why are all the sea-warfare games i've seen shitty WWII ones where all the ships are identical or boring 1700s line battles?
Ironclads had tons of variations and differing tactics/battle roles; it was by far the most interesting period in ships.
Also general sea-warfare games thread
>>320007740
There aren't many navy games because naval warfare is fundamentally boring. It boils down to two sides bringing their ships and the side with better and bigger ships winning. In a naval battle that can fit in the scale of a video game, there will not be any strategic points to fight over, or any way to surprise or flank anyone.
>>320007740
>playing surface ships
>>320008778
>battle begins
>enemy's first shot strikes your boiler
>KABOOM
>crushing defeat
Sunless Sea is a pretty interesting sea warfare game, although maybe not what you're looking for
>yfw you have hundreds of ship images dating 1850-1918
They really need to make a Victoria: Total War game.
>>320007740
>Ironclads had tons of variations and differing tactics/battle roles; it was by far the most interesting period in ships.
It was also the period most lacking in interesting naval battles.
>>320009607
top tier taste right there
Pro tip, naval battles have been boring as shit forever. The last time they were actually exciting was when triremi's were fighting on the Nile.
That said, Sid Meier's pirates is a great game.
>>320014117
>tfw no modern remake
I can still remember british ministers screaming 'imbriglicated' at me, and 'shoovahn' after getting someone to surrender. weird how little things stick with you sometimes
