Dear Players,

In developer spotlight posts, we discuss the detail and ideas behind Carrier Command 2.

In this post, we discuss the helm on the carrier bridge, how it functions, and how you navigate the world in Carrier Command 2.

The helm is a control station at the centre front of the bridge. This position is surrounded by windows, giving the player a very wide and open field of view.

The Lower Console

The lower console has 3 multifunction displays which can be set up to the players preference, engine controls and dials, fuel information, rudder, throttle, control mode and gear controls, signalling and illumination lights.

The Upper Console

The upper console has a propulsion status screen, a mechanical compass, a compass and bearing information screen, ocean floor sonar, and the master alarm button panel.

To pilot the carrier, you simply start the engine, then use forward-backward, left-right controls to drive. It is simple to get started, but there is a lot to master and becoming an excellent helmsman is no simple task!

You will want to set up your multifunction displays. They display a map, centred on the carrier position. They can be set to various layers and zoom levels, each providing a specific view. There are various weather views indicating navigation conditions, ocean depth view which gives insight into the magnitude of the huge ocean waves, and ocean current view, showing the movement and pull that will be applied and pull the carrier off course. The weather and ocean are dynamically and richly simulated, and continually changing. We will cover these systems in more detail in due course.

The carrier ocean floor sonar works in a similar way to real sonar, scanning the ocean floor in a sweeping pattern, and mapping the returned data to a visual graph showing the proximity of the ocean floor in all directions. This system is entirely mechanical, using the physics simulation to test and simulate the sonar system.

This screen is most useful near an island in shallow water, where very fast decisions need to be made to avoid grounding the carrier on a sand bank, and where you are relying on this information because it is difficult to see what lies below the waves.

We hope you enjoy this insight into these details of the mechanics of Carrier Command 2, and the details and mechanics as we build on the rules of the original game.

We look forward to your thoughts and feedback in the comments! And please let us know what you want to hear about next!

Much love <3,

The Carrier Command Developers

Flat Top along with CARRIER naturally is part of our pantheon of relevant game systems to study and emulate to an extent, but in regard of scenarios I can safely say that we didn't take our inspiration from there - we just simply picked what we felt relevant in the actual course of combat history and came up with popular variants (that might have been influenced unknowingly by our experience with Flat Top as much as all other comparable sources & naturally our own imagination)

In regard of your other questions

Coastwatchers: yes. At the lowest level of realism you get instantaneous feedback, at the highest level expect a punishing delay early in the war (gotta go to SWPAC, then to SOPAC before getting back to you). Situation gets better after Watchtower when the network is optimized & the items of interest flow faster to tactical SOPAC hands.

Minefields & minesweeping: we are gearing up for it (specialized ships will be featured) but I am not sure we'll have the opportunity to implement them in vol.1 properly. They are pretty low on the priority list due to our early focus on carrier ops & the lack of relevancy in a tactical battle. They certainly will feature the moment the scope grows and requires long-term items featuring them, such as minefields interdicting friendly & enemy port approaches.

Submarines: at the lowest level of realism I suppose they'll be in your control and report instantaneously whatever they come across, even when underwater. On higher levels of realism, they'll report to their relevant command (COMSUBPAC or COMSUBSOWESPAC) and might require an additional delay before information is properly disseminated to you. Besides, in that kind of situation they will only be allowed to send a contact report when surfaced, which means that they can only do that before or after the action proper, incurring further delay or uncertainty.

In regard of their combat efficiency (besides S-boat and their old yet reliable Mk10) not sure if historical torpedoes can really be tweaked in our current meta (that is made more efficient with a switch): simplifying command is just a matter of ignoring/making irrelevant existing command nodes at the lowest tactical level, but the battle action still proceed the same way, which wouldn't be the case if Mk14s were suddenly made efficient.

On the other hand, in regard of being instrumental in the way they influence a scenario, I'd say they still pack a big punch. A submarine scare can absolutely change the behavior of the enemy and disrupt its operations, just like it did historically twice at Midway for the US side. As you say, it might be a matter of random influence. We can't guarantee that Nautilus will also put up the same show as she did that day, but technically as long as you opt for a Midway game with historical dispositions, you can bet that she will be on the morning track leg of the Japanese carrier strike force. What it means for the carrier strike force (aka everything from a mere, fleeting disturbance to an actual damaged or sunk unit, with everything in between, including the historical outcome) is then up to the engine. Same with Tambor (although the circumstances would really be unlikely to take place 1:1 again in regard of Mikuma & Mogami). At any rate, whether we focus on air strikes or not, US fleet submarines are by definition a most random mechanic in 1942 (apart from making contact, that is) and these historical events certainly demonstrate that well enough in my opinion. We're still two years away from the sort of efficient wolfpack tactics, with workable torpedoes & super intel, in 1942 they are a disruptive shot in the dark, which happened to be decisive in Midway without the need of hitting a single explosive torp - and irrelevant in all other engagements, save for the occasional S-boat success.

Dear Players,

In developer spotlight posts, we discuss the detail and ideas behind Carrier Command 2.

In this post, we discuss the damage control station and power management system in Carrier Command 2.

In the original game, vehicles could receive damage to a specific component of a vehicle that would effect the behaviour of that vehicle in a specific way. In the remake, we have designed main carrier damage in a similar way, so that the carrier takes damage (by weapons, collision, etc) at a specific location. For example, a hit to the tower could disable radar, while damage to a specific CIWS would disable that turret.

The damage status of the carrier is displayed on a screen on the bridge, showing the health of the various sub-systems, as well as the overall health of the hull. While the hull health is the critical health bar that ultimately decides if your carrier is destroyed, damage to sub-systems can leave you exposed and vulnerable.

Damage can be repaired, but it takes time and costs power (both of which are likely under short supply if you are under attack). Sub-systems will only work when fully repaired.

Power is a valuable commodity in Carrier Command 2. The main power unit on the carrier is responsible for supplying all systems, including propulsion. Just having a system active has a small power cost, and while it is possible to power all systems at once, it ultimately leaves less power available for propulsion. Turning systems off to get a little more speed may seem attractive, but may leave you radar blind or vulnerable to missile attack. Likewise, to fortify with full battle-readiness, the manoeuvring speed will be limited.

While not the first example of a power system, my favourite example is the 1997 Lucasarts game, X-Wing vs TIE Fighter. In this game, you could balance your power between weapons, shields, and engines, and continually rebalance as your desired play style changed. It was possible to leave power at the default state, but you could express your play style and optimize your ship by tweaking the power balance as you saw fit. Carrier Command 2 aims to achieve a similar balance. It isn't something that new players need worry about, but the player can choose to optimize the ship for it's current role and strategy, or just turn systems off to quickly repair the most important damaged systems.

We hope you find this post interesting, and we have plenty more to share in coming weeks. There are some particular elements in the game (such as procedural world generation, weather simulation, AI and pathfinding) that I really want to share, but they probably deserve a video, and we are so busy getting the last parts of the game finished. I expect we will find the time for videos around release.

As always, we look forward to your thoughts and feedback. Let us know what you think and what you want to hear about next!

Much love <3,

The Carrier Command Developers