Hjalfnar_Feuerwolf
-
Posts
218 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Hjalfnar_Feuerwolf
-
-
I am somewhat struggling with the different systems and I would really like to use the imperial measurement system in the game, but I am struggling with converting metric numbers into imperials just in my head. xD Would be great if the devs could find a way to display both at the same time.
-
3
-
-
Any idea when this will come out? Currently preparing my Alpha review video on the game, could be interesting to wait a few days longer for the new features.
-
On 11/25/2019 at 7:20 AM, RAMJB said:
You must be effin' kidding me. Is that true?.
DarthMods were the only thing that made TW games attractive to me. They were so, so, so, SO damned good in bringing at least a decent ammount of immersion to those games. I enjoyed RTW like nothing else just because that mod alone.
I had faith in this game, now I have a lot more
Yupp, Nick Thomadis is Darth himself.^^ I like to think the Ultimate Strategy games are his way to give Creative Assembly a kick in the butt for not hiring him as AI dev. xD Fine by me, Total War seriously needs a competitor.
-
3
-
-
On 11/25/2019 at 7:52 AM, TAKTCOM said:
As a person who has played thousands of hours on TV and hundreds of hours in Armada, I clearly see that the popularity of the multiplayer is completely inadequate for the resources spent on it. No one needs multiplayer if the main game mode is sandbox. But no, someone must shoot himself in the foot, time after time.
Did he say anything about the further development of the series? I am impressed with their ability to merge all their successes into the toilet.
Well, BFGA2 was an improvement (helped with the German translation of BFGA1 & was on the DLC/patch test team "Emperors Elite" xD), but yeah, aiming for MP with a game that is definitely made for singleplayer was...at least questionable. Told them this from the beta of BFGA1 on.
Nope, nothing on this. They are working on "something he can't tell". So there will be more, probably one or two campaign DLCs and most likely a third game set around the Indomitus Crusade as BFGA2 was a commercial, if not design success.-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, fsp said:
I have to agree about one thing: the AI is always, always, always inferior in these kind of games. I just experienced that again in RTW2 today. Fine game, but the AI needs clear superiority to compete.
UA:D needs multiplayer in the end. When I played Total War against the AI, I felt confident entering a battle even when outnumbered. When I started playing MP campaign against a friend, everything changed. Every battle was so much more exciting. Attacking a smaller neighbour would still work, but it could come at a terrible price, as my devious friend would play that AI's troops in the tactical battle and inflict hurt on me. 1v1 battles in the campaign with massive armies - it was brilliant, even if TW is far from brilliant.
No need to make it too complicated. Just allow a competitive campaign as in the latest TW games. Don't worry too much about balancing: allow for historical starts as in the base game (and let players work out the balancing), or allow for totally balanced (if unhistorical starts). Balancing will never be 100 percent fair. If players are ready to accept this, a ton of fun can be had nevertheless.
He. You do know who is the lead dev of this team, right? The guy behind the DarthMods for Total War. Go and play Ultimate General: Civil War on a setting where the AI is equipped to the same standards as you are. I am from the TW crowd too and DAMN, that game gave me a run for my money.
Also, go check MP player numbers of Total War or the Paradox games. MP players are around 1% of the playerbase. Yes, they buy more of the DLCs and with a playerbase as massive as that of Total War, there is some serious money in there. But the CA dev teams for the various TW games are what, 200 people strong each? This is a 7 men team (last time I checked).
Funnily enough I was closed beta tester for a similar game, Battlefleet Gothic Armada 2. Yes, I know, Warhammer 40k space battles is not exactly the same, but the whole thing is similar with a "world" map to navigate your fleets on and real time tactical battles. The devs spent months to get MP battles halfway balanced and make the campaign coop. And for what? Nobody I know plays MP. A few people did, but the campaigns are great and almost nobody cares about multiplayer. I talked with one of the devs about it and he said it was a serious waste of time and money. Had they gone for optimizing the campaign instead of making it coop compatible, they would have been able to release 3 months earlier and the campaigns would have been even better. They more or less dropped MP 2 months after release and made a singleplayer DLC with another campaign that sold like crazy. So yeah. MP focus can actually ruin a grand scale strategy/tactics game because most of the players will never touch it, it's only worth it if your playerbase is huge. And despite UA:D most likely being the best and most accessable naval tactics game of the last 20 years, it will not sell in the millions at full price. So it is better to make a very good campaign instead of investing a shitton of money and time into something that an extremely small percentage of the playerbase will actually ever use.-
5
-
-
No interest in PVP whatsoever. This is going to be something of a Rule the Waves and Total War combination, so yeah, MP would be cool at some point, but should be nowhere near the focus. Just look up how many people play titles like Total War or the Paradox games and how many of them play the MP. I think the quota is somewhere around 0.5 to 1%. Hard pass for me, and I have actually played Total War and Paradox stuff in MPs. No matter what you do, you need a shitton of rules and people still try to exploit, so I'd rather play my own historical accurate campaign against the typical, capable AI of this dev studio instead of having to put up with the BS of troublesome MP cheesers.
-
13
-
-
Hm, I don't know. Voice actors COULD be cool, if they aren't too talkative. In WoWs the comment everything which can get pretty anoying. But only movement and attack orders or reporting torpedo sightings, that could actually be cool and/or useful. Would happily enlist as a German voice actor. xD
-
I would like to point out that HMS Barham is a good example of how devastating torpedo hits could be at high seas, the ship capsized in less than 4 minutes, only then blowing up. Estimates are that most of the dead would have died either way as they were still inside the ship when it capsized.
-
Look at what the range tooltip says, the longer the range your ship is build for, the less maintenance and fuel it needs when sailing out. As in the campaign a lot of combat will happen around colonies and such, with CAs and CLs mostly, it's probably a good idea to prepare for that.
-
1
-
-
For 5, I am pretty sure I've read something in the various tech descriptions that engine tech etc. will have an influence on the reliability of ships. If your ships have sustained heavy damage or are simply badly designed (we had that quite a few times in history) and their maintenance raiting is below a specific threshold, I am pretty sure you might lose your ships post-battle in campaign mode. It might even make sense to add this for a pure battle mode, like in Battlefleet Gothic: Armada 1/2, where your (space) ships can be so damaged they fall prey to various more or less natural causes and are lost. Of course there should be a probability that other ships might be able to tow your ship to safety, but as we see in the aftermath of Jutland, cables might snap or heavy seas cause the rescue attempts to be called off.
For the crew, that is a MUST. We need crew, and probably morale. You are an admiral commanding a fleet (or flottilla or task force, whatever), you have to rely on your captains to do what you order them to do. Would love to see ships being unable to follow orders due to crew losses, or their captains losing their nerve...or even, though this might be unpopular, not reacting to your orders due to failure of communications, which was a huge problem in the pre-wireless communication era. This way upgrading your communication equipment would make sense even in the NavAcademy mode. -
As I am pretty new to the game, I can just say I had a few very good experiences with AP, wouldn't have been able to beat the semi-dreadnought scenario if my 11" AP hadn't penetrated and blown up the magazine of said BB on the fifth salvo.
-
Would be great if we could allocate targets to the main guns and secondaries/tertiaries separately if we want to and we really need the secondaries to fire at targets of opportunity when they don't have the main target in view. There is nothing like punching through an enemy battle line while your guns are blazing on both sides of the ship...
-
2
-
-
Alright. The solution was: Bigger guns, more armour. Fine by me, I am German. xD Maxed out armour on the BB, went for 2x2 12" turrets and a load of 4" (gimme those 8.8cm, yeah!), weathered the enemy fire to blow the enemy BB up with the fifth salvo at 6km. Ok, let's be honest, this was pure luck. Finished off the CLs easily after that, despite them managing to slam two torps in my poor BB, they didn't even come close to sinking it, all hail Kruppstahl!
-
My CL get slaughtered, no chance for them to close. I'll try a cheesy build instead of a slightly historical one and see how that works out. A shame.
-
Hey guys. I have tried to beat the Semi-Dreadnought with varying configurations of BBs and CAs now. Only time I ever came close was when my CA somehow managed to get close enough for firing two torpedoes that both hit. But before the enemy BB went down it basically shredded my CA and the enemy CLs finished me off. My own CLs, that are not under my command, are basically useless. Could someone tell me what the hell I am doing wrong?
-
Just saying, but I can't acces older blog posts, it only ever shows the newest one.
https://www.dreadnoughts.ultimateadmiral.com/blog -
Ouh, this sounds very interesting.^^
-
I am certainly interested. Also got some experience as beta tester, whatever that is worth.
-
16 hours ago, McMonkey said:
I've found melee cavalry useful early in the game, for capturing stray supply wagons, driving off pesky skirmishers and distracting enemy infantry formations & cannon. By constantly feigning an attack from behind then retreating out of seight you can force enemy batteries to constantly be turning to & fro (IE not firing on your units). If there is an isolated cannon I'll charge it, but 2-3 in a group can seriously hurt or wipe out smaller melee cavalry units. You also have to be careful when charging enemy units to force them to break. This worked for me on one occasion and the enemy infantry routed but I could not get my cavalry to respond to orders to give up the pursuit & ran right into a fresh enemy unit & were wiped out. I was raging! I've also used melee cavalry to draw away enemy infanrty who would otherwise join others in charging my own infantry lines (same kind of tactic as used on enemy batteries).
As others have noted, as the war drags on into the fortified lines stage the uses for melee cavalry tend to dry up. I've captured or recovered lots of carbines and despite not being a huge fan of dragoon type cavalry I've made decent use of them as dismounted skirmishers in some battles. For the cost I'd rather just use regular skirmishers where possible.
I do think the balance of cavalry works well for this game. Shock melee cavalry would be great but it could really upset the balance in favour of a canny human player who could simply send massed cavalry on wide flanking manouvers & then charge in to the enemys rear, trapping them like the Romans at Cannae. As it stands you can try this tactic but it won't be a one stroke killer blow as in games like the Total War series. I also like the way routing enemy units regroup relatively quickly instead of fleeing the field. Annoying when the battle is obviously won/lost, but more challeging to play against.
First on, you know the F key orders a fallback move of your unit, meaning pressing it several time lets units in close combat leave said engagements and gives you back control. It also gives you the option to retreat units without exposing your back, as units in a fallback move don't count as being shot in rear.
I also quite like how the cav situation is right now, especially as it is historically fitting. Neither side ever had really good close combat or charge cavalry, because they lacked the trained horses AND riders for that. But both sides heavily utilized cav as mounted light infantry, which had a huge impact in quite some battles like Gettysburg, where Buffords cavalry held off Lees forces long enough (with the help of some serious errors on the CSA side) for the Union to occupy the highly advantageous terrain. This most likely won the battle. And in the game you are absolutely capable of doing exactly the same, I certainly did so once (just for fun) with my 3- and 2-star-skirmcav concentrated in one division at Gettysburg, digging in and holding of repeated charges by the rebels.^^ With Sharps Carbines and Spencers they are devastating... -
Finished the video. Thanks for the help guys!
-
Just saying, the script is mostly done, thank you all very very much for your insight. You might find a few things you mentioned in this thread in the video that will hopefully be released in a few days.
-
Yupp, expend your AI allies to the max in the early battles, not only does that mean less losses for your forces, it also means more weapons for you to salvage after the batte.
-
1
-
-
Thank you. She even went to Tankfest with me this year, which is a 30 hour ride/sail from Hannover in Germany, I have no idea why a nerd like me got so lucky...probably because she is just as nerdy. She even plays video games, though more adventures, and loves Star Wars, Stark Trek and Game of Thrones. As a thank-you gift she is now off for the weekend with her BFF to the M'era Luna festival, bought her the cards as a present and planned everything. xD Four days off without kids watching her favourite bands...while I am able to play as much on the PC as I want because the kids are staying overnight at their friends and grandmas, win-win.^^
-
1
-
-
14 hours ago, Percon said:
Videos are easy to make, you want to see them coming? I might be wrong on some, they might be engine limitations, and other things that are unable to be changed, due to the way the game is made, but plenty of work to be done, still an early release, far from being called finished game, with missing features, and options.
...I remember you, you're that midget squeeker kid, YouTube star wanna be, that keeps on spawning his gameplays.
You got a link to my topic, provide better score [only K/D ratio matters, nothing else], you have as much time as you like, I will ignore your failplays on YouTube.
Challenge accepted?
Major General, Confederate campaign.
08.08.2018
Seeing I just did 4 missions, you don't have that much to work on.
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.
BTW, the let's play stuff is more for relaxing.
Please give us both, imperial & metric!
in General Discussions
Posted
Read my post again, please. BOTH. At the same time.