Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 10/19/2020 in all areas

  1. I'm absolutely with you on the rest of this post (and would add the fixed barbette/superstructure hardpoints as my personal bugbear) but just wanted to clarify, didn't they fix the accuracy/speed thing in the last update? It's still not perfect but it was a vast improvement on alpha-7. THIS! Torpedoes are ******* heavy and they're difficult enough to load when they're in the same room, never mind while maneuvring under fire. If this game is going to persist with ahistoric torpedo reloads being the standard for external launchers, please can we split the reloads between launchers
    7 points
  2. Can I put in a vote to have 20in. guns on dreadnaughts? And the ability to put big ol' guns in every open space on deck? Edit: And gold accents, please.
    6 points
  3. Ok so the other day I notice something a little dumb. So I was playing with a replica of Tirpitz and I've almost used all my torpedo's. Near the end at the battle I had six torps left and reload indicator showed my torps are reloaded when I got in position to use to them they didn't launch. At first I thought my torpedo launchers got destroyed but then I realized they fully functional. Then I realized that the game divides the ammo left evenly so 3 for one launcher 3 for the other. The problem with is Tirpitz has quad torpedo launchers so they can't fire 3 torpedo's. I feel like the torpedo la
    6 points
  4. Nah nah I mean where I'm imagining these things. I'm thinking of their "armor viewer" in the port as an example of changing the various thicknesses of armor. It's a very approachable presentation of how armor is laid out.
    5 points
  5. What'd be really cool in the future would be being able to select a portion of the ship and manually change the armor thickness, depth of the citadel and "bullet sensitive" components, shape of the citadel protection, etc. I admit a lot of this comes from playing wows, but these (armor designs of ships) were design choices that engineers made way back when, so with the freedom that this game allows, we should see what boundaries of creativity can be hit!
    5 points
  6. @SteeltrapThey might introduce (and im hoping) changes to armour, bulkheads, gunnery (if needed), spotting (to get rid of stealth firing which is dumb) in the campaign update, but if not those above issues along with the designer and custom battles should be the next main focus of the dev team. Also things like, models not appearing, but gradually getting spotted and more detailed as well, would be very nice as that would get rid of the weird spotting mechanics, also smoke changing colour depending on speed, engine damage, engine type and era as well.
    4 points
  7. So after alpha 9 has gone through i wouldn't mind seeing a focus on, game mechanics such as bulkheads, the AI, gunnery and spotting since i have noticed cases where you can get spotted by the enemy and they can fire at your ships (this usually occurs below 1904) and you can do anything since they can't see them. Also we need a better armour system, and a more complex AI so that it is able to pull off various different tactics in the heat of battle or plan accordingly, on what the player has vs what they have (mainly the campaign as i don't expect the AI to retreat randomly in missions or
    4 points
  8. Personally I find this introduction of additional bling underwhelming. AI, damage model, armour model and damage control are where things have stalled. Second tier I'd add the other core factors of the gunnery model itself (any of you notice a ship doing 0.1kn can put the exact same penalty on your gunnery as a ship doing 30kn, for example? LOLWTF), manoeuvring (ship performance but also formation station keeping) and visibility (how do the devs justify early 1900's ships being able to shoot at ships they can't see simply because another of their ships can? I'd really like to know how tha
    4 points
  9. Well heres the new hull for hitachi, ill still work on the front end as im not 100% pleased with it, but still a major improvement over the other.
    3 points
  10. Ok I really hope when camos are added to the game I hope we can add logos and such on the decks like with Bismarck. Now I know in real life the reason they did this so aircraft won't get confused and attack they're own ships. The Italians are the best example of this they're red and white stripe decks.
    3 points
  11. Or in an "ahistorical" campaign, perhaps? :3
    2 points
  12. I vote for this but only in custom battles.
    2 points
  13. Coming from 3ds max to blender uv mapping is just plain bloody werid, but im getting the hang of it. The main hull still has problems (limited too the anchor holes now thank god), ill be testing out the UV's too see how they are in substance, otherwise i might see if i can just texture in blender again. Sorry it's taking this long, but technically i've only been using blender since early september. only reason why i am able to produce models as good as you see is due to prior 3 years experience in 3ds max. Otherwise ill just post moar images of hitachi, a new aircraft carrier im work
    2 points
  14. I'd agree with Steeltrap on this one. I also want to see the basic gameplay sorted out before worrying about more cosmetic options.
    2 points
  15. Only ohio, georgia and massa have secondaries worth talking about and viable for sec builds, the rest of american ships, lack the range and the accuracy to even be somewhat useful. you take a hybrid builds on those ships, but its your guns that you should be using to take out DD's not secondaries as if you're relying on those the DD is far too close. otherwise you take a tank build for most BB's as their secondaries are trash in, accuracy, range and fire rate. Not too mention some have poor fire chances as well or too small a calibre to pen through 32mm plating which most BB's past
    2 points
  16. Hello Admirals, We would like to share news about the progress we have so far and the status of the upcoming update. The team’s reorganization is working great and we are very happy with the results. These last 2 months we have touched upon all major aspects of the game with the new lead programmer (from formations to AI to ship designer) - and finally we can say - now the new team is more than ready to continue with the development of the campaign. We plan to add extra resources in November, which will help us to speed up the develo
    1 point
  17. 1) Even against DDs it doesnt help that much because they hardly ever hit even with a secondary build, and the tank build will at least give you a chance to survive the russhing DD. 2) Still mainly comes down to RNG, I too hit most of my shots on a DD, but even then that only means at most you will do 4k damage. 3) Shooting AP is a lot more practical then HE because you will still do more damage since it prevents the hull from being saturated as DDs can become saturated quicker and my prayers go to you if you shoot HE at a French destroyer. 4) Wasnt saying anything about skills an
    1 point
  18. Yeah, this does tell me you have no idea what the meta is. All the German BBs are pretty irrelevant at the moment so giving them the weakest build is already handicapping them even more. There is only 3 American ships that can perhaps use a secondary build as the rest just dont have the range to make it worth the skill points. As for hitting DDs could be me, but when you notice the same shit for years where every well aimed shot just lands around them and maybe land 1 hit for 1400 damage perhaps its not the player. Doesnt help that DDs have the arbitrary immunity against BB AP, so no its not j
    1 point
  19. Gave me another idea: sunny bunny camo - applied after migrane maker aka razzle dazzle was prohibited by Geneva Protocol. I knew that misreading thread's title as "Magic in game?" will derail me hard πŸ˜‹ No regrets.
    1 point
  20. A campaign without limits.....LETS DO IT
    1 point
  21. Unability to build something like HMS Incomparable would be rather strange, IMO. At least that's there I planning to start my "roaring 20s" lineage.
    1 point
  22. Yes pls, also hope you do well. Wish i did better in uni at my course, but thats too late anyways. My skills have improved a lot since i left anyways, given i can now do whatever models i want now. Oh btw what do you guys think of this? This is ORP Jadwiga rendered in substance painter, dunno if i can get the same effect in sketchfab but she looks really nice even if she isn't fully done yet. Basic i know, but it helps me with doing her up proper. Ill add in her other materials later on today and use them on her and see what they look like.
    1 point
  23. I wish πŸ˜’ Nah, I just google "navy trimaran" and took the one seemed most explonatory. Though I somehow mentally ready that I'll end up learning some 3D (and perhaps C#) to made me some shipfus. When I bought build-your-own-ship game that's not exactly what I expected πŸ˜… P.S. Some 6 and 8 inch verticals, perhaps?
    1 point
  24. Moar like triple siperfired one. Remember these? Since topweight stability should totally be a thing, why not give her some training wheels:
    1 point
  25. In the mean time does anyone else have any designs they wish to share? Better than just waiting for me to finish stuff of really. Regardless ill post pics of the CV im working on Hitachi and model of dreadnought BB as well Both the CV and the dreadnought will be bare bones, but the dreadnought will be a continuation of ORP Jadwiga so you might see some familiar stuff on there (Plus thanks to HusariuS for the names as that makes it alot easier to choose whats more appropriate, even if they never existed, but that is the point of the thread really).
    1 point
  26. Ye, you push in close unless the flank has few ships In-general. But even then you can get cross-fired although most peeps in the game fail at map awareness so, its not always a given. Secondaries are only usually useful against BB's for fires and lightly armoured cruisers and DD's for raw DPM, but then the secs still need to hit and deal damage so yeah. You can do hybrid with georgia the most due to how she plays in general and her being more unique out of the three ships that should of been in the standard tech tree. Oh well.
    1 point
  27. Kinda tells me you really don't understand the current meta of high tier BB play. Tanking as a BB is no longer a viable strat, as HE spam and fire damage have made BBs who try to tank and push into nothing more then xp pinatas. Which has added the side effect of making secondary builds practically irrelevant as you will most likely die before you get in range. Best strategy with BBs is to stay at long/ mid range sniping at cruisers, with a tank build to preserve as much hp until it's safe enough to start pushing an objective. Yeah, sadly even with the Germans is mostly advisable to sti
    1 point
  28. With how big "destroyers" are now, they'd probably call a 50k tonnes ship a cruiser anyway. ^^
    1 point
  29. You're correct, most BB players who take a secondary build DO have half a brain, if that much LOL. Makes largely no sense to build for secondary other than Massa and arguably the Germans, although even there it's not necessarily the ideal build for German tiers 9-10. DD rushes aren't the greatest threat to BBs, although it was true back when I played that the lower tier ones (tiers 4-5) could charge your same tier BB and there was very little you could do due to the absurd dispersion at even close range. No, the greatest dangers are the ridiculous HE spammer ships and CVs. BBs who di
    1 point
  30. I would be fine with historical boni being implemented as an option, like, at a game's start, you can tick a check-box for "historical advantages" so nations gain the boni they had historically but if you _don't_ check that box, then nobody gains any boni unless they develop them.. I would be opposed to those boni being hard coded without any way to remove/change them. I mean, I'm pretty sure there isn't a law of nature that states that the IJN simply _has_ to develop the Long Lance and simply _has_ to train excessively in night combat. The IJN developed those techniques because they
    1 point
  31. A 510 a day,keeps the weebs away amirite?
    1 point
  32. True, although if this game goes up to 1949-1950 we maybe could squeeze it in somehow. I mean if we get a des moines/Worcester hull then the game will have tech from that period as well. We will have too see what else they add in that's closer to the 50's so we can have a noice excuse to add it in lol. Could do with more pre-dread hulls and hulls from 1925-1875 too be honest doe.
    1 point
  33. Oh roight, never watched him too be honest. Speaking of smolensk i want vertical quads as well even for bigger guns maybe up to 203mm's cus reasons. Or if mod support becomes a thing expect me to make 22inch hextuples vertical and horizontal even if they make no sense. I and maybe if they make another version of this game in the future they have aircraft carriers so i can make yorkie.
    1 point
  34. With the current limitations, It really forces you into the same design a lot. Which is why I wish they would just rid of a lot of this fixed points, or just add more of them for better designs. Theres no point in a build system at that point if you end up with the same designs over and over again.
    1 point
  35. I wouldn't recommend aiming for Shikishima specifically. takes deep breath, Japanese Navy nitpick is about to begin Shikishima emulates the final design studies for the A-150-type battleships in extremely few ways. In fact, she doesn't resemble them much at all, except in the number and calibre of the main battery - and even then, the shells are much heavier than they ought to be. What few surviving records of the A-150 that exist indicate - to point out a major difference - that she was to be armed with a homogenous dual-purpose battery of 10-cm guns, dispensing with the split LA/HA
    1 point
  36. Something particular you have in mind?
    1 point
  37. Until we'll have some damage control minigame, some single alarm on ship you currently control for atmosphere would probably be enough for me, or it may become really irritating really quick. Now that alarm should yell all the way. @Cptbarney proposed some poi-mod for dat and me likey 😁 Positively love the idea. Some horns would also be nice to hear. And, of course, AA sirens in the future. UPD: collision alarm (video title is misleading)
    1 point
  38. Constant modifiers in relation to maneuvering are not changing. You will not see a bigger penalty due to speed, for example. Only the aspects that are utilizing target "bearing" and "range rate" will become more dynamic. So, for example, ships that are at large distance and move fast, will create bigger penalties to aim locking due to bearing change caused by degree difference between each aiming shot. Or ships that approach or increase distance with high speed, will cause more penalties to aiming procedure. As for the Destroyers and Torpedo Boats, they will still be as vulnerable as hist
    1 point
  39. Well and correct me if I'm wrong ships that your not controlling already try to dodge torpedo's they're spotted so I'm sure the alarm will only heard on the ship your riding or following. As for how long the alarm will last they could make that the alarms sound only for a few seconds after the fire or flooding has started and only on the ship your riding because I know if you heard alarms from all ships it would be annoying. But if the alarms become to much of an annoyance they can always make it you can turn them of the settings.
    1 point
  40. Hello Admirals! I want to share some of my drawings. This game inspired me to draw battleships, pre-dreadnoughts and ironclads. 1. Northern battleship 2nd Class (III. generation) Armor: 0-350 mm Armament: -light: 18*1 12,5mm mg; 14*1 75mm; 8*1 76,2mm -medium: 4*2 127mm -heavy: 2*2 300mm Speed: around 18 kn Crew: ~900 2. Northern Coastal cruiser (I. generation) Armor: 0-100mm Armament: -medium: 26*1 8" Speed: 12-14 kn with steam Crew:~400 Later I will post more if you want Ha
    1 point
  41. Another day, another ship. Wait a sec, today actualy two ships! First ship is the oldest protected cruiser in the Northern Navy. She has okey guns, slow speed, because the old technology. She had a boring life. And she and her sister ship were scrapped after 22 years of service. Northern Small Protected Cruiser-I. Armour: 1-75 mm Turret armour: -light: 0-10 mm -medium: 0-30 mm -heavy: - Armament: -light: 10*1 7,92mm mg; 2*1 45 mm -medium: 9*1 150 mm -heavy: - Speed: 20,5
    1 point
  42. Today I brought you an enemy 2nd Class Battleship. She was designed to defeat Northern coastal vessels, even early, smaller battleships. She has one turret at the front with the highest caliber gun at that time. Her armour is not the best, but she doesn't have to show her broadside because her turret arrangement. On the other hand, her secondary armament is not grear, she hasn't got lots of guns, so she is not that great against destroyers or torpedo boats. Her speed is better then the Northern coastal ships. One of the best thing about this ship, that she has low profile, her deck is lower, s
    1 point
  43. The next mega battleship is an interesting one. She has smaller caliber main guns, but she has lots of them. The reload speed is also shorter so the RoF is excellent. This ship is good against almost every type of ships including battleships, but against larger battleships her main guns are not that effective. She has massive secondary fire power and dual purpose AA guns. The AA is good against aircrafts and airships too. The biggest draw back is her citadel. She has the biggest citadel among the mega battleships I have created. She has lots of turrets and because of this she has lots of ammun
    1 point
  44. GUNNERY FACTOR: "Target Manoeuvre" EXAMPLE: DISCUSSION: This is taken from a target travelling at less than 1 knot (hence the title of my screen snip, lol). 1 knot = 1.852km/h, or (1852/3600 = ) 0.51m/s. For a shell flight travel time of 20 seconds, say, the target is going to travel 10.2m. I suggest it's nonsensical for it to be able to apply a penalty through "manoeuvre" that is GREATER than the bonus its slow speed gives to anything shooting at it. This is part of the broader "range rate" discussion I expect to see, which is to say it's the degree to which you
    1 point
  • Newsletter

    Want to keep up to date with all our latest news and information?
    Sign Up
×
×
  • Create New...