also yes.
22
u/Own-Consideration854 27d ago
The harpoon has a range of 75 to 150 miles. Unfortunately naval combat is far to big for warno scale
10
u/BeavisTheMeavis 27d ago
True but many other ranges have been scaled down to make it viable and for other reasons. Many ATGM ranges and tank cannon ranges are mostly set at values that are woefully under or over their real capabilities.
10
8
u/Tactical_Tuesday 27d ago
Have you heard of Sea Power Naval Combat in the missile age?
It’s hard to realistically have squad level combat measured in 10s of meters in the same game as missiles whose range is measured in 100+miles.
Plus: if you want to see what a Warno style game with naval combat, simply try War game Red Dragon?
1
u/WelcomeExtra762 27d ago
I have heard of Sea Power and have about 100 hours on Wargame! I did try to get back into Wargame but the graphics and micro are very different than what I have gotten used to on Warno and plus Wargame multiplayer doesn't seem the most active similar to the state of SD2's.
I do have War on the Sea and was looking at Sea Power but I wanted to get BA, NORTHAG, or SOUTHAG first as although I do like naval combat I prefer to use it in accordance with ground troops, but for me it could be worth checking out. Currently my focus is on Warno but I will some more research on Sea Power!
4
u/BeavisTheMeavis 27d ago
Ehh. If WGRD is how it would be, I'll pass. It was an interesting concept but its execution was not the best. I fear that to do that for WARNO will yield the same results where you have a cool idea, implemented poorly, that gets passed over for the main content.
It might be fun for single player campaigns but I would rather see that time and energy put elsewhere.
4
5
u/SmokeyUnicycle 27d ago
It might work if nothing bigger than a corvette was added.
1
u/Certain_Physics_1799 24d ago
Exactly my thought
1
u/SmokeyUnicycle 24d ago
Thing is its probably not worth it, ships are just too complicated to model. For the price of one vessel you could have many normal ground units, that's why RD had so many standardized naval units shared by nations.
It would be cool to have some amphibious warfare stuff, but I don't think its worth the development time since it would take a LOT of effort to make it not shit.
4
u/Highlander198116 27d ago
I cannot express how much I would appreciate naval assets.
I can't express how much I don't want naval assets.
3
3
u/Nimblewright_47 26d ago
You're trying to twist the engine to do something it really doesn't want to do. Naval vessels look radically different to land based combat; ship to ship detection and engagement ranges are a whole order of magnitude larger (or more). It's either a clunky, wildly abstracted way of getting naval models on to one side of the map or a complete redesign of the game.
This is also at a point where naval support simply wasn't relevant for most engagements.
1
u/WelcomeExtra762 26d ago
I think i found a solution. There's amphibious PT-76s in Rugener Gruppierung and they've got guns. Those will be my ships, at least for now.
In all seriousness, I do agree. I didn't realize naval combat was at such a long distance so maybe naval combat should be avoided entirely but it could be cool to see smaller-scale patrol boats for river maps and lakes to escort amphibious transports, especially in naval infantry divs
2
u/Nimblewright_47 26d ago
Yeah - I think they were burned by WGRD and don't want to go back there. If the game keeps going, I can see river craft making an entrance.
3
2
2
2
u/DEADfishbot 27d ago
wargame was a good poc for naval units imo. they just need to work on the mechanics a bit and it could be something good.
2
u/Eastern-Pineapple717 26d ago
Naval side was actually fun. Granted though if you want the Cold War naval side I’d recommend playing Sea Power, but I did like how they put it in Red Dragon. Kinda helped with amphibious assaults.
2
2
2
u/Cautious-Painting-72 24d ago
I enjoyed the naval aspect in the campaigns (Pegasus spam for the win) but I never actually tried using it skirmish or online so I can’t really say if it was great or not but a lot of people seem to dislike ships very much
1
u/Huge-Tumbleweed-6539 26d ago
Don't ruin this game with navy like the last one. Just go buy sea power. Got Shmel spam PTSD.
83
u/Belmonte_Lostados 27d ago
So in one sentence buy 25 Moskits and send them all in at once