Skeksis
-
Posts
1,150 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
33
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Skeksis
-
-
Ports with shipyards and construction capacity.
At the moment every port can construct ships with unlimited capacity. I.e. deploy them anywhere into the campaign without consequence. The only governor is finances or the monthly balance.
I was wondering if this should change to only selective ports to have shipyards and those shipyards to have a construction capacity limit and/or varying class ability.
The results should be:
- Adds a strategic layer where the player has to consider where they can build ships and there actual fleet assignment or movement thereafter.
- Regulates capacity.
- Adds important levels to ports, i.e. considering which ones to acquire, shipyard or not.
- With varying class ability, only some ports can construct battleships, or only destroyers. As a limited resource.
- When shipyards are at max construction capacity the player/nation has to build ships elsewhere or purchase dock space from allies or wait until there are some free space/docks.
- When ships are completed, they then may have to travel through hostile waters to join fleets.
Campaign-wise, there should be a limit on how nations deploy ships, especially with ports/shipyards acquired on the other side of the world.
PS, but ports without shipyards should have better economic returns, better cargo shipping capacity, like trade ports, giving choices to the player or headaches!
-
4
-
On 4/23/2022 at 5:26 AM, Nick Thomadis said:
Furthermore, the new calculations for the hull will affect everything about the ship stability and weight allocations.
A long time ago I agreed that while artillery remains automated, the rest of the game should have a level of detail to keep the player busy.
IMO I believe this level has been reached. And to go anymore complex would serve to discourage players from enquiry.
I like discovering new and better ways to build ships, always getting the best performance out of my designs. Even months/years later. But I’ve learnt all of this over a progression of the game's development.
So then imagine a new player who has never played this game before or is not even familiar with warships or the concept of detailed design. How would they fair if confronted with so much detail at once.
Just saying what I have noticed with v1.05 by adding beam and draught calc's, etc. I think the pendulum is balance currently but with too much detail there’s a chance it could start swinging into the too hard basket.
-
1
-
-
12 hours ago, Zuikaku said:
Dud torpedoes are going to devalue destroyers? No, they are going to put them in the right place. Torpedoe attacks were hard to conduct but devastating with a bit of luck. What you want is the guarantee that any risk you undertake with destroyers will pay off all the time. Well, luckilly no more!
It's not just DDs that will have repercussions but right across the board like BBs, especially 1890 campaigns where torps are the most effective ship killers. Considering tech will be at its worst, battles are going to be somewhat like a marathon!
There's another problem with duds - the perception that the AI is cheating.
If two battleships are facing off with torpedo's and some of your torps are duds but the AI torps hit's home, then the reaction by the player will be that the AI has cheated. No way around this.
It's already hard enough for admins and supporting players to convince players who think the AI is cheating that it's all by player design or lack off. Throw in dud randomization and it will be impossible.
Duds in a performance designing game isn't going to past very well.
-
2
-
-
Quote
Long campaign with peacetime periods: This was actually a planned and expected feature of the campaign. On the current WIP map you will be able to start from your selected year without instant wars. New tension mechanics and special events will trigger diplomacy effects. Alliances will be formed and different wars will be fought throughout decades of gameplay.
You know there's something else that's not in-game yet, not even in any of the GameLabs games, that's AIs campaign vs AIs campaign (other wars that are not versing human). We only have AI campaign vs Human campaign.
Total War has it, and if it works similarly, it could be a really big step for the game's development.
Quote- Dud Torpedoes: Torpedoes will not be as successful as now but will detonate and damage ships according to their angle of impact and their technology. You may have torpedoes to not explode on impact or explode prematurely with new visual effects.
I have my reservations about this, IMO it's going to devalue destroyers.
Already you are expected to lose DDs undertaking torpedo runs. The ones that survive this long arduous journey into position to launch torpedo's, then only to be duds, and then the target survive the attack, un-sunk, to complete its destruction of your DDs force. All for what - nothing.
If duds devalue destroyers, then human players just won't use them. And on the other side, the AIs will be stuck with useless units.
-
4
-
3 hours ago, Gregg said:
Then I agree, Torpedos need work in this game.
We need the ability to launch torpedoes in a more realistic way. Off, Save, Normal and Aggressive is fine, but we need finer controls over torpedos. Why do we have to fire 2, 4 or even 6 torpedos at a transport, then one would do the job? We need the ability to select the torpedo launching device, and how many to launch from said device. We need to select the spread angle of a salvo of torpedos; at least narrow, normal and wide. Also, we need the ability to instruct the torpedo tubes to track a target, without launching a torpedo. Finally, we need the ability to launch a torpedo upon a command, if said torpedo tube is tracking a target.
Then the AI will be at decisive disadvantage, because humans can do all of the above and some, the AI can't. Plus humans can predict or take a chance of where the enemy will be or might be or corralled to be, the AI cannot do this either.
But by keeping torpedo launching strictly automatic on each side, torpedo's remain balanced (in regards to nonlinear predictions).
-
1
-
-
And hopefully diplomacy can be alittle more dynamic to include ‘the enemy of my enemy is my friend’ diplomacy.
-
2
-
-
v105 was a very big update and this one even bigger, seems like alot of things suddenly got moved up the order and completed. Got a few extra staff! I guess what this means is that all things/features are possible. Especially ways to improve on RTW2 inspiration, lets face it RTW2 diplomacy is as basic as it comes (player side).
Some suggestions for ‘Alliances’ part of diplomacy, e.g. Player to influence tension/events by manual input (nonautomated events), player to add events as and when they see fit. Could be limited by a required currency. RTW2 can only do this with spies and only by chance of thee.
While proposing a ‘defence pack’ might be the most obvious agreement, or as one might put it, a mutual trade, there are other forms of proposing peace or ‘trading peace’ or trading tension. And ‘defence packs’ might be rejected or should be if there's no 'buttering up' beforehand.
Trading peace e.g.
- Trading/giving ‘ports’.
- Trading/giving ships.
- Trading/giving funds.
- Trading/giving technology.
- Etc, all in-game materials.
All to influence tension manually or by player input, so we choose who ally with.
-
9 hours ago, Cptbarney said:
Update 1.06 will be interesting as we will only be 3-4 updates from 1.10 as well (sort of a milestone i guess). Interesting too see how the game has evolved from mid 2019 to now.
Have a good one lads.
Continuous campaigns against any nation is when this game is going to take off. Players will then truly immerse themselves into fleet ownership, advancement and establishing a continuous dominion. The game will be less about a series of battles and more about planning for war.
-
3
-
-
On 3/30/2022 at 6:15 AM, Littorio said:
You can't have it both ways
Considering beam/draft customization and ally battle involvement has virtually gone through without any major hiccups (in hindsight), it wouldn’t surprise me that we might get an interim release with diplomacy based on the current 5 nations. With a full campaign you’ll still get waring and allying nations between the current 5, like 5 could be enough.
Continuous campaign issue discovery must be next on the agenda, though it probably a given that diplomacy will be in the next version anyway.
-
1 hour ago, Littorio said:
at least some things have been alleviated
Sometimes you need to jump into the deep end, you’ll discover all your problems much faster. Pushing the envelope better.
-
6 hours ago, Littorio said:
diplomatic interaction yet
With the next expansion diplomacy gets very hard to ignore, to which of that Dev's will probably be adding the US thus making it too many nations just to have ‘checkers’ sides.
I think this time around, this release is going to miss full length campaigns, I am. It’s going to be very important to keep the game’s momentum on track, campaign momentum that is (though it's easy and a pleasure to come back to this game at anytime).
QuoteSpotting (which yes, I remember you disagree on mostly), background visuals, weather, transport refinements, shipyard building limits, a basic logistics system, adding coast defense vessels and/or monitors, there are many things that should take precedence before delving into yet another round of fixing these totally bizarre game issues stemming from diplomacy, alliances, and allied-involved battles.
All this minor stuff can be reworked whenever.
Except for auto-resolve battles (not listed), which will defiantly need featuring since battles will probably impact AI vs AI (if such things happen). But this is probably been work on now anyway since the lack of is having an effect in the current release (human vs AI).
-
On 3/27/2022 at 5:20 AM, Littorio said:
This will be more complex than many players realize
Maybe not so much.
It should be a series of questions based on power projection, port proximity and unfortunate events (i.e. timed events) where you answer them that leads to increased/deceased tensions, i.e. war or ally.
The same for AI vs AI wars but with answers based on the same respective power projection.
With probable player challenging added.
So maybe on the surface it looks complex but under the hood, as a list of timed questions, quite simple.
I think with the next released version, with map expansion and the core game fleshed out , it’s time to push the campaign to the next stage.
-
I really hope the team is working on continuous campaigns in the next version.
It really would help stop the constant fleet rebuild at the end of every short war. And I'm very keen to see how prioritizing certain research lines will give you advantage - wars just don't last long enough for any meaningful researching. Plus, choosing who to actually war with and who to make an ally.
-
Subs are already here, has anyone noticed “x transports lost” messages? how do you think they got sunk!
It’s very much an unfinished feature though.
-
3 hours ago, Vigilantemerc said:
This isn't even a live patch its a beta patch....
And its an early access game, buying into them always comes with the risk of incomplete features and bugs. You playing an in development game and helping test it.
100%. It’s compelling to see a game being develop and built up step by step. Recently adding in fleet map movements and taskforces.
Dealing with undeveloped features is on us.
-
2
-
-
This doesn’t look like a bug to me, seems more like a reversal.
Age old battle, historically accurate game vs enjoyable entertainment.
-
2
-
-
23 minutes ago, Andvarus said:
I dont know if I should laught or cry........
Ship got duplicated aswel and can we get a scrollbar for really big fleets? Cause now the buttons just disapear into nothing ness above 30 ships in a fleet
A good argument for multiple saves, if you fail or in this case, a corrupted game, you can just load the previous file, thus saving a total campaign loss/file failure.
I do this anyway, copy the save_0 file at multiple stages or at every month of the campaign. Save slots are a waste of time.
Also I think it's time to introduce saving during battle while running a campaign.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:
We will disable for good the unlocking of campaign until we finalize the game, because nothing good comes from saves editing.
Feedback: I can't be bother playing 1890-1900 timeframes (anymore that is), too slow, dull and not enough options to design variations. Some of us need options to skip.
-
1
-
-
On 3/3/2022 at 8:14 PM, Kiknurazz91 said:
All i was really wanting to do was maybe increase the starting funds by a few million is all. Nothing too game changing.
In layman terms, just edit the first digit after ‘cash’ e.g. if 2.34343400000000E+0006 (2.3 million), edit the first digit to 9.34343400000000E+0006, (9.3 million).
I edit this too, so I can have the best ships to start with from the technology level available and also to match enemy ship numbers with that tech level.
Otherwise, based on funds available, you have to build the cheapest ships you can and that’s no fun. Actually it's just hard to scale down your designs, to sacrifice so much ship's ability just to start a campaign. 😥
Hopefully with a full continuous campaign we'll be able to generate enough funds, through winning battles, claiming ports, trade and peacetime etc. so that we can always build/design the best ships to the tech limit/level available.
PS, always make a backup file copy first!
-
Very annoying, irritating, messy, unsightly and 'in the way' display issue.
THE SHIP INFO TAB, AHHHHHH... it flips around all over the place...
Please could you change it so it only displays if a single ship is selected...
-
3
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:
PLEASE STOP EDITING THE SAVES FOR YOUR SHAKE.
Alot of players like to have an 'decisive advantage', including 130,000t shipyard starting size.
Removing the ability to edit these values would take out an ‘relaxed approach’ to the game, well at least these two values anyway.
-
I can confirm the same.
At first I didn’t move any ships into open ocean, maybe 6 months of campaign time, battles were normal, but once taskforce’s were created no more battles. To me, it looked like AI pathfinding problem, once pathfinding failed for an enemy AI it simply bailed out, hence no battles. I.e. Italy taskforces seems to block Austria pathfinding or blocks/bails the battle generator.
-
5 hours ago, Grayknight said:
i know in the proces of leaving Ukraine. This game is for now dead.
You do realize GameLabs company is spread around the world, located in Ukraine, Russia, Greece, Dubai, Italy and Estonia, head office in Kiev. It has been posted that UAD team works out of Athens by forum users.
Please don't post shit unless you have official statements.
-
4
-
-
Spock : Admiral, if we go "by the book". like Lieutenant Saavik, days could seem like hours. 🙃
Means, next Monday is actually next week.
Gosh, you guy's have never figure out the code. 😊
What's coming next (v1.06) *UPDATE 28/5/2022*
in General Discussions
Posted · Edited by Skeksis
Concur, it also means that the game has to choose ports with shipyards when sending ships for repair and only shipyards that are class capable, placing ships a long way from there operational area.
Plus maybe putting repairs on hold until space/docks are available. That then leads into decisions for players (and AI) to use up all space/docks for new ships or leave some space free for repairing. Including refits. Would also limit how many ships get repaired at once. If ships end up in repair ques, then it might force out decisions by players to avoid battles, putting more emphasis on tactical abilities.
Alittle change here but it could be a dynamic change for the campaign gameplay overall.