NuclearNadal

18,000 ton, 28 knot, 8in armor CA. 28 5in in twin turrets.

Yes it is, and again, I’ve seen the post about it. However based on the importance of the Torpedo in naval warfare, it feels quite important that it change and yes, I have posted about it before and perhaps to much but giving a scale of damage or in this case, non damage, is much better than a bunch of us whining and complaining a whole bunch until the damage it gotten right, multiple patches later.

Seeing the communications variable under the RDF/Advanced Radio seems to currently be more for the campaign? But rather than ask it’s purpose at current, I’m curious as to whether or not signal flags will be implemented along with various other communication forms such as the telegraph or radio. As we know in irl at Tsushima, the telegraph for the first time played a vey important factor in the battle. The Russians had German sets that they didn’t quite understand (if I’m remembering it correctly) and the Japanese sighting report and communication exchange between the Orel and the Japanese was quite important. Will signaling be a factor in sighting/formations? RTW as a comparison has a random chance for a “signals misunderstood” causing a formation to break away in the wrong direction for a period of time. Edit: Grammar

It’s a test I comepleted to back up the point. So far I haven’t seen anyone else give a measurable scale of torpedo hits>damage. This give the devs valuable information (hopefully) in order to properly balance and assess how much torpedo damage should be amplified. Notice how in previous posts I mention both super dreadnoughts and Pre-dreadnoughts and the respective amounts of torpedos required to sink them (+- a few). Now the devs can properly adjust given the type of damage received by various ship types especially the larger ones. Maybe I should bring it up again, just to make sure

Below is an attached image of the error message received when trying to open the launcher. This error message has appeared before but this time was different in that it actually opened the launcher itself. The other times that I have received this error I have had to go to the task bar, find the game launcher that is "open" and end the program. This is despite the launcher not being open.

Ok so I did a quick test in the modern battleship mission and I let the destroyers close to torpedo range and let them fire as many as they could. I counted them and it came out to 22 hits and to around 63% structural damage. This really needs to be fixed along with the damage model as while it’s a good concept it just has to many things that prevent catastrophic damage to ships.

Torpedos are currently next to useless. The damage is next to nothing and even less with the TPS. I really do hope this changes.

In the modern battleship mission I just let the destroyers fire their torps as they do minimal damage and I don't want to have to take an accuracy penalty.

Windows plus PrtScrn in Windows 10 sends them to C:/Users/(Insert user)/Pictures/Screenshots

Ammo detonations currently seem somewhat lackluster. Damage models are decent but the sinking of ships feels somewhat underwhelming. Don't get me wrong its fun shooting at things but the explosion should be just as good. I 'm thinking something more like the magazine explosion of Barham vs the current one which is more like when Seydlitz's turret blew out at Jutland. It also stands to reason that large ammo explosions would seem more like Hood when she explodes. Artwork of the Borordino could provide a basis for Pre-Dreadnought explosions. It would also be cool to see shell hits individually rather than sections of the ship just turn "damaged" and blacken. Think of the damage model sort of from Atlantic Fleet.

So I have both of these games and I wanted to draw parity between them. The reason for this is that I would like to see some things that RTW II has in UA:D (given that they are both dynamic, the general technology is the same up until around 1925-35). Keep in mind I’m not advocating the copying of another game, simply I’m suggesting things from another game that are good, well established, characteristics to be used in the context of a similar game. To me this mostly concerns shipbuilding. Currently the shipbuilder has the general characteristics of RTW II but some things could be improved. One thing I’d like to see improved is the selection of armour thickness. RTW II has a simple yet effective drop down menu (or you can type the thickness) which makes it much quicker than in UA:D. Another thing I could see being implemented from RTW II is the weight reduction with the use of less turrets but in twin/triple mounts. Ex: I have 16 6in secondaries in single mounts which would be heavier compared to 16 6in mounts in twin turrets. The same logic applies to the main guns. (All guns just seem overly heavy in UA:D). Something to do with the battles that RTW does is a selector to turn off gun range rings. Yes you can turn off the HUD in UA:D but I would like to be able to turn off gun ranges and such. Faster time warp? (10x maybe?) Improved structural damage. RTW II uses a simple bar system, once the bar is full a ship will sink. UA:D does this better with actual compartmentalization but putting 15+ 18in rounds into the bow of a battleship regardless of armor just seems like to much especially when the structure damage is at like 1% and it doesn’t change despite penetrating hits. I find that the entire ship needs to be hit along its length for it to be sunk which kinda negates the use of a damage point system. I don’t think this should be downgraded to that of a bar system but I think that ships shouldn’t be able to take that kind of punishment and not have the structural damage change. Note: Some conclusions may be wrong as these are based off my initial impressions of UA:D. Feel free to point out any features I missed or got wrong. Carriers pretty please?

Hello, So far the game is quite enjoyable however a few things I've noticed while playing seem like they could be changed. 1. Reloads: Reloading so far can be cut down quite a lot by using the Automatic Reloader but I've found that this is mediocre at best. For example: a 13in, twin turret roughly with 1913-14 era tech has a reload of almost 55 second-ish (If i remember correctly, my game currently CTD's which is a different story). This seems like way to much. By this time these Pre-Dreadnought era reloads were cut down considerably and reloads could be done in ~30 seconds or even less (SMS Bayern could fire at 23 seconds). I would like to see more realistic reloads. 2. Torpedoes seem relatively ineffective even with max torpedo size. For example: when in the "Torpedo the Dreadnought" mission, it takes 7+ torpedoes to finally do the job. Even on Pre-Dreadnoughts it takes 5+ torpedoes. This seems like way to many even with TPS 1-2. 3. This is two parts the first is: why can't I hit anything at 200m or less whilst damaged? Yes I get it, not everything is going to hit blah blah blah but it just seems that when you get to a ridiculously close range, sometimes even though I could shoot the ship I could throw the shell and have it be more accurate. The second portion to this is shell trajectory. If i'm aiming my twin barreled gun at something and both guns fire at the same time, it would be reasonable to assume (given that wind, humidity, same powder charges are not a factor) that both shells with travel near each other to the target. In game this happens most of the time but other times it seems like one shell flies on a widely off trajectory. I'm not advocating 100% hit rates but visually I would like to see shells not flying off independently of one another. I have some more suggestions but I have yet to find a dedicated suggestions thread bc i'm probably dumb lol

Alright so this bug took place today, I grabbed a SS of it when it happened. I'm on the Alpha (v1.6.38) and now I cannot play. I tried to repair it but it refuses to work regardless of anything I try. Has anyone else encountered this yet?