Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 09/11/2021 in all areas

  1. Greetings Admirals, The next major patch for Ultimate Admiral: Dreadnoughts has just become available! This large update is the precursor of the first campaign version of the game. We decided to release not together with the campaign since it has many new features which owe to be tested solely. Please read everything about it in our blog: https://www.dreadnoughts.ultimateadmiral.com/post/core-patch-0-5-released Your feedback will be much appreciated, as always! Note: There is a known bug of freeze if you click mouse button while waiting to load a battle. If you choose to
    22 points
  2. Hello all, We were ready to release, as we fixed and optimized all majors aspects, but we found a potential crash problem that could be caused if you clicked mouse button while waiting for AI fleet design in the loading window. We cannot release without this bug fixed, so please wait until tomorrow. PS. We are sorry for the anxiety and anticipation caused so far, but we want you to play the game with the best quality and stability possible.
    21 points
  3. The year is 2036. Hot, clammy winds blow over the sprawling marshes under which lay what some used to call 'Europe'. The sun is hidden, barely visible behind a thick and dense smog, but the horizon is illuminated by the eternally raging wildfires that roll in waves through the ruins of the continent. The stalker is short, his frame little more than a skeleton; scarce protein is found since the Hyperdroughts of '32 and '34. He looks around nervously before lifting a hatch, previously hidden under some dirt, and slinks into his burrow. He puts down the rusted harpoon in one corner, his cat
    11 points
  4. Hello all, A hotfix has just been uploaded which includes the following: *Hotfix v88* (17/9/2021 UPDATE) - Fixed major bug of gun armor resetting for saved designs, when trying to apply new gun armor settings. - Fixed major bug of armor penetration, incorrectly evaluating the armor thickness of guns and causing too many detonations and flash fires. - Fixed issue with part selection in ship design, that could become overly big and inaccurate. - Fixed bug that caused keyboard edit of gun armor to use only inches measurement. - Fixed bugs of Auto-Design which could cause build
    10 points
  5. Thanks for noting. This was an "ancient" issue and it will be fixed. Saves are stored in "AppData" folder of Windows e.g. C:\Users\YOURUSERNAME\AppData\LocalLow\Game Labs\Ultimate Admiral Dreadnoughts Crew losses are supposed to simulate realistic conditions. Despite players wanting crew to die by the hundreds, in history ships were not having extreme losses, unless they were sunk or detonated. You can read about the casualties of Derfflinger and Seydlitz in the Battle of Jutland for the matter. We try to properly simulate the conditions of crew casualties caused by direct
    9 points
  6. Oh come on, you personally convinced me that we have to revert this change in the upcoming hotfix
    8 points
  7. The update has just been released! You can share your feedback here:
    8 points
  8. I'll be honest, if it doesn't come out today, I'm gonna be extremely disappointed. It's clear that they meant today by their previous statement. If they do delay it again, it's clear they're incompetent in their abilities to give out release dates and be honest with the community. Better to cover your backs than give out false promises.
    8 points
  9. Again Thanks very much, it is exactly the communication we need. Look forward to tomorrow!
    8 points
  10. We were demanding more communication and precision. This is exactly that! Thanks very much for keeping us inform. This is exactly the kind of communication we need! To know what is going ! Again thanks very much!
    8 points
  11. Also thank you for the more detailed and transparent look into what is going on in the process. This keeps the players/customers informed and feeling engaged!
    7 points
  12. Who's excited for tomorrow? I am!
    7 points
  13. I strongly disagree. Now just to be upfront I have been defending the devs delays and such multiple times mostly on the steam forum. I have worked IT and software dev all my adult life. The delays are understandable especially with covid. That being said the communication is some of the worst I have ever seen. Long term goals being missed is understandable. There are weeks or months between them and things can happen, these things can get compounded by other things which causes other problems that snowball. That being said when you give a timeline for the same week, there are very few
    7 points
  14. 6 points
  15. I think the designer is indeed the biggest issues with the most work needed still. Campaign is important to create a setting to use these ships but being able to construct them properly is the main selling point for me. I wrote up a summary of what I would like to see a while ago but I am not sure if the devs agree with me on this (although length to beam ratio was announced a while ago - haven’t seen any word on it yet though)
    6 points
  16. Ok just been looking into the smoke interference mechanics and they look completely backwards to me. So currently smoke interference is based solely on the funnels, which makes no sense since funnels don't generate smoke, the engine does. For example if I have 2 funnels on my ship (100% engine effectiveness) and I add a 3rd redundant funnel in case of damage, instead of reducing the smoke interference as you might expect, it increases it by 50%. What I'd suggest is this. Remove the smoke interference stat from funnels. Instead directly calculate it from the engine hp * a multiplier
    5 points
  17. YES! If they can't handle it themselves, then let the community pitch in, too.
    5 points
  18. Restoke the boilers, the dreadnought fleet is lifting anchor!
    5 points
  19. That and all the scummys thing peegee has been doing for the past 2 years (even more so in the recent CC exodus and how they have been treating both colleague and community alike in the past month). Game has potential, but its going now where sad as its quite fun but horribly frustrating.
    5 points
  20. Nobody's mad that they're finally communicating. That's objectively a good thing. Personally, I'm mad at myself more than anything, because I let myself get hyped up like an idiot. I've been frantically refreshing this board all week. When patch day finally rolled around, I spent the entire day at work positively itching to come home and play my favourite game's new patch. I'm not exaggerating when I say that it's literally been on my mind all week, only to see it postponed at the absolute last minute. Once again they're over-promising and under-delivering. It's nothing out of the ordin
    5 points
  21. So, now we have apx 68 dreadnought, super, modern and experimental battleship hulls, and only 16 pre-dreadnought hulls. @Nick Thomadisdo you ever plan on fleshing out the pre-dreadnought fleet with an equal amount of hulls? Any other pre-dreadnought hulls planned? Or are you content with the content you've got?
    4 points
  22. You should really, really redesign the module selection thingy at the bottom. The hull section becomes really crowded when designing a lot of different ship classes, and if you turn on unlock, it becomes completely unusable
    4 points
  23. I doubt it, seeing as they never really listen to good advice. But we can hope.
    4 points
  24. If they add this game to the Steam workshop I know the first thing I'll be doing. Do yOu SeE mY PlAn!?
    4 points
  25. They really should just release it on steam as soon as possible, and open it to the workshop as well.
    4 points
  26. Getting a bit concerned, though hope we are still getting it today. Quite excited for the new Italian content.
    4 points
  27. (In palpatine voice) Commander Nick The time has come Execute core patch 0.5
    4 points
  28. WG and balance are two different things sadly. They almost never listen to the community, and this is a very big issue. I was a ship collector but I closed my wallet ine year ago. They don't deserv my money at all.
    4 points
  29. One that has bugged me for a bit. Why all the hull weight/engine weight modifiers for equipment that has very little to do with that part of the ship. I mean the boiler been a engine weight multiplier makes sense, the boiler has to scale with the engine, but why a hull weight modifier? If I put the same engine in a bigger ship, why does the boiler suddenly have to weigh more? Why does propellent choice affect hull weight? If I've got the same number of guns on 20kt ship and a 40kt ship, the weight saving should be the same right not proportional to hull weight. Not like the larger
    3 points
  30. After messing with the game for a significant period of time, I'm fairly sure that turret armor is actually bugged as it's getting overpenetrated by 2 inch shells with consistency. I'm less sure about superstructure armor though, it's difficult to tell the details with it.
    3 points
  31. Over and over again it seems like the insistence on AI designed warships is sabotaging everything else.
    3 points
  32. I assume that you'd get back pressure from the funnel which would cause the engine to lose efficiency, so was going on the assumption at 100% efficiency was at the point the smoke was at maximum thickness for the engines working at 100%, as below that you'd still be producing less smoke anyway as the engine is restricted by air-flow. So it makes sense that any extra capacity after that is mainly for thinning the smoke. Can't see this would be a big change to implement either.
    3 points
  33. Yeah I have mentioned it a few times currrently you can build ships with no turret armour and as in battle whatever you set it, to it will reset to defaults and it can also happen in ship designer too I think there is some issue with the designs not saving turret armour as its the only way I can see them getting lost all the time.
    3 points
  34. Right from the horse's mouth of official US ordnance documents: https://bulletpicker.com/pdf/OP 1664, US Explosive Ordnance, Volume 1.pdf#page=37 Usage continues for all naval shells down the line. 5"/54, 6"/47, 8"/55, both standard and superheavy shells for that, etc. According to Navweaps.com it was used in an upgraded, higher-density packing with superior sealing methods in later iterations.
    3 points
  35. No worries, when its done is done, we can always find another game or make other merry. its all about experience, why shall we pay to bad one.
    3 points
  36. Now that it's Tuesday, let's try this again: Who's ready for a patch?!
    3 points
  37. alternatively...it's done when its done.
    3 points
  38. definitely more smaller updates, i.e. patch 1.1, 1.2, etc... a smaller patch every 2 or 3 weeks would be a lot better then a giant patch every 3 months also a few non game-breaking bugs are acceptable in my opinion since alpha/core is about adding the core features and not so much optimization, which would be the beta versions
    3 points
  39. The dev team themselves keep setting the expectations they keep failing. No communication and no sense of when work will be done is what gets people angsty. You can't keep saying something will be out then delay it, that just makes it look like you have no idea of what amount of work is left or how sound the product is at any given time.
    3 points
  40. I'm fine with waiting a bit longer. I would much rather wait to get something that works properly then get it immediately and it doesn't function properly.
    3 points
  41. They're in a lose-lose situation really, if they don't release, everybody is going to HIT THE ROOF. If they do, and it's not ready, people are going to complain about bugs.
    3 points
  42. So, I'd imagine the whole crew aspect will be similar to that of Ultimate Admiral: Age of Sail, where you assign your own commanders to your ship and the rest of the crew is just auto generated. Or will it be much different to this? What do you guys think?
    3 points
  43. Yeah, they are a bit limiting. But people want them, so we want at least visual variety on them. They are 2 thirds of the early game content after all, and people still want to make these forgotten casemated things. Yeah, people like big ships they can customize. The issue is, we dont want just big ships. Variety and immersion dont come in just seeing diverse (and unlrealistic) modern big ships. We also want the tiny ones, the old ones, etc. If you just fought large modern BBs and BCs for the entire game, you would be bored no matter how diverse their design was. The issue is not big
    3 points
  44. But submarines dho, but submarines! Ha! On man those subs, wew lad. I am just amazed that WG thinks any of that is okay. I was in both closed and open beta for WoWS and have hardly played since, I was considering going back for subs but just nah, I can't even watch submarine game play.
    3 points
  45. I uninstalled this game 2 month ago. I played this game since the beginning, and I loved it, but the current meta is a no for me.
    3 points
  46. I don't post here much and I'm fairly easy going but when dev's can't meet their own deadlines it makes me wonder about how the dev team is led. We get a somewhat detailed decription of what's in the update, with the last line saying that it's schedule for this week. Now, it's next week because it's still in testing. Why make a point to highlight that the update was supposed to drop this week if you weren't 100% sure. That's customer service 101... you don't promise a customer something that you aren't completely sure that you can deliver. And the dev's wonder why people are trash talking thi
    3 points
  • Newsletter

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