Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Mindfield

Members
  • Content Count

    18
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

20 Excellent

About Mindfield

  • Rank
    Landsmen

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Germany
  1. Some not already mentioned points: 1. UI Option to disable all floating numbers. 2. Fog of War Options maybe as part of difficulty settings : - No exact Information about what is damaged (non visible) - No Information about gun reload status and torpedo reload status (incl. launch sound) - No exact ship model before certain %
  2. Firing Test 1: I cant sink the CL anymore. If I play safe and keep distance, I ran out of time because the BB hits nothing. If I play agressive the CL sinks me every single time now. Something is wrong.
  3. I hope they keep focus on the single player mode. There are already 2,5 games in it: 1. Tactical Battles 2. Strategy Game Here they can put a lot of efford in it. 2,5 Ship Designer Maybe unfair to call it 0,5 game, since there are many things involved to make this whole thing working. In the end, the strategy game decides if it will be a great game or not. Scenarios and battle generator (if it will be put in) will last only so long. But give it a purpose and win a war is what I want to see. Some may remember Falcon 4.0. Why does it still exist today? Because of the campaign engine, which ruined Microprose making it, but it is what sets it apart form even the most modern Flight-Sims. Adding multiplayer to UA:D takes away ressources and is not what I imagine of that game.
  4. Just a report how fun this game can be and how effective torpedoes are. The mission "Armored Convoy Attack" is to sink the TRs. How about sinking all ships! I build 4 CL with 16 tubes each firing 21" electric torpedoes. This is brutal fun. The 21" torpedoes pack a serious punch, and you fire 64 of them! Reload is 10 minutes, but after the first wave of torpedoes, the enemy is already crippled. It takes some time to sink the rest and catch the fleeing TRs, the CL going only 22kn, but it worked. Best part, I didnt lost a single ship.
  5. My guess is, that the most modern reload modules are missing.
  6. @SiiljakkiJetzt lernst du was fürs Leben: Kaufe ein Spiel erst wenn es fertig ist! Ist für deine Nerven einfach besser. Unfertiges Spiel = hohes Risiko. Mal abgesehen davon, dass auch fertige Spiele Mist sein können
  7. Remove Hit Counter. What is the point of it anyway? There are visual clues if you hit or not.
  8. Guess why I wrote "guess" in quotes. Seems you guessed wrong.
  9. Sextant "perk" is nonsens. Getting a rough or good enough position is elemental part of sailing. And at that time we had the tools to do so. Im not sure when the naval clock was introduced to get the longitude. Do someone know the age old game B-17 Flying Fortress form 1992? (Yes, Im a bit older^^) There was an "AI" navigator who "guessed" the possition of the bomber. The position was only rough and the player could manually corret the position on your best judgement on the navigation map. In fact you had to correct him, because the "guess" was all the time a bit off. If your judgment was off, you could miss the target area too. I think this mini-game can be used in NA too. Your officers will "guess" the position, but you can manually correct it on the map. For that we need a new tool to measure distance. Then you can tell your friends: "50k NW of Macao" No "Perk" or F11 required any more.
  10. All the following is for PvE-Server: This game requieres a lot of patience. It is not the usual type of game with fast gratification some players are used to. I was nearly 3 years away and started over like a newbie, had forgotten almost everything. But what I remember was trader hunting and sinking lone warships. It was fun to capture trader and sell the loot. For this to do there was no need to travel too far. This has changed dramaticaly, the sea feels almost empty. But I like it now more, because it is less crowded and it feels a bit better somehow. I think new people need more pointers in the right direction to do their stuff. I really like the tutorial, the exams not so much. I struggled massive and failed Endurance to a point I gave up and luckily there is the "Skip" button. This button should be a lot more prominent and it should be initially made clear the exams are optional! Pointing this out to people in chat made them happy. I dont know how many will silently quit the game because of the exams. For a new player the AI seems to be a real challenge, extreme good aim and doing crazy manoeuvres. Again some pointers would help, like improve the ship with upgrades and skills. The last one was total new to me and I found out only yesterday. So far I have not encountered a trader, but I will go search for them. Thanks for the AI-Pictures btw. I can imagine a mission type like "Capture enemy trading vessel" to ease the beginner problems and spawning a battle like the "Kill" missions. Would add some variety too.
  11. Yes, I know what they want to achieve with this scaling. But getting punished for success is not fun. If the difficulty level is too easy, then I can choose to increase it and make things harder. But if I play good on Colonel I got harder battles than PegLegFatty on BG, then there is something wrong. My point is, that the game does not tell me, that my army is already big enough for that kind of difficult level and increasing my army would increase the overall difficulty. I did some experiments on BG and Battle of Shiloh (all minor battles won, recon 4): Initially the game told me I am facing 44k enemy troops. My own strength, including what is already on the board , was 27k. I pumped as many men I could muster into my army, and my final troop count was 40k. The AI numbers for the battle was suddenly 41k. Why was it going down? This is completly not understandable for me. The game gives absolutly no explanation. The absolute numbers were then: Union: 46575 Inf 174 Cav 1666 Art CSA: 38798 Inf 2100 Cav 3000 Art If I want a harder game, I want to make that decission, not the game in some artificial way that I can not understand.
  12. Why were my battles much harder on Colonel difficulty? I had a much larger army and the manpower pool of the CSA was a lot smaller. Currently I try BG difficulty, and again my battles are much harder than the battles shown here by PegLegFatty. Multiple times I completely destroyed the AI army, and still it came out stronger. e.g. Antietam: I surrounded the CSA and completly wiped it out, killing 37k troops. Then it got reinforced with 59k new troops. The inscrutable scaling of the AI is the most annoying thing so far in this game! For me it seems the AI downscales in PegLegFattys battles, making it easiers than it should be. Anyone tried to make the smallest army possible and still beat the game?
  13. After some searching, I found a map that shows what ports are controlled by nation. It is based on player input. And it is an unusual place (I didnt expected it there): http://www.navalactioncraft.com/map
  14. Sandbox games or theme park games can have long or short sessions. And you are rude, limited play time != carebear != theme park games. And I am not complaining about the grind, just making clear that grouping is not the "solution" for everyone.
  15. I am too one of the limited time players, playing on the PvE-Server (Interruptions, Session Length) Now imagine a session time of 1 to 2 hours: You have to focus what you want to do in that time: - Shopping and crafting, depends, can take 1-2 hours - Doing Missions, 3-4 Missions per hour - Hunt Traders, 2-3 Traders per hour All that done solo. I have never grouped up so far in NA, but these are my concerns: - Gathering time (find players, get from A to B, waiting) - Time to find appropriate target Many MMOs solved this by e.g.: - letting you teleport to your groupleader - no or minor time lost to find an appropriate "target" or content due to "teleport" or short travel times Allways of concern are, but not limited to NA: - Battletime - Interruptions A lot of time in NA is simple "wasted" by getting from A to B. Focusing on gaining rank XP is possible and OK, as long for me I am able to do it solo and not run into a time- or content-gate (e.g. Port-Battles(PvP-Server), impossible Missions). Grouping as an alternative, would need to be significant more profitable to compensate all the time lost.
×
×
  • Create New...