Command: Modern Air / Naval Operations

 PC
Metascore
tbd

No score yet - based on 1 Critic Review

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 1 out of 1
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 1
  3. Negative: 0 out of 1
  1. Pelit (Finland)
    Oct 25, 2014
    85
    The new modern strategy game standard for the next 20 years. Amazing sandbox of modern military technology. [Oct 2014]
    All this publication's reviews

User Reviews

All reviews »
User Score
4.3

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 56 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 17 out of 56
  2. Mixed: 5 out of 56
  3. Negative: 34 out of 56
  1. HermanHum
    Jan 1, 2016
    4
    The Good, the Bad, and the Downright Ugly

    The Good 1. Many of the game functions and commands are compatible and synchronized with    The Good, the Bad, and the Downright Ugly

    The Good

    1. Many of the game functions and commands are compatible and synchronized with Harpoon3. H3 veterans will easily grasp the basic game concepts and controls and be playing within an hour.
    2. A physics package makes most units observe the Laws of Physics. This means there are no more instantaneous turns, acceleration, dives, or missiles fired 'over-the-shoulder' at a pursuer.
    3. Sensor detection and weapons resolution reports are very detailed resolution through comprehensive messages that show the various modifiers and variables. Control over these messages is excellent so that they can be disabled if they turn out to be too much information.
    4. A Scenario Editor allows for scenario writing meaning that players are not limited to the 39 official scenarios included with the game.
    5. Third-party modifications to images, sounds, and icons are easy to add.
    6. Color-coded messages make for ease of reference by the player. Hostile action reports appear in Red, while other administrative reports appear in white, green, or yellow.

    The Bad

    7. No multiple player capability whatsoever 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 (yes, you there is "teleportation" in this wargame about naval warfare) of units instead of the more recognized deployment from aircraft or ships.
    9. The crude Formation Editor feature means that the solitary map is unnecessarily cluttered with icons and symbols. Confusion is quick to ensue 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 when the majority of aircraft are arbitrarily and artificially limited to 950 knots on afterburner even though these same aircraft exceed 1200 knots in real life.
    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.

    In Conclusion

    This game is theoretically functional, but could easily have used twelve additional months for optimization and polish. As it currently stands, MNO is a hodge-podge of ideas haphazardly thrown together. It is good that MNO replicates many functions from NWAC and Harpoon3. It is too bad that many bad ones are also duplicated while helpful ones were forgotten. Features such as the Formation Editor and Event Engine are prime examples of good ideas for functions that were poorly implemented and badly integrated. The awkwardness of the UI makes the game a chore to play instead of a pleasure. A thorough re-examination of the overall design phase might be prudent, especially considering how some features generally considered "standard" within the naval wargame genre are conspicuously missing.

    This is version 1.05 and, hopefully, improvements will come in the form of game Patches instead of "paid patches" (a.k.a. download content or DLC). Should this game be meaningfully patched in an expeditious manner, an update of this review is certainly possible.

    Modern Naval Ops Review (Steam v1.05)
    www[dot]youtube[dot]com/watch?v=LFQ2nitU5ow    … Full Review »
  2. Cieciu
    Oct 19, 2014
    4
    **************************

    I come from the cardboard and "pencil and paper" (our way to play miniatures) wargames, so I was very curious    **************************

    I come from the cardboard and "pencil and paper" (our way to play miniatures) wargames, so I was very curious about experiencing this genre on my PC. "Harpoon" (which I have in the cardboard version) appeared to be promising, but the Ultimate Edition was a broken mess. For there reasons I had high expectations for "Command". I forked $80 for this game when it came out, only to find on my PC another broken mess.

    "Command" tries to do too much while, at the same time, even the most basic commands are buried under an incomprehensible user interface. You can determine rules of engagement, EMCON, when to use or not to use weapons; and, most importantly, the overall mission. Then you discover that throttle and altitude are under another menu. And that general route is under another one.

    In the tutorial you have two squadrons of F-14 whose job is to clear the skies over the objective. So you program them to maintain standoff and blast the enemy they find ***in a specific direction***. You launch your squadrons, and they start to dance "The Blue Danube" by Strauss, without, of course, firing a single missile. Amazing.

    I devoted maybe 15 hours to "Command", because you just ***feel*** that there is a game under the mess When I started playing computer "Harpoon", for example, I found that the possibility to open different windows to follow different situation at the same time was really cool. So I expected to find the same opportunity here. No joy: you have to follow everything from the same window: even WWIII. The reasons of this horrible design choice are beyond me.

    Speaking about the map itself, the developers decided to go for a 3D world similar to Google Earth. Cool! Until you realise how jerky is moving around, it doesn't matter how powerful your rig is. I have an i7 with a GeForce GTX980 and an SSD, and it is like playing on an old Pentium 100Mhz. Sometimes I, literally, cannot find a crisis point because the map window, instead of moving smoothly, jumps around. The propaganda says that "on a powerful computer the game will scream". The developers recommend the use of a powerful computer. In my opinion, this requirement is only useful to hide the numerous technical problems. Given the problems with sound too, I'm not even more sure that "Command"'s developers used DirectX, which would be amazing. To close the book, add the random crash, sometimes when you are launching the game!

    The mess of the UI joined to these technical problems leads to further confusion. Your aircrafts, instead of screaming on the objective and launch their, lets say, anti-radar missiles, again improvise a representation of "Terpsichore" in the Darcey Bussel version, while the SAMs choose "Sarabande" by Haendel (the music from "Barry Lyndon") and wipe out the "Prima Ballerina" wannabes from the sky.

    Why the anti-radar missiles didn't fire? It's an error I made? Something buried in the UI? A bug? Mystery. I once stumbled into a debate where some bozos tried to explain that "you have to learn it by yourself, by doing research!" and that for this reason "Command" offers the opportunity to be a "learning experience". I do find this not only offensive, but also an excuse to cover for the horrific manual (to the developer's merit, each incremental patch is bringing it to what it should have been in the first place). Anyway, If you don't know who Darcey Bussel is, you can use my review as a "learning" experience...

    "Command" brings to my mind a strange image: a child who is unable to come into world from the mother's womb because of a series of complications: you see the head, or maybe the feet, but the poor creature is stuck. It is like seeing something which could be good stuck halfway between a potentially interesting game and a turkey because the developers could do/knew only part of their job.

    Will a better mid-wife arrive to finish the job? We can only hope, but I have bad feeling about the whole situation. Right now my best hope is that another group of developers will learn from the mistakes of this one and finally produce a good modern warfare naval game.    … Full Review »
  3. TomSunday
    Mar 9, 2015
    3
    NOT A FUN GAME EXPERIENCE.

    Unfortunately one can easily 'sum-up' the basic failure and downfall of CMANO. 1. The learning curve is ungodly    NOT A FUN GAME EXPERIENCE.

    Unfortunately one can easily 'sum-up' the basic failure and downfall of CMANO. 1. The learning curve is ungodly to say the least. 2. The software was obviously consulted with and or directed by former hardcore military 'brass-heads' with little regard to developing a game that actually produces entertainment, income and assuring MATRIX revenue. CMANO should have been developed in two or three different playable versions (novice and expert) thus opening a much bigger market share. CMANO as it stands today seems to appeal to less than about 1% of the PC military simulation player market due to its inherent difficulty to play and the awkwardness of its interface and more. What companies need to understand is that war simulation games have to be fun, entertaining and not agonizing. Eye candy like graphics need also to be present and incorporated in a big way. I do not think that these overdue improvements will happen nor be available as 'PATCHES' based on the demonstrated intransigence of the game developers. The game has naturally been praised by many so-called military experts but surely Matrix cannot survive on just these 'experts' alone. Case in point: I just noticed at TARGET where 'Dangerous Waters' by Sonalysts games was on sale for $4.99. A simulation 2-disk game also hard to absorb and to play thus never making the cut or producing revenue. I am still today stewing over the almost 400 page Sonalysts full combat manual. But then again I am just a simple GAMER (Armchair Admiral) with no real military background or a degree in Naval Warfare like the many thousands of my kind. But we do have the cash to play and would love to see a major improvement over the venerable HARPOON and late Fleet Command.    … Full Review »
See all user reviews »