Take care to note that the shortcomings identified within the v1.05 video review are still present in the currently released version 1.09 of the game, 13 months later.
Did you mean by that all shortcomings still exist?
From the v1.05 review:
Quote:
The Bad
7. No multiple player capability exists. The only opponent is the AI, which can be easily tricked once it is understood. 8. The Event Engine produces strange results from teleportation of units instead of the more recognized deployment from aircraft or ships. 9. A crude Formation Editor capability means that the solitary map is cluttered with unnecessary icons and symbols. Confusion quickly ensues when aircraft assigned to protect the carrier group cannot easily be distinguished from those assigned to expeditionary missions. Most other games have independent window displays to control formations so that units can function as organized groups.
The downright Ugly
10. No database editing capability exists. The database is locked. The current items, equipment, and systems can be shuffled, re-arranged, or re-combined, but nothing new can be added nor can the performance of any current system be modified. Players are forced to accept false perceptions of reality. 11. The UI is severely overloaded, cluttered, and user-unfriendly. The dependence upon a single map to display all the units and functions means that the number of icons and other data displayed is extreme. Coupled with the inability to turn off some information, this means that the player is easily overwhelmed by the data, much of which he probably did not want to see in the first place. 12. Direct player control is difficult to exercise due primarily to the single map display. The inability to differentiate between units at a distance or high altitude means that the user must constantly zoom in and out to locate units for his orders and targets. This awkwardness triples the time and effort necessary for the most simple and basic orders and truly makes the game a chore to play instead of a pleasure.
7. No multiple player capability exists. The only opponent is the AI, which can be easily tricked once it is understood. 8. The Event Engine produces strange results from teleportation of units instead of the more recognized deployment from aircraft or ships. 9. A crude Formation Editor capability means that the solitary map is cluttered with unnecessary icons and symbols. Confusion quickly ensues when aircraft assigned to protect the carrier group cannot easily be distinguished from those assigned to expeditionary missions. Most other games have independent window displays to control formations so that units can function as organized groups.
The downright Ugly
10. No database editing capability exists. The database is locked. The current items, equipment, and systems can be shuffled, re-arranged, or re-combined, but nothing new can be added nor can the performance of any current system be modified. Players are forced to accept false perceptions of reality. 11. The UI is severely overloaded, cluttered, and user-unfriendly. The dependence upon a single map to display all the units and functions means that the number of icons and other data displayed is extreme. Coupled with the inability to turn off some information, this means that the player is easily overwhelmed by the data, much of which he probably did not want to see in the first place. 12. Direct player control is difficult to exercise due primarily to the single map display. The inability to differentiate between units at a distance or high altitude means that the user must constantly zoom in and out to locate units for his orders and targets. This awkwardness triples the time and effort necessary for the most simple and basic orders and truly makes the game a chore to play instead of a pleasure.
I dont have CMANO so i can't really imagine what that mean. So... Are you able to offer evidence in a video showing "shortcoming" Nr.8 from someone uses the currently released v1.09 patch?
7. No multiple player capability exists. The only opponent is the AI, which can be easily tricked once it is understood. 8. The Event Engine produces strange results from teleportation of units instead of the more recognized deployment from aircraft or ships. 9. A crude Formation Editor capability means that the solitary map is cluttered with unnecessary icons and symbols. Confusion quickly ensues when aircraft assigned to protect the carrier group cannot easily be distinguished from those assigned to expeditionary missions. Most other games have independent window displays to control formations so that units can function as organized groups.
The downright Ugly
10. No database editing capability exists. The database is locked. The current items, equipment, and systems can be shuffled, re-arranged, or re-combined, but nothing new can be added nor can the performance of any current system be modified. Players are forced to accept false perceptions of reality. 11. The UI is severely overloaded, cluttered, and user-unfriendly. The dependence upon a single map to display all the units and functions means that the number of icons and other data displayed is extreme. Coupled with the inability to turn off some information, this means that the player is easily overwhelmed by the data, much of which he probably did not want to see in the first place. 12. Direct player control is difficult to exercise due primarily to the single map display. The inability to differentiate between units at a distance or high altitude means that the user must constantly zoom in and out to locate units for his orders and targets. This awkwardness triples the time and effort necessary for the most simple and basic orders and truly makes the game a chore to play instead of a pleasure.
I dont have CMANO so i can't really imagine what that mean. So... Are you able to offer evidence in a video showing "shortcoming" Nr.8 from someone uses the currently released v1.09 patch?
It isn't from v1.09, but there have not been significant changes to this feature since the original game was released in Sept 2013. You can try this video for a good comparison between formation editors of various games.
IMHO, that's not really a review per se, more like a preview. I'm hoping Wargamer or some other page might publish an in-depth review of the thing before I pull the trigger on that one.
I'm having a hard time to enjoy playing CMANO and have to agree with the criticism posted regarding the UI and time-compression.
i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SoundBlaster 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1 btn 2 axis gameport joystick, Numpad as hat-switch. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH average.
I'm having a hard time to enjoy playing CMANO and have to agree with the criticism posted regarding the UI and time-compression.
If you are already suffering through the MNO interface, why do you need a review on NI? They both run the same v1.09 game engine. NI just adds 15 scenarios to the same game engine. Therefore, the gameplay would show no difference between NI and MNO.
On the first request, the v1.04 update (July 2014) provided a doctrine option that allows for full-range torpedo shots, either only for manual attacks or also for AI attacks. Like all doctrine options, this is configurable at side-, mission-, group- and individual unit-level.
On the second request, known operational anti-torpedoes were added in the v1.08 update (July 2015), as our users provided sufficient information that these systems have finally moved out of the lab and entered service. Your request to provide this ability to existing conventional torpedoes was examined and rejected, as there is still no credible information that this is feasible.
On the first request, the v1.04 update (July 2014) provided a doctrine option that allows for full-range torpedo shots, either only for manual attacks or also for AI attacks. Like all doctrine options, this is configurable at side-, mission-, group- and individual unit-level.
On the second request, known operational anti-torpedoes were added in the v1.08 update (July 2015), as our users provided sufficient information that these systems have finally moved out of the lab and entered service. Your request to provide this ability to conventional torpedoes like the Mk48 was examined and rejected, as there is still no credible information that this is feasible.
Thanks.
Hi,
I am glad you are finally answering my request instead of sunburn who was very condescending.
It is feasible, it does not belong to science fiction. It was feasible in Harpoon, I posted a vid on the matrix forum way back.
I played scenario "training submarine operations" at a friend of mine. What it is is similar to this => https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dZBNFFaDkY (naive documentation about 5 prospective sub commanders at a sea training)
In the simulation, basically, one could get out the Maneuvering Board manual to look up the steps you need to solve all the problems during your submarine/destroyer hunt: Closest point of approach, intercept with given speed, avoidance of contacts, best evasive action against a target, torpedo/missile danger zones, limiting lines of approach, pass clear at maximum distance, remain within specified range for maximum time, risk analysis, calculation of probabilities for occurrence of events etc. These are not just funny details whats going on in subs/ships without any benefits but helps you to get through the naval scenarios. And speaking about "shortcomings": none of them mentioned earlier here was relevant for me. (CMANO v1.09 with latest patch, 4MB RAM, older business laptop).
