Skeksis
-
Posts
1,150 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
33
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Skeksis
-
-
Set to ‘Don’t Updated’ means you can’t try the new version and then change back to your campaign version, unless you're computer savvy.
-
11 hours ago, Gregg said:
so we can finish version 1.4 campaigns
Made even worst with mods, mod authors don’t always update their mod with each new version. Referring to gaming mod authors in general but also there is nothing to say that UAD mod authors will be here forever too! Not saying they won’t either, but time does go on.
Devs should list previous versions in Steam, not only for player campaigns, academy missions, shared designs and custom battles, but also for recently added mod listings.
-
17 hours ago, bikes02 said:
Couldn't even download the game launcher
Same, after purchasing it was very hard to find the download option again.
Game Labs should have the ‘Game Labs Client’ downloadable first, i.e. make it available to download from all of their web sites. Once downloaded, users can redeem or purchase from there.
I like the Game Labs Client, Game Labs should consider it as a permanent option. No need to worry about keys, etc.
-
13 hours ago, kjg000 said:
I'm also not sure Xsolla will be a firm base in the future
I can’t see why the two clients can’t run side by side anyway. War Thunder has its own standalone client, as do many others.
"scammed", I meant general online scams.
-
I know what you mean, twice I’ve fill out the credit card details but couldn’t click that final button.
Such is the fear of being scammed. I hate to say it but Steam is 100% trustworthy.
Did Game Labs send an email to those who assigned up for early access? No official notices here in this forum???
-
Quote
It is strongly advised to clean up old designs and start a new campaign, in order to ensure a smooth and fast gameplay without inconsistencies and bugs.
Finding "old designs" by checking, shared, custom battles (or anywhere else), for every single year of every single nation, is somewhat cumbersome and something players might not want to do.
Adding a "Clear Cache" button would help players and ensure clean campaigns. And stop players cleaning by other means. Should be an UI option.
-
3
-
-
On 3/25/2023 at 5:02 AM, colonel1689 said:
Looking forward to this game
“A gripping real-time campaign….build your army and navy, construct military infrastructure, and fully command your armies….fully zoom-in and fight massive battles on a battalion level”
“tactical control by zooming-in further” [and zooming out to global view].
If this is the case, no load screens, then this development would put this game into the very high-end market of strategy games. A huge advancement from UA:AoS linear campaign.
-
1
-
-
I don't know when this happen but it's here now.
Here's the official website, looks different too? fresher.
https://www.ug1775.com/
-
1
-
-
Where are all the pros? Your review is all cons, you don't want to offer any pros?
9 hours ago, kjg000 said:but would like the communities views
-
Overall, you can play the Campaign, Academy Missions and Custom Battles very well. Important not to lose sight of this fact. All new players very happy.
I think it’s time to say... Thank you very much for letting me be part of this development, it has been a real pleasure.
-
4
-
-
24 minutes ago, Norbert Sattler said:
Something that I would greatly appreciate would be the abiliity to see how much of my shipbuilding capability is free BEFORE I have decide whether I build a ship for my minor allies.
And to barter. You might want to build something for said minor nation but just not huge battleships that take 3 years of your shipyard capacity. I.e. Counter proposal.
-
6
-
-
Officers and Commanders.
I would like to see them featured. Sometimes you want to put names to your taskforce and ships, to know them by assigned Commander. It would add another layer of interaction for taskforces and the game. The game does miss a ‘personal’ level or human connection, named Officers and Commanders would fill that gap.
-
3
-
-
What if…
The inner belt damage reduction is using the outer belt damage reduction values. You would see similar results.
e.g.
What we're seeing:
- full damage 628 1st 12" belt -312.422 2nd 3.5" belt -312.422 partial damage 3.156.
What should happen:
- full damage 628 1st 12" belt -312.422 2nd 3.5" belt -10.716 partial damage 304.8.
No, it can't be that simple.
-
1
-
1 hour ago, brothermunro said:
From playing around it seems to happen most often if you have a lot of penetration compared to the target’s armour. I’m guessing the game’s penetration formula outputs a numerical value where 1-2 is a pen, anything less than 1 is a partial or blocked or something and values over 2 are over penetrations. If however the formula outputs something very odd, like a negative number, or possibly a number that’s beyond the upper limit of an overpen the game gets confused.
Very much conjecture though!
And let’s not forget, it’s not just partial pens perse but also the lack of partial pen damage. Quite possible pen/partial/block* is actually working just fine (and that’s why Dev’s can’t find anything) and it’s the damage calc that can’t ramp up the damage.
* Inner belts changing full pen to partial, is most likely ok.
-
1
-
-
41 minutes ago, TiagoStein said:
True, but it got really bad more recently. A few months ago it was mostly believable, but not accurate and sometimes a few WTF moments. Now it is looney toons level of physics.
Ok not so long ago but whatever/wherever this bug is, it hard for Dev's to track down else it would be fixed by now. Something that’s always overlooked. Any ideas might help.
-
Penetration became problematic with the introduction of adjustable barrel lengths and shell size (it's been that long).
Base penetration values, when things were good…
One correlation is shell size.
Bug appeared after adjustable shell size implementation and as shell sizes go up in size, so does penetration errors against lesser armor.
“there's also a slight additional dependence on diameter but this is negligible” maybe not so negligible?
"no armor best armor"!
-
@Nick Thomadis what about this...
You said to @Lima that you would "look into it". What say you?
Because the problem is how to automatically re-crew ships without re-commissioning every other ship that's mothballed.
-
Does "sandbox" mean 'open world'?
I'm wondering, because....
If say, Ultimate Admiral: Dreadnoughts land battles was beta testing or laying the foundation for Ultimate General: American Revolution global campaign land battles, because the AI strategic element would be seeming similar, then...
First, that's kinda what UAD has already, AI controlling the strategic element of nations, fleets, land units, conflicts and responses accordingly (though turn based). If you were to swap UAD canvas with an American Revolution background, bingo, you would have a similar global dynamicity interactive strategic campaign.
... it would be kinda interesting though, if this was the case, i.e. multi-application development. And also, if deployed in UGAR, it would be taking the game to a new level.But meanwhile...
When and where is Ultimate General: American Revolution going to get its own forum?
-
7 hours ago, RNV said:
Is it me or the "ships going back to random port" issue has almost disappeared for task forces (sometimes damaged ships retreat to unexpected locations) but is worse with battles generated by port-based ships? I had a battle randomly pull ships from ports in different sea regions and then send them back scattered across half of my home provinces.
I've had this too, ships been pulled from ports and returning to different ports.
Question: Do we have to change repair priority in ports so if 'low' ships remain in the same port or 'high', for ships to move to best repair port? Same as for TF repair priority.
-
1
-
-
If nations don’t dissolve, then you’re potentially facing warring with the same nation for the full 50 years – war after war same old same old. IMO, dissolving nations is essential for changing the environment.
The issue is larger nations are dissolving too early and it's where the fix is needed.
This is where minor nations could step in and balance their major ally, propping them up artificially. Giving transport protection but at the same time adsorbing some of the tension. E.g. for Britain, Australia and New Zealand could support the South Pacific region etc. but maybe with conditions, e.g. mayor ally must supply/build ships to do this.
For minor nations:
- Increase support for certain nations.
Also:
- Info on their fleet size, makeup and supporting sea region would be helpful.
-
A way to barter build options.
- Because you may want to build ships for them but not so many or skip large capital ships that take up too much build capacity. Even a way to barter different ship classes.
- E.g. 'Up' and 'Down' counter proposal buttons.
-
23 minutes ago, Lima said:
Britain is losing a lot of convoys.
I see. Haven't played Britain for awhile but I guess anyone playing Britain would find this out.
But on the other hand, the AI (Dev's!) should be balancing the 'fleets' combat abilities, including the ability to protect against regional transports losses. I.e. not to overextend - not to engage in so many wars.
-
Oh no, Britain collapses, was warring with them, some meaty battles too...
Here's the previous January...
Looks like Britain wasn't doing too well, almost 4 billion in the red, picking fights with... well... everyone. Spain dissolved too early aswell. Something amiss here. Britain, a major nation should be better at finances. Sent in-game file. 1910 campaign start.
Also, if a nation dissolves while you're fighting them, shouldn't you get a crack at some of their stuff? you know we were the victor! 🤔
-
3
-
2
-
-
37 minutes ago, admiralsnackbar said:
Yes i think manual rudder was finally removed as Nick said they planned on doing once the ship turning was set to a level they thought acceptable.
Biggest problem with removal, is we can't brainstorm the issue, can't offer insight or clues into the cause.
I don't believe it was "misuse by a large number of players", more likely only a few and it's actually the other way around, a large number of players use the feature as intended. And it's a large number of players who miss out, not the few.
-
Stationary bug (or clustering bug?) but this time on the AI side. Human player can get their ships going again but the AI can't, it's putting the AI at a real disadvantage.
These examples are of a single battle where 3 ships are sunk while in a stationary position, they are sitting ducks...
All destroyed before details were available, but to interpret screenshots, all 3 ships don't show any propeller wake, so they're stationary.
And I'm missing manual rudder (maybe everyone), you can't zig-zag ships or do a fleet wide u-turn effectively anymore. Putting player at a disadvantage.
-
2
-
v1.5 Short Teaser
in General Discussions
Posted
I've should have checked, there are version listings now - after all these years.