Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Navalus Magnus

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

357 Excellent

About Navalus Magnus

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

1,899 profile views
  1. Also: If devs would grant us the boon of a multiplayer dlc anytime in the future, op guns would decrease the value of it significantly! If you played against a player you would be more or less forced to use this op guns. Thus different possibilities of fighting battles (e.g. distant sniping vs. close quarter brawling) would be much reduced.
  2. Yes a new campaign for France or Spain would make more sense imo. Or something like a dlc ship pack, adding more variation to the game for those willing to pay a bit more. Most of all, I think, the game would profit from a scenario and map editor dlc! 😊
  3. @Husserl @sterner Two other things: 1) When playing Custom Battles, Line of Battle or Crossing T I’m forced to fill all available slots with ships, otherwise the battle is not accessible. Please remove this limitation! I‘d like to decide how many ships I (and my enemy) bring to the battle! 2) I might be mistaken but the model of the Victory class 1st rate seems rather (too) short in length. Compared to photographs showing the original HMS Victory from the side, the ingame Victory looks quite bulky to me! I know it seems absurd, keeping in mind all the efforts you guys
  4. @Husserl @sterner Another topic: I’d really appreciate, if you enabled an ever turning mini map, that adapts to the perspective of the player’s camera view: Right now the mini map is static and the players field of view indicator adapts. Please make it the other way round, so that the field of view indicator, just like the camera view, is static, pointing from the bottom to the top of the screen, but the objects of the map ever adapting and rotating in accordance to the players camera swings and shiftings. This would make the use of the mini map much more convenient imo, be
  5. No, there won‘t be more battles in the British campaign- as far as I know.
  6. There are lots of examples provided by @JaM in the Discord channel. In short gunnades (Congreves) allegedly ... - deal as much damage as carronades, - are far more accurate than carronades, - have a longer range than carronades, - and a better penetration than carronades (please correct me, if I’m wrong!). Keeping in mind that they seemed to be between medium guns and carronades, in terms of barrel length, they should be nerfed e.g. in the damage dealt, the accuracy, range and penetration values should only be slightly better than those of carronades Otherwise ca
  7. What about the op gunnades, do you intend to nerf them?
  8. Do you intend to release the game after that, or spend some more time for fixes and improvements?
  9. @sterner @Husserl Some of the dedicated players of this promising game are discussing things to fix, change or add to the game (mostly on discord and steam). The recent talk for example is about the necessity of revising the damage model and nerfing gunnades; it‘s about the different level of difficulty, about the need of an AI algorithm, that prevents friendly ships from firing through another, to hit an enemy vessel; and it’s about the missing of Bellona class ships / historically inaccurate aboundance of first and second rates, in battles of campaigns without adaption ... It
  10. To St. Vincent I brought 2 second rates, 2 74‘s (I was hard pressed, to get these two out of the missions before, because there were few. In fact there was only one more 74 which I burned at Fireworks.) and 3 frigates, ... at the battle though I was reinforced by 1 first rate, 1 second rate, 2 74‘s and 1 64. To the battle of the Nile I brought 1 first rate, 2 second rates, 2 74‘s and 3 frigates. Given these fleet lineups the enemy would have been well equipped imo with a force of let’s say ... - at St. Vincent: 2 first rates, 4 second rates, at least 4 74‘s and maybe 1 64 in exc
  11. Update: The battle of the Nile: Enemy fleet: 1 1st rate, 6 2nd rates, no 74‘s and a couple of frigates. This must be a bug, isn‘t it!?
  12. @sterner 1. Dear devs, imo you do a great job with this game, thank you! 2. While playing the British campaign (medium, no adaption) I noticed the following oddity, which could be fixed by you fairly easy to make the game a bit better I think: 74‘s are quite a rare encounter, although they were the workorse of the SOL fleets back in the days. Instead I encountered lots of second rates and first rates, which were rather few back then. For example: In „The battle of Cape St. Vincent“ I encountered 3 1st rates, 5 2nd rates, no 74‘s and 2 64‘s plus a couple of frigates.
  13. Don‘t get me wrong, I don’t want to have fancy fantasy pirate ships or something like that! I also want the „real stuff“ to get into the game, but I think there are better choices than USS Pensylvania, because of the following reasons: That‘s what I found on wiki about the USS Pensylvania: „Launched in 1837, her only cruise was a single trip from Delaware Bay through Chesapeake Bay to the Norfolk Navy Yard. The ship became a receiving ship“. That seems a rather unimpressive record! I would rather have (more famous) ships of the age of sail implemented into the game. Ships t
  14. @sterner @Husserl Would it be possible to implement the opportunity to switch Adaption on and off and / or change the level of difficulty in a running campaign (via fleet management overview -> options)? Imo this would be a nice asset, because players could adjust the level of difficulty to thier abilities without restarting a campaign. This might also minimize negative Steam reviews, even further, as the difficulty of the game seems to be an important factor for lots of the negative reviews. What do you think devs?
  • Create New...