Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Tycondero

Members2
  • Content Count

    181
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

194 Excellent

About Tycondero

  • Rank
    Ensign
  • Birthday 11/25/1986

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I don't think so that this feature would necessary make it impossible to tackle Great Britain or the United States. However, in the game there will already be a disbalance as Great Britain or the United States have more funds for the naval program than the other nations (at least at the very start of the campaign). Furthermore, you should be able to adjust the capacity too, just as you can with the maximum displacement that is currently limited by the yard size in the game. The great thing about taking shipyard number and size into account is that it directly diversifies your strategy. With t
  2. I have a small (perhaps premature) suggestion for the campaign gameplay that I would like to make. - Have your nation's shipbuilding capacity be limited by the number of shipbuilding yards available. Currently, we can build dozens of ships simultaneously if we have the funds. In reality, the number of available yards was a big factor in how many ships could be build and how fast a shipbuilding program could be realized. Great Britain had many companies and yards available so that they could even support foreign build programs. Germany and especially France had much fewer yards/compa
  3. I know that this has not been the focus of the beta patch, but would it be possible to instruct the auto-designer/AI to not create these strange large barbette, small caliber gun combinations? I think in this case (British Dreadnought I hull) the problem might be that smaller barbettes, that would match well with secondary caliber guns, cannot be placed at the designated location (only medium and larger barbettes can). Therefore, the AI mismatches these perhaps?? BTW: there are a lot of hulls with smaller issues like this, but I do not know whether it is worhwhile to take the effort to re
  4. Easy fix would be to restrict the number of centreline turrets to 2 within the tech tree. I personally would have no issues with this configuration post-dreadnought (e.g. >1905), especially as these hulls should remain inferior on every other aspect compared to the post-dreadnought (true BB) hulls. EDIT: I think these issues mostly come with the fact that we (players) are more flexible with placing parts. The AI will only use the predesignated positions and as a result will always place a secondary tower on the place that now contains your superfiring main turret. In this regard the pl
  5. I have found a bug when designing DDs or other (default) unarmored vessels. If you do not increase the armor of your default unarmored vessel you cannot select different armor techniques/types (e.g. Krupp etc). This means that at least during the 1890-1910 campaigns (but possibly also later) the default armor type is "iron plate". Iron plate armor has a value that sets Hull weight to +33%. This means that if you opt to not change the default zero armor values you will never get to choose (or even see the option) a different armor type, hence the hull weight will be significantly (negatively) a
  6. Do sunk transport ships that are sunk during combat missions impact the transport pool/budget? We currently get VPs for sinking them, but I do not see the sunk ships being registered when completing the campaign.
  7. The AI still needs work in target selection. I have had many engagements where I fought CA versus CA. However, the moment there are some easier targets to penetrate available (DDs, and CLs) the AI CA seems to focus only on these easier target. Eventhough my controlled CA is only a couple of km off (hence easy to hit as very close by), the hostile AI CA still keeps on shooting at retreating DDs over 8 km away. This is probably due to the fact that the chance for the AI to penetrate my CA was only around 20%. However, here I believe it would still be better for the AI to not ignore my CA at this
  8. I agree. Time compression should be in full control of the player. Maybe some small smart moments of forced 1x or pauze could be added as a QoL thing, but in general the game should not prevent us from increasing the time compression when we want to. If the super high (30x) has issues in close fights then those should be an exception, but let us at least be able to use 5-10x when we want no matter how close the enemy is.
  9. There is a very clear one that any dutch person with decent knowledge on history knows immediately. The map shows the province of Flevoland, which was an area reclaimed from the sea/water from the 1940s onwards. This means that the Netherlands should look different on the map during the timeframe of the game. https://pin.it/4vR29DB
  10. Is this true? I surely hope so! Would be great to be able to compose task forces/fleets.
  11. Yes, encountered the same issue. DDs and CLs seem to be able to tank absurd amounts of damage. Even if 12-14 inch guns hit these targets, it takes quite some time to flood/sink them. Either something is wrong (bug) or their ability to absorb damage should be reviewed.
  12. Yes, I agree. The 1890 start made it quite clear that playing battles is painfully slow because everything is slow with these ships. Should be no problem for the devs to allow the increase of the accelerated time more.
  13. Just had the game freeze up when trying to proceed to the next turn. Had to force quit the game.
  14. I think this was our God given right. Seriously happy with what I read in the dev dairy. Map looks cool too!
  15. Very true. Luckily he seems to be gone for now. Though I wouldn't start to put fascism stickers on people (very cheap way to dismiss someone). The guy was clearly out of the line in how someone should behave as a person in life. He behaved as a first class troll what would have been banned on any other forum. I agree. This forum needs more active community managers and dev interaction. Look at Paradox Interactive! They have weekly dev posts. Okay they are much larger as a company and have a very money grabbing DLC attitude, but their communication is rather good. I am
×
×
  • Create New...