Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

akd

Tester
  • Posts

    2,801
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

akd last won the day on January 21 2022

akd had the most liked content!

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

akd's Achievements

Master and Commander

Master and Commander (9/13)

3.3k

Reputation

  1. Kiev is, in fact, currently under a massive, internet-wide DDoS attack.
  2. Please think before posting. Game Labs offices are in Kyiv.
  3. Maybe I misunderstand, but the bolded do not make sense as separate types of “HE” shell. You would, for example, have nose-fused HCHE (generally for bombardment, not ship-to-ship combat), or base-fused CPC, etc. All in all, sounds like a great set of changes and look forward to the Beta. Particularly happy to hear of the switch to more natural “accuracy” system that as described would seem to allow for both “accuracy” (errors in predicting future position of target or in where own shells will land) and “precision” (dispersion of shells within a salvo due to ballistic factors).
  4. Makes no sense from a machinery arrangement standpoint, but sadly game totally ignores that.
  5. Although faster, with their much greater length-to-beam ratios, BCs should be much “clumsier” when maneuvering.
  6. The “compartments” (the game diagram is, of course, a horrible representation of how compartmentalization and flooding works in a ship) can be fully pumped out and made watertight again unless they are red (destroyed) in which case they can’t be pumped out at all. In the above case you likely have compartments going red after pumping out because of the fires. It is really hard to see the damage state of a compartment under full flooding which is an unfortunate failing of the UI.
  7. That depends on the target position, course and speed and your position, course and speed.
  8. From my just-started British 1910 campaign where I accidentally let the AI auto-design my legacy fleet, I give you HMS Dread...not! But seriously, this isn't a dreadnought. It's semi-dreadnought with the speed of a pre-dreadnought, and with an absurd mix of secondaries, tertiaries, etc. (I especially love that ultra-efficient use of a 319t barbette).
  9. Awesome! But what is "Super HE"? I know there were "Super Heavy" shells (e.g. US 16-inch), but that seems to be covered in a separate design choice in the designer for light / standard / heavy shells (would be nice if this could be picked per gun-caliber, rather than forcing it on all guns / ammo carried).
  10. You can roll a mission that has your ships intercepted returning from another battle, or vice versa against AI ships. Anyways, I'm pretty sure something is wrong with the auto-designer for CLs: I've noticed that sometimes (but not always? Or just always with a recent update?) when you select a CL hull for building, the armor defaults to 0 for all values. It seems the AI starts with 0 armor in its design process, loads up on guns (here it has 4x 6-inch and 12x 4-inch on less than 3,500t), then adds HP, then fills what tiny leftover displacement it has with minimal armor values (2mm belt!). @Nick Thomadis, also curious how these super thin, non-armor armor values work. Are they considered to be on top of the structural steel that should already be present in the structure? Or do you need to put, for example, 5mm of "armor" on the hulls of all ships (including destroyers / TBs that should be unarmored) to have the game treat the hulls as normal structural steel (which of course has a thickness and armor value, even if minimal)?
  11. The ambush locations are often hilarious. Just ambushed a German battleship and armoured cruiser in the Irish Sea northeast of the Isle of Man in Solway Firth. Those guys were seriously lost! Also started at 2km from them in clear, morning conditions. They were clearly too busy trying to figure out where the hell they were to notice 12x coal-burning destroyers approaching at high speed.
  12. Maybe you weren't supposed to be able to tell which direction she was sailing? 😜
  13. That's not how it works. You don't end up with a surprise on delivery (well, except those "hidden" surprises like grossly overweight, belt under water, etc.). Spain issued the specifications and obviously approved the designed plan. Likely they had their reasons for the central bridge (I'd guess it economized on armor protection for the conning tower), but it was certainly an anomaly for a barbette ship of her era (maybe you are thinking of older ironclads that still considered the quarterdeck the command position?). The Marceau she was based on had the bridge / CT up front.
  14. Since she was based on a French ironclad design, one of them might serve as a reasonable substitute, although I don’t think we can replicate the idiocy of placing a funnel in front of the bridge. However, what is needed even more than a hull is a set of “Mark 0” guns to replicate this older generation of armament (lighter for the caliber, but generally in barbettes rather than gunhouses and with extremely slow reload). http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNSpain_126-35_m1884.php
×
×
  • Create New...