Andre Bolkonsky
-
Posts
1,129 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Andre Bolkonsky
-
-
On 8/24/2018 at 12:27 PM, DeRuyter said:
To me this looks to be a single player game first with an option for limited multiplayer (not MMO style), like UGG. I could be wrong but that's the way I read Nick's description.
Knowing how Gettysburg and Civil War developed over time, I would say this is an excellent guess.
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, Fred Sanford said:
The V-25 was a typical German DD of WW 1. Actually, the Germans did call them torpedo boats, emphasized the torpedo armament over the guns in their designs. British destroyers tended to be larger and equipped with more guns but fewer torpedoes. Late war V&W class DD's were excellent all-around designs and many survived to serve in WW 2.
Good answer, but the question belonged to Norfolk, not myself.
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, Norfolk nChance said:
Makes sense, and assume not that reliable spotting targets either. With Jutland I’ve two questions...
Communications, how did this happen between fleet Dreadnaughts? Beatty and Jellicoe seem to have issues between command. Directing your own fleet was it still Flags, flashlight or Radio by then?
The German Torpedo Boats, were these light destroyers like the V-25? I assume real submarines came much later on towards the end of the war?
Norfolk
No. Germany had true diesel U-boats starting 1911. From the Fall of 1914 going forward, U-boats are sinking ships with self propelled torpedoes, and finishing them off with deck guns. Certainly, U-boat range and effectiveness progressed exponentially during the war with the combat experience provided. But submarines used as forward recon with wireless communications will be an issue during Jutland.
Regarding communications, wireless radios are still in their infancy. They are generally reliable, but RDF (radio direction finders) is already in use. To use a wireless, from a sub that spots capital ships, is one thing. For the main battle fleet to use wireless communications will tip the fleet's position to the enemy when you begin transmitting that much chatter. Certainly, the technology is in its infancy, and will be nothing like the US picking up signals bouncing off the Japanese carrier fleet inbound for Pearl Harbor on December 5th; but it must be taken into account by the admiralty. Therefore, flags and signals are still the order of the day.
-
1
-
-
15 hours ago, Norfolk nChance said:
“One of my favorite eras ever, can't wait to start building my dream fleet!”
Would love to see the USS Texas when next in Houston great looking ship.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NN_ThoXR9GQ
[WoWs] Legend advert
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sjx0YFyekt8
Stats breakdown and gameplay at 16:50 or so. Are the stats close in accuracy?
A Huge supporter of @admin and GLs hard core style but would say caution is needed regarding Aircraft and peripheral machines in the game. Read @Sir R. Calder of Southwick comment on aircraft at the time.
World of Warships [WoWs] creates the USS Texas beautifully in the game. However, gameplay I find very weak indeed (the entire game). Major floors occur regarding the use of Aircraft carriers and spotting as a whole. The threat of introducing Torpedo boats, submarines not destroyers received a major backlash.
Fleet mechanics is terrible on the Random game but better on a Campaign style mission which is Co-Op. When ready I’d like to hear a general game outline and a similar Me2 product. [WoWs] doesn’t do it justice in my opinion.
With @Nick Thomadis on side maybe the MMO style is not the way to go? But I’m no games developer...
Norfolk nChance [ELITE]
I don't think anyone would imagine combat aircraft, or carriers, could be included in a dreadnought based game. The introduction of combat aircraft is really the breaking point between the Dreadnought / Battleship Capital Ship dominated fleets and the Carrier Task Forces that RULE the oceans in World War II.
Spotting aircraft, on the other hand, would be available to the TOP TIER fleet if you use WWI / Jutland as the ending point of this conflict. And aircraft wouldn't appear until the final fleets sail during the endgame.
-
1
-
-
This past week, I took my daughter and nephew to tour the USS Texas, "The Last Remaining Dreadnought", which is moored just outside Houston and is now a permanent museum ship. A trip I have made many times.
In particular is the layout of the ship, the gun deck where its secondary batteries poke out of the side armor rather than placed in the 5" ring guns that will become ubiquitous (and deadly) on future US battleships. And the five primary gun turrets configured in AB-Q-XY formation holding two 14" naval rifles each. And the primative rangefinders located all over the ships, a novel invention when she was launched.
She is also the first US ship to mount dedicated anti-aircraft guns, and to have launched an aircraft (from #3 turret) from a moving naval vessel. She provided shore bombardment both to support amphibious operations during the Normandy invasion; and later at Iwo Jima and Okinawa.
It's ships like this that really excite me about this game, and the ability to design and deploy a gradually more and more technologically advanced fleet. The position of the primary and secondary batteries, the possibility of early AAA, torpedo blisters and tubes, primative recon aircraft to help spotting. So many exciting possibilities. And the ability to site the batteries in front of the superstructure, as in HMS Nelson or IJN Izumo; or behind to kite an enemy and bombard while pulling away.
USS Texas, which would be the end of the production lines this game will encompass (I am guessing that some sort of Jutland type engagement will be Nick's last battle to cap the game) has a fabulous history, and is in desperate shape. It needs to be placed in a permanent drydock to prevent further corrosion of her hull. It would be a shame if this ship were scrapped, too much of our history has become disposable.
-
3
-
-
On 8/3/2018 at 12:50 PM, DeRuyter said:
Protected cruiser within time frame:
Is it just me, or do others immediately begin reading the signal flags to figure out which combat bonuses this ship will receive in WoWs?
A beautiful shot of the Queen of the Pacific with Philadelphia as a backdrop. The Flying O was a hell of a ship in her time.
I also like the shot of the snout of the USS Becuna on her starboard side.
-
1
-
-
On 8/18/2018 at 7:50 AM, Nick Thomadis said:
@Norfolk nChance
When the game enters a phase of development to make it ready for more interaction with the community, we will organize a special forum and we will share more information at a constant base. Thank you for all the positive energy and interest.
@HachiRoku
Yes, it's me
One of my favorite eras ever, can't wait to start building my dream fleet!
-
1
-
-
10 hours ago, Hjalfnar_Feuerwolf said:
Sorry, was busy celebrating my tenth wedding anniversary. Haven't played the rebels in a while, I will give it a try in a week or so when I am done with Silent Hunter 5. Thankfully I have time now after the Battfleet Gothic: Armada 2 closed beta ended.
BTW, the let's play stuff is more for relaxing.
Congratulations to your wife for putting up with you for ten years! 😎
Seriously. Congrats.
-
2
-
-
7 hours ago, Percon said:
You are still -3k casulties, but thank you for the screenshot.
Downloaded version 1.09 from the internet, loaded my saves, reinforcements appeared at 3.07~ minute mark.
I will finish this mission this way, then just load the save on Steam.
Yes, I do. I have been here since an early release. Purchased the game, saw that forum is mostly ignored by everyone responsible for the game, made a refund, got it. Patches started to appear, bought it again, and... Déjà vu, just as everything was ignored, it still was. As I have wrote before, I would not be so salty if Nick admitted he is a fool, and this project was more than he was capable of doing. Just say it, make a topic where he apologize his customers. This game had a potential.
Another problem is that it was not tested, and seeing you are of these so called "testers" you are responsible for the poor state of the game. What did Nick tell you to do? What kind of test have you done? Click an icon on the desktop, and see if it works? It launches, so ya, it works, test completed.
OH, wait. I remember you.
You are that . . . individual . . . who bought the game because school was out for the weekend. Because a particular patch / battle release was delayed by 48 hours and you would not be able to play during recess you loudly demanded a refund. Then disappeared, only to reappear at this time. I guess school is back out.
You are hard to forget, in the entire history of this game you are the only individual who has acted or behaved this way.
-
5
-
-
2 hours ago, Percon said:
I am not expecting Nick to answer, because he does not even give a fck about this forum, or the Steam one, bugs, or anything at all.
Have I asked for this? No. Did anyone else? I hardly doubt. This game has a lot of flaws, this change is just another one, that needs to be added to the list.
Topic will remain unedited, by me. Dropping so called patches, that only fck with the players, insteading of making them enjoy the game more, is ridiculous.
With all due respect, you have no idea what you are talking about.
If you think Nick and Sterner don't care about this game, you are merely reinforcing what I just said.
If you think being a jerk is going to help you, you are wrong again.
However, if you want some help with the game, this forum is FULL of seasoned vets who love to help support new players and teach them what they know.
Your choice.
-
2
-
-
Drop the insults, ask the question in a respectable manner, there are a plethora of players who would be happy to help you.
The way this is phrased, good luck.
-
5
-
-
What the hell?
-
2
-
-
Memorial Day was established in the United States to remember the Fallen in the War of the Rebellion, and has since expanded to remember all the combatants in all of America's wars.
The graves of soldiers were decorated with flowers, and their names remembered.
We have not forgotten.
-
6
-
-
On 4/24/2018 at 10:25 PM, Gray_Lensman said:
I can accept that the manual was not updated constantly. Most game manuals tend to be dated, but from what I'm observing while playing, it does still seem to hold true about the Infantry brigades having the same arc and range no matter the weapon. Am I observing this correctly? And if so, when a skirmisher is spawned off, does it have the longer range associated with (of course) the same brigade infantry weapon, but not being used in volley mode?
Yes, each regiment has the exact same firirng arc.
Watch the bullets fly and you'll see which weapons greatly exceed the arc.
-
The Manual was written in the infancy of the game. It was decided it was not worth updating as the game evolved. Any information in there is suspect.
I can guarantee you that is a true statement.
An infantry unit can spawn a skirmisher upon command, that skirmisher unit has the exact same weapon/range/firepower of the infantry brigade that produced it. The skirmisher unit moves like a skirmisher rather than an infantry unit, but its weapon is unchanged.
-
6 hours ago, Gael said:
Mukremin,
For a quick bit of info on CSS Alabama, check https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSS_Alabama .
Raiders like the CSS Alabama and CSS Shenandoah are said to have impacted the northern shipping owners in convincing many of them to register their ships under other countries' flags in case the South would eventually rise up once more.
I don't know anything about a conflict in the Bering Sea.
--Gael
It was a Confederate surface raider, British built, steam-screw propulsion; The Sea King.
It circumnavigated the globe and its last sortie was to lay waste to the American whaling fleet operating in the Bering Sea after the actual end of hostilities because of a lack of communications.
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, Hussar91 said:
Ps. To perhaps illustrate my point i’ll mention the widely applauded “Dunkirk”. It’s good and i like it. But it wasn’t accurate at all despite what so many have spoke about that movie. There was a bucketlist of stuff they got wrong and if to be absolutely critic they shown dunkirk totally wrong. But they haven’t used cgi at least.
Most specifically renaming James Campbell Coulston as 'Commander Bolton'.
There was only one Pier Master, he was a hero in every sense of the word; failing to use his name to make it a universal story of all men is just plain wrong.
Other than that, I saw the movie in the theater. I had that sound in my head for days of the clock unwinding. Rather brilliant.
-
20 hours ago, Hitorishizuka said:
It's very bothersome, honestly. You can see me do it all the time in my playthroughs and it takes a lot of micro to combine the divisions and it creates a bit of temporary weakness from time to time because you don't always have the brigades to cover the ground you need to because you're always a few short due to combinations.
On the other hand, especially with how early you can get Fayettevilles as CSA, you can get some devastating effects out of them done right.
Yes. I agree. It is fun to figure out how it works and to have one or two divisional brigades for special purposes. But it is very tiresome to manage lots of them in any major battle or for a prolonged period of time where in one battle the rifles and their consort will spawn side by side, and at dawn the next day they are scattered around the map.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, A. P. Hill said:
OKay so apparently I've been going about this all ass-backwards ... I thought I read that you had to select the "consort" first, then the "elite" second ...
yeah, it is a move that takes patience and planning. It takes a few tries to get it optimized.
-
7 hours ago, MikeK said:
Thanks
So corps commanders are interchangeable for rallying, morale, etc other than buff circle size and,
keeping divisions together confers no benefit vs mixing and matching units from various divisions or corps EXCEPT proximity helping to merge brigades.
Can you describe correct best practice/technique to merging? I have tried it a few times - it seemed to work once - the other times it did not but the battle moved on.
So, let's say you are playing Union and you have a couple of hundred Fayetteville Rifles and you'd like to build an elite assault unit; or want to maximize your slim supply of Henry or Spencer rifles. . .
Within one well commanded division: give the Fayetteville rifles to the most elite unit you possess that has few enough men to equip them. Pick a second brigade and place it in the same division to be its consort. Name both brigades appropriately so you'll understand which is which in the rattle of battle.Side note, make sure the other brigades in this division are well commanded because they will lose the Divisional General's buffs to command and efficiency when you combine brigade.
The Consort Brigade wants to be as large as possible, as elite as possible, and armed the worst firearms in your inventory. What you want, and this will depend on the exact number of rifles you are trying to use, is a brigade of 2,500 men totaled between the rifle brigade and its consort AFTER you deploy skirmishers. This takes a bit of practice, don't get frustrated if it doesn't work the first time. Try, try again.
On the battlefield, have the rifle unit and its consort move to very close proximity to one another. Deploy skirmishers in both brigades. Select the elite rifle unit and order it to combine division, and the consort will begin to be absorbed. When the new brigade has formed, recall skirmishers; and you will have a heavy, elite, well-armed unit
This is one possible outcome: A Divisional Brigade of Spencer Rifles parked in the Devil's Den in Gettysburg laying waste to any Rebel brigade that gets near it. When they bring up their artillery, they scampered to the top of the hill and continued firing. This, BTW, is my favorite screenshot EVER:
Notice the brigade is armed with Spencer Rifles, was originally 2,771 men strong, and surrounded by Rebel dead. Regardless of what you name either the rifle brigade or its consort, the brigade name will change to the commanding general's. In this case, 'Owen'.
-
2
-
-
18 hours ago, Hjalfnar_Feuerwolf said:
Started thinking about 7 Years War...could also be pretty cool. Still strongly supporting German Unification Wars, though.
My favorite game of all time was a tabletop miniatures 'Seven Years War' game a group I knew played back in college. The core group were a couple of lawyers, a physician, and the history professor and between them they could field a massive army of lead. The professor thought it a great way to teach Linear Tactics, and invited students who might be interested. I became a rabid fan, and lead Austria to ultimate victory during a year long campaign fighting out the entire war in Europe. Grenzers and Croat Skirmishers followed by Hungarian infantry and their plethora of field guns flanked by Currassier and Dragoons for the win.
-
9 hours ago, Sanny said:
Any such game will have to be bigger and better than before. I remember launching Civil War for the first time, I was blown away by how improved and expanded the gameplay was from Gettysburg (a title I played through countless times before). The first CSA and Union missions caught me off-guard with stuff I wasn't expecting, the forts, the ironclads, the armoured trains... Any such sequel will have to take a risk and delve into uncharted waters too.
If it's anything though, I've heard a lot of my friends say they wished Civil War had an actual campaign map, at least something you could move your armies around on (similar to Total War). They weren't also thrilled about the whole army scaling issue (which improved later) and the fact that each battle's outcome didn't really contribute to different scenarios other than a pure defeat and game over. People missed the decision making that Gettysburg had, granted though that was one battle, not the 50 odd battles Civil War has but I still think there was that desire for dynamic battles even for replayability value.
There's a lot of possibilities of what the sequel may be but it will have to get the things that put some people off Civil War right.
Gentlemen,
This is Sanny. A die hard Scot who lives up to every stereotype you can imagine, and a hell of a good guy.
Sanny introduced me to Ultimate General: Civil War. He talked me into buying and playing it just about the time Dartis and Sterner released the Shiloh battle. And unless I'm mistaken that's his first post ever on this forum.
He is a mensch, and a friend of mine from the Paradox game forums. Take care of him. Give him just as much grief as you'd give me, and he'll hand it right back to you again.
Please join me in welcoming him to the forum.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, jekct1212 said:
Now, this is a hint!
You are a man who can read between the lines . . . . Bravo.
-
During development of the game, at one point in time, 'Combine Unit' to form a divisional brigade was a solid strategy to create large units using elite weaponry.
The tactic has been nerfed since that point, and Aetius' explanation works well in that regard. There are morale and command penalties to a divisional brigade that make it an emergency mesaure rather than a game strat.
BTW, the let's play stuff is more for relaxing.
Work in progress: Dreadnoughts
in General Discussions
Posted
The internal configuration would be interesting, protection of the citadel and the ammunition / fuel storage areas being crucial. Where the boilers go, the stacks go; where the guns go, the ammunition goes. I can't wait to see how this is being modeled in the game. The naval rifles, ammunition lifts, and ammo compartments will be fun to site around the ship; and the differing gun calibers determine how many rifles a ship will hold. Secondary batteries, torpedo tubes, so many variables.
Patience is a virtue. I am told.