Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Jatzi

Members
  • Content Count

    82
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Jatzi last won the day on January 14

Jatzi had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

69 Excellent

About Jatzi

  • Rank
    Ordinary seaman

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Yeah and I want stuff like that to happen here. I mean that situation is probably impossible to recreate organically in a video game but in RTW I have attacked ships that were misidentified and then greatly regretted it. That CA turns into a BB or BC? Now my cruisers are dead. The DD turns into a CL? Now my destroyers are dead. I like it. Makes me think, are those actually what they seem like. A lot of the time no. This is actually a big problem in night engagements in that game, a good problem I mean. Night battles are bad, very bad.
  2. I mean a lot of the changes discussed here are reasonable. The ability to set the belt length was stated as unreasonable? How so? No one here is talking like deciding the length down to the last inch. Short, long, normal, high, low, flat, angled. That's simple stuff. A graphic representation of the armor layout would be very appreciated, something like WoWs and Warthunder's xray modes would be cool but anything at this point. RTW 2 does that sorta stuff for the belt; the exact same stuff. Normal, limited, extended are options for it as are inclined vs not inclined. Simple toggles in drop down
  3. Well the commander made that mistake when the Yamato wasn't actually engaged. A torpedo attack forced the Yamato to leave the battle, I think they could have avoided that but I'm not sure and anyways avoiding torpedoes irl isn't easy. Regardless he was operating off of reports and I could see a commander with the force he had facing such heavy resistance, on the ocean and in the air because basically everything that could fly and attack the japanese did regardless of how effective they were, thinking he was fighting a superior force
  4. What was wrong with the Age of Sail release? I like that game. I dont know how much replayability it has but I like it. They at least delivered what they promised with that game and out of all the sailing combat games it's probably the best one out there. Yeah I've lost most of my hope for this game. I still have enough hope to stick around and keep the game on my laptop but I'm fairly pessimistic about things. If they'd just say what was up, where they want to go and explain some stuff then that'd be great. What are you wanting to do with this game? More arcadey? More realistic? Why will
  5. It was mentioned in the previous thread that even battleships on the horizon would be small and easy to miss without radar, when they still had visual spotters. So with calm seas and good weather you could have like a chance to spot a ship on the horizon, which would be every ships max spotting range and would be dependent on mast height, that would increase the closer the ship got. It would go to 100% fairly quickly, there'd have to be research on how easy it is to spot ships from the horizon moving in to judge where to put that limit and how granular the increases would be. Weather would jus
  6. Unfortunately none of this will happen. Both of those lists of ideas would greatly improve the game and wouldnt be that hard to understand for new players if there are proper tooltips. But I have a feeling the devs are mostly done with the ship designer beyond reworking armor a little. They'll shoot both lists down with the "it'd be too complex for the AI/new player" argument. Both are false as you can have a more restricted system for the AI, plus templates can be a thing for it to use. And legit this stuff isn't that hard to understand for new players. I like the first list better, for the d
  7. Everything you said there just reminds me of SpringSharp, a program to design ships. If they took that style of design and brought it into this game it would be so nice. Like you set up everything in something like that and the game generates everything for you. It's not going to happen at all but I can daydream
  8. Everyone on this forum really seems to like recreating historical ships as already stated above so I can see the nations limited to one style being quite popular. I wouldn't play this game more than once after that. Like if I want to recreate an historical battle or a potential battle between historical ships, like Yamato vs Iowa, then I can do that in custom battles. That's the place to do that sorta stuff. The campaign is supposed to be a sandbox of sorts. The goal shouldn't be to artificially limit nations to a specific style but instead bring the in the factors that led to those styles. Al
  9. I saw this made by the AI during a destroyer battle mission. Good counter to destroyers really. Got wrecked by a long range torp from a damaged friendly AI destroyer way in the back of the battle though
  10. I know pocket battleship, semi-dreadnought, semi-battlecruiser are all not actual classifications. But they do represent in-between ships. I mentioned a specific cruiser I made early on in a RTW game as Italy. I was fighting France in like 1905 and couldn't beat their CA's So I made a kind of semi-battlecruiser or pocket battlecruiser. 16k tons, 11 inch main guns, heavy secondary battery of 8 in casemates and 4 in tertiaries. 24 knots with CA armor. It was really just a CA albeit a large and well-armed one especially in this game. In RTW it's less common to have CA's with such heavy armaments
  11. If you think the AI will ever get good enough to generate the same exact ship twice in a row than I think you're very optimistic. Also tech will totally increase during a war. Also also, without knowing what the AI has built, what their fleet is made of you can't build your own fleet to match. Building a fleet in a vacuum is boring and probably bad. Also also also, you're probably gonna be using ships that are kinda old in some wars. In many cases ships were outdated by the time they were finished and entered service. If the AI just generates designs on command when a battle starts you're igno
  12. Better not be like that. The game should generate designs and have them be built with the full cost and time required that the player would have to pay to build that same design. It shouldn't be some random design only made when a battle happens. Cuz then also if they win that battle or they retreat and the ships aren't sunk then what happens? A brand new totally different design is made when the next battle happens? That's terrible game design and I wouldn't play it if it was like that. I'd just play RTW which doesn't have such a stupid system. EDIT: This would also play into inte
  13. Access to enemy reload timers and even the specific dmg they've taken is something I'm not a fan of. This game is most similar to RTW so I compare them a lot. In this case RTW is better, you don't get notifications of torpedoes being launched and you can't tell how much damage a ship has taken besides a guesstimate, light/medium/heavy dmg that is often wrong. You can see the enemy designs as that information is mostly public but sometimes that information is even wrong, armor values and speed at least. It's easy to see if a ship has 16 in guns or 20in or whatever. You definitely don't get acce
  14. Someone said it a few posts above. Less super dreadnoughts. More of the actual realistic ship hulls and components and whatnot. Based on how everything is I'm kinda expecting to have to build 100k ton battleships during the campaign if only because the AI surely will cuz it's stupid. I don't want to do that though. Super dreadnoughts are, or should be, extremely expensive and honestly they're not worth it. In RTW I never go past 50k tons for my dreadnoughts because after that they start to get prohibitively expensive especially since in RTW it's hard to armor against 16/17/18in guns. Of course
  15. The ability to see machinery and armor would be useful. Something along the lines of WoWs or Warthunder's system where it highlights the different armor sections and shows the machinery and citadel spaces. I'm not even sure if the citadel is a modeled thing that moves depending on your turret placement, as it should, cuz I've always seen some weird hits that are listed as belt/deck extended or really far up hits that are listed as main belt/deck. Also the friendly AI ships being able to auto avoid torpedoes would be very nice. If it messes up a formation that's fine, torpedoes are deadly
×
×
  • Create New...