Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 01/18/2021 in all areas

  1. Hello admirals, Despite the difficulties of 2020, which have affected everyone’s life as well as the game’s development, we continued to provide several updates and significantly improved the game. We deeply hope that Ultimate Admiral: Dreadnoughts has already become a game that you enjoy and thank you for your ongoing and precious feedback that we so much appreciate. We want to assure you that we acknowledge all your concerns and suggestions and today we would like to inform you about what are our definite plans for the next patches that are going to be delivered within 2021. W
    35 points
  2. I am really happy to read this - it is a very good idea to improve this very core aspect of the game in my opinion. Can you already shed some light on what the general scope/direction here will be? Are you aiming for “just” polishing the current version of the designer and add parts or are we talking about expanding, changing and overall improving the ship designer to become more of a flexible and powerful asset?
    10 points
  3. Will we see any major changes to the ship designer at all? At the moment it is very restrictive, and would like too see more placement options and maybe the ability to swap out sections of parts for other sections, like the tower being split into 3-4 parts, Tower, Rigging pole, Barbettes, other.
    10 points
  4. @1MajorKoenig, @Marshall99, @HusariuS, @BobRoss0902, @Steeltrap, @coalminer, @Koogus, @Bluishdoor76, @Airzerg, @IronKaputt, @Gangut, @Tycondero, @Danvanthevacuumman And sorry to those i missed. Very nice, indeed mister nick. Can't wait too be fair.
    10 points
  5. No offense to you my guy but I sincerely hope they don't listen to this at all. It's bad, like really bad
    9 points
  6. i will be first one to ask What about ship designer?
    9 points
  7. We will tell more details as soon as they are defined permanently. Currently we revamp most things about the campaign, replacing everything working previously in barebones mode.
    9 points
  8. Saving designs in custom battles, so the games replayability shoots up.
    7 points
  9. Finally! A naval game that is not focused on Japan and America as the first playable Nations.
    6 points
  10. Coming from RTW 2 this game is very limited, however most of these problems could be resolved by an overhaul of the ship designer. As of right now some hulls are objectively better than others such as how one of the pre-dreadnought hulls can hold 3 (main) guns instead of two. Now this would not be a problem if it was like RTW 2 where you actually can build a ship of similar style if you so choose, but in UA;D since the hulls are locked to certian countries this means that say as Japan, you could not build a 3 turreted Pre-Dreadnought even if you wanted to. I'm not saying that it should all be
    6 points
  11. You have a point but the game isn’t in a state for release. It needs some more to not ruin the release. And you need to consider that most of 2020 was a complete write-off for the development. Not ideal but it happens. And the team apparently has a plan and some new people working on the two core components of the game (designer and campaign). Personally I am very optimistic once more and even sort of hyped! I was wondering the same to be honest. Although the note they added a new programmer to improve the ship designer was the best news! There is something else thoug
    5 points
  12. Most games are developed hidden from public view, the ones that can afford it! and people do not see the true development time. These games are announced in an almost readied finished state, they’re marketed for alittle while then released. People associate that marketing timeframe with all games and think that the one’s that are developed in the public eye should release content in the same manor. EA and alphas mistimed “excitement” and “it’s been awhile” complaints are just part and parcel of public development, not for Dev’s to ever let themselves be burden by such things.
    4 points
  13. @Nick Thomadis Oh yeah nick, are you allowed to tell us what time period the campaign is set in? So for example between 1890-1915 or the full 50-60 years.
    4 points
  14. Looking forward to the upcoming campaign and experimenting with some truly weird naval doctrines.
    4 points
  15. Well, it's beautiful to hear at least some news about the campaing although to me it resembles the news we received last summer (about campaing until December) so I am not that hyped anymore.
    4 points
  16. I've recommended it to one friend of mine on the understanding that it's most decidedly a WIP (he was a game dev, so knows the score.) Whether I recommend it in beta and beyond to the many other friends I know from naval history and wargaming circles depends on three things: Remaining 'gamey' elements (cloaking smoke, torpedo spam and other such fixes to the meta rather than the underlying issues) are reformed. The designer improves to the point where you don't feel held back by arbitrary restrictions. Modding is officially supported or at least easy to accomplish, acknowl
    4 points
  17. I am all for more variety in the designer I am all for more freedom in placing parts I am against „all-equal“ and want nation specifics I am very much against „same ship Syndrom“ I want this Game to be awesome I feel that this game needs a great designer with a lot of freedom and a good dynamic campaign to use the designer meaningful
    4 points
  18. ye something to tie us over until the campaigns release essentially.
    4 points
  19. Me personally, I'd honestly like more nation specific parts being added. The current pool of parts is still very lackluster and generic. This wouldn't fix the many issues the builder has but I'd like to have more Nation specific variety rather then the generic parts.
    4 points
  20. Id' say wait, because currently, above mentioned limitless design possibility is a lie.
    4 points
  21. I hope that this was only a joke. Seriously, the ship designer needs most of the changes in the future. Now, it is far from good.
    3 points
  22. Thank you! Thankyouthankyouthankyou 😍 I look forward to seeing more detail about the designer improvements once your new programmer has got settled in, but for now this news is very good news.
    3 points
  23. Hi all! After leaving my feedback regarding the Ship Designer - in my opinion the most interesting and unique selling proposition of the game - in multiple threads I decided to write up a summary of what I would like to see. The whole thing is aiming to improve flexibility and create more interesting (and less repetitive 😞 ) Designs! As a Start I would expand on what we can do on the Hull! These steps are marked as H1 to H11: H1. Hull Selection Fewer hulls needed as the hull itself becomes part of the design process. Example: tumblehome, pre-dreadnought, dreadno
    3 points
  24. 😤😤😤 This is the best thing that happened to me this year!
    3 points
  25. We need a division maker pre-battle and also able to give orders pre-battle too with a 3d or 2d top down view of the battle screen and then once ships are assigned their roles and ranks (flag ship for example) then the player can hit play/continue/begin/battle etc.
    3 points
  26. 3 points
  27. I hope captain/commander names or portraits can be display in the battle instance, to provide a connection from the crew/captain/commander interface to the battle. Playing a game recently with companions, it has that correspondence. UAD can do it with captains or division commanders, names/portraits (maybe voiceovers) would create the same atmosphere. To expand on this, when the division lead changes a message could be displayed e.g. “Commander Beatty has taken command of division 1”. There could be quite a few battle related commander messages, maybe campaign messaging too.
    3 points
  28. So, I think the limitations of the ship editor are pretty obvious. 1MajorKoenig has a very extensive post on that subject elsewhere so I'll not rehash it here other than to say, if you allow sufficient freedom in the designer to make ships that fulfill roles that the user decides on rather than sticking rigidly to roles dictated by the game designers then you naturally eliminate a lot of the "everything is the same" issue. As far as nation specifics go, I think this would be better handled as a set of technology advantages rather than a special "thing" that I can have and no one e
    3 points
  29. Welcome to the club of designer dissapointment, take your tea and feel comfy.
    3 points
  30. Further development of the ORP Henryk Pobożny. Looking better as time goes on too be fair. Enjoy! Also she has 360mm Main guns, don't ask why they are that caliber just picked it randomly lol.
    3 points
  31. Would it be possible to get an radar type overview of the ships positions? Feel like that would help a lot for general awareness.
    3 points
  32. When I was doing a custom battle, I noticed that after a certain distance, the lighting engine broke down. Intrigued by this, I proceeded to explore the outer reaches of the Ultimate Admiral Dreadnoughts battle area with a specially designed ship, the "Worldborder or Bust". Here are some points of interest I found: Maximum Spawn Range: 25km from center, farthest spawn setting in custom battle- start point. Light Glitch Range: about 110km from center, lighting engine breaks down. Auto Navigation range: about 200 km from center, automatic steering using right click breaks
    2 points
  33. This is exciting news. I'm glad to read this. @Nick Thomadiskeep up the good work! I'll paypal you a tip, personally, if you manage to sneak functional echelon turrets into the game C;
    2 points
  34. Drach did a couple UA:D videos early last year around Alpha-5, most of which (iirc) consisted of "can we recreate (x) historical ship? Not really, no." He's one of my favourite youtube historians, so perhaps it would be good to get him back again once the ship designer has been significantly improved. Give the update a bit of public fanfare.
    2 points
  35. This is amazing! An excellent plan and a good way up slize the work! North Sea Campaign - I LOVE it!! And that is even more amazing!!!! Wooohoooo can’t wait!
    2 points
  36. How cool it would be if visible models of ships corresponded to their current identification status starting with vaguely ship shaped brick and slowly refining over time with some generalised elements, until popping in with full detail. But eh. No rush, let's wait till most critical parts are done before pestering the devs with all these small wishes.
    2 points
  37. I found this very old post but I like the ambitions described here
    2 points
  38. For the modern and super IJN BB hulls you can't fit the large funnel on any of the superstructures, can't put it anywhere on the ship.
    2 points
  39. Yep, missed this. A map / plotting table mode would be helpful. it could partially or fully replace the freecam for that "realism" feel as well. May be optional.
    2 points
  40. Algerie is also the example I used a ways back when I said armour was embarrassingly light. RL Algerie's belt armour alone (not deck or turrets) is 1,500 tons. The same belt in game was something like 450. This along with engines also being too light is the main reason all the AI ships are speed demons with insane armaments. I once saw an 11,500 ton cruisers with 15 203mm guns and a 367mm belt. That sort of belt would weight more than half the ship's entire weight in real life.
    2 points
  41. Ok, i named realistic expectations, so here are the wishes / suggestions - All (or at least main) guns of same caliber to be considered as a single group and to receive shared aiming data. - Repair that old bug or whatever it is, when not all guns fire in each salvo even when they should. - For guns to stop shooting literally backwards if RNG said so. I'm fine with it to be RNG based, just tweak the visuals so misses are not THAT stupid looking. - Consistent tech in autodesigned fleets: to counter issues mentioned above. In simple terms, program should pick a set of tec
    2 points
  42. Adding to all the above: a fix for the AI auto-designer that this time actually fixes things. Dropped this in the clowncar thread but it's worth posting here just to count the sins: Oversized destroyer tower: check Shrunken 1920s battlecruiser hull: check One (1) main gun on a pointless barbette: check Unused rear deck big enough to land a plane on: check (feature or bug? you decide) Is clearly a tugboat cosplaying as a light cruiser. An attempt was made.
    2 points
  43. For me there are two ways the German vs Britain campaign can go. The first is if you the player fail to keep British ships from taking to much territory and loss to many ships the British will invade Germany and the ending of the campaign will be the fall of the German Empire. Now the other thing is, if you manage to keep the British from taking your territory and absolutely slaughter them and push them back to Great Britain and the German Forces invade them you win and to German Empire continues and until other Nations comes out that you have to fight.
    1 point
  44. You are either for all hull/components access for every nation or you’re for nation specialized traits, you can’t be both! I’m for each nation to have there own unique hulls/components, this way each nation should be different to battle against, different to command and especially it’ll be different in the way we build/design ships of those particular nation. The scope of the game increases with each and every variance and we can play those variances by selecting its retrospecting nation. Wouldn’t this way make for a better and re-playable game? Including custom battles, like if all the
    1 point
  45. i tried to replicate the french cruiser Algeirs from 1931 ingame and i got a lot more armored equivalent for same tonnage and equipment.From my experience so far it does seem that armor is a little too light and you can get away with putting stuff like 200mm of extended deck armor.
    1 point
  46. Sidenote: In real life maintaining that archaic crap is almost impossible unless you have access to know-how from your grandfathers time. Cheaper certainly it isn't. Not to mention supporting infrastructures which no longer may be there. Speaking from bitter experience here. More related to the thread, Liberty ships in WW2 initially were built with triple expansion engine too, so certainly the know-how and tech were available but in military use USS Texas launched in 1912 and commissioned in 1914 was one of the last battleships using triple expansion engine (certainly last USA battle
    1 point
  47. Hello again all, I would like to mention the progress we have so far with Ultimate Admiral: Dreadnoughts. The game is mostly finalized in its innovative ship design mechanics and more features will make it deeper the coming months. The Ship Designer will allow players to construct and customize their own ships and will influence greatly the outcome of battles. During the campaign you will feel the tension of the Naval Arms race in a continuous struggle to construct the most powerful ships against major nations. The combat model is about 60% ready and needs more technology effects to becom
    1 point
  • Newsletter

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