Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

admiralsnackbar

Members2
  • Content Count

    37
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

admiralsnackbar last won the day on February 9

admiralsnackbar had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

20 Excellent

About admiralsnackbar

  • Rank
    Landsmen

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I tried that. For whatever reason it takes pictures of my desktop instead.
  2. What build setting do you select when you start, I already said i selected boost firepower. UAD for whatever reason doesn't let me take screenshots of it but i can definitely build a ship as i describe. If you don't have access to those modules it's probably because of the settings you selected for the mission.
  3. My understanding was that if you wanted a heavier ship to stay afloat, you needed it to displace greater volumes of water, although that technically only tells you the volume of the ship below the waterline. I guess technically a better proxy for silluiette is some function of "reserve bouyancy", deck and superstructure size. Except reserve boyancy isn't really a thing in UAD. If the game can measure the ships volume above water then there would be no need for a proxy.
  4. If I had to build the ship spotting and Fire control system from scratch it would look something like this: Ship spotting under Fairweather conditions should always be even and symmetrical. If your tower is tall enough to see another ship, that ship should be able to spot your ships tower. You could probably do some general game formula to figure out for a tower of given height, how close does a ship of another given height have to get before they become visible to each other (given the curvature of the earth) But things like weather and time of day throw grist into the mill. Weather c
  5. Won on my first try: Select: - Boost technology - Battleship 2 - 15.7K displacement, 22.5kts - krupp IV, 11/7/3/2 armor scheme [all else the same] - heavy shells, reduced ammo, 2 mark 3 14 inch guns [no secondaries] Approach their line at a 60 degree angle to get closer, once you achieve a 12-20% hit chance go parallel
  6. Yes a few things popped out at me regarding fleet control and arrangement: 1) Why is the AI combining its own RNG pre-dreadnoughts into the battle line with your own ships 2) There needs to be some kind of logic that can be utilized for creating divisions where if two or more ships are moving in roughly the same cardinal direction, the ship that is farthest ahead becomes the lead ship by default. An interrim solution would be to allow dragging and dropping within the division so that the farthest left ship listed in a division becomes the lead ship. Allowing you to pause the game w
  7. German wrath is definitely still brutal. Destroyers undetectable at 4-5 KM launching 8+ torpedo salvos at ships so close that not even a destroyer can maneuver out of it. Victory is basically a function of whether you're fleet is properly positioned to never have to deal with those buggers.
  8. It would be nice for formations to see for a given ship where the ship would 'like' to be, like a green oval in the sea representing the space the ship is attempting to occupy in the formation.
  9. My ship for this scenario [won on the first attempt] - boost firepower - battleship 3 -8/8 inch belt, 2/1 inch deck -2 twin 10 inch mark 3 main guns 3 twin mark 3 7 inch secondaries, coincidence range finder III - max displacement speed 29 kn, multiple expansion - heavy shells, increased ammo [optional], enhanced reload, white powder explosives. I don't think light torpedo armed ships are good for this scenario given the low torp tech and how fast the enemy ships are, you need reasonably heavy guns to do it.
  10. RNG in Hit probabilities: 1) For testing purposes I wonder if it would be possible to export the data from battles where you could see, at least for main battery salvos, the probability of hit for each salvo and the number of hits generated. You could then compare the number of hits scored over time to the 'Expected value' generated from the sum of the probabilities in excel. 2) There may be a human bias in looking selectively at hit chances for individual salvos and concluding that the game is biased against the player, given how probability in salvos changes drastically for each salvo
  11. Is there currently a hotkey that allows the player to automatically form a division from all ships currently selected? The only method I see currently is drag and drop which is 1. slower 2. Frequently trips me up because the selected ship 'cards' move the moment you initiate the drag and drop. Unrelated, but a useful Battle UI feature would be the ability to cycle through certain types of ship data for all visible ships (Ships in camera range). Better still if that data could be cycled through by some key bind. Examples: 1) Speed options for all visible ships read as (Current Spee
  12. Having turrets be the 'built component' rather than the entire gun layout might improve AI ship building, (the issue of AI putting tiny guns on massive barbettes or visa versa). But it would probably require additional model work meaning fewer unique varieties of turrets, since a single turret will now have to be modeled to support several different gun configurations. That said, the most recent British turrets appear to show that it is possible to mount secondary batteries on top of turrets, which isn't far from what's being advocated. Another downside is that it might be confusing for pl
  13. Increased Partial Penetrations/Overpens damage and tuned their mechanics in order to have a more realistic effect. HE penetration slightly reduced. As a result, small guns will become more effective, especially at close ranges and HE will be ideal for destroying a ship's superstructure and incapacitating its parts, but not as useful for sinking it. I don't think people were complaining about overpenetration's being underpowered so much as the fact that they were occurring too often and in unrealistic circumstances; I.E. against certain light ships even when using the lightest HE shells pos
  14. I don't think the Armor Viewer is necessary, but I would like to see some way to custom control the armor and arrangement of the citadel directly. Instead of 'selecting' a citadel type that applies probability/weight/cost multipliers based on your current armor scheme. The damage model would then need to account for the fact that penetrating hits at the midsection of the ship are causing structural damage and possibly flooding but are hopefully not blowing up magazines or destroying engine components, so shells that fail to penetrate the citadel do noticeably less damage then ones that pe
  15. Concerning the complexity of the system: The ideal product is one where the base version is simple enough to sell sufficient copies to cover future support and updates, that can also be modified to be more complex by more dedicated naval history buffs later on.
×
×
  • Create New...