Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Tankaxe

Members
  • Content Count

    25
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

25 Excellent

About Tankaxe

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Yes the RNG in RtW is a pain (don't you just love when the battle generator feeds your CLs to enemy CAs and having to convoy raid with a grand total of 3 destroyers that's escorted by CLs) One of my major beef with it is how it handles cruiser battles. You don't get a proper cruiser task force and instead get these incredibly odd 1v1 or 2v2 cruiser battles with a destroyer escort here and there. It doesn't make sense and since the AI can have up to 20 CAs and more CLs all these single cruiser actions can be very exhausting. Things like convoy raiding and bombartment missions should require an entire taskforce of cruisers if they expect a similar number of enemy cruisers in the area. So IMO if the game can make cruiser actions bigger with missions that are important would be useful
  2. Another advice is to slow your ships to full speed for the aiming bonus and you should start landing hits. I don't know about the above advice but I've had the enemy fleet completely focus on my CLs making them good to bait leaving my B unmolested. (Also check their speeds of it's 18kts restart as they can't do anything) If your using a BB only use 12" and above. You can fit these guns on the battleship hull by rotating it with the R key. But just as above you must knock out those CL because right when you start landing hits on the B the entire enemy fleet will run. Worse case scenario you cripple the semi-dread but due to damage model shenanigans you aren't able to land a killing blow because your shells keep hitting the destroyed sections. This will give the CLs time to escape and the enemy B has a rather significant chance to land a hit that will slow your ship and that's when you restart.
  3. Note that once Battlecruisers hit the scene they made armored cruisers virtually obselete and most nations had stopped production of such ships to focus on building battlecruisers. so the only thing that would remain relevant is Mass produced light cruisers and destroyers to cover regions and screen the battlefleet Light and heavy cruisers were only a thing because of the Washington naval treaty and without it cruisers would just be further enlarged Battlecruisers. While the player can also make enlarged armored cruisers as some sort of 'anti-cruiser cruiser' the time and money they'll take would give other nations an advantage in the Battlecruiser race. So either way it's quite realistic that BC and BBs are stronger against weaker opponents and their main duty's is protecting and projecting force with numbers
  4. Ah I certainly don't want to take too much time and resources. A road-map would be nice and thanks for the feed back. Now I feel bad because now I feel I was demanding.
  5. Honestly the priority dev blog should be campaign features since we have players jumping on board either without reading the website with only their own fantasy in their heads. Or they do read it but are just miss understood on how it works. This is my preference but if the devs prefer to do a dev blog on campaign once they have it close to working order I have no qualms about it. My next preferred dev blog is just their statement on how they plan to handle the topic of aircraft carriers and other advancements in the 1940s+. Since most players are mostly fascinated with the era or it's the only part of naval history they know.
  6. We really need more communication of the developers as discussions in the forums are going in all directions. We also dont really hear much from them besides acknowledging bugs and from what iv'e seen has recently stopped giving feedback to suggestions. I propose a dev diary so that we can see what the devs are focusing their efforts on so forum posts and tester can stay and keep relevant one topic at time. It should be moderated just enough to keep everything ontracks and not derail into a historical debate as we've seen multiple times. for an example say the developers release a diary on torpedoes on how they work and how they planned to go forward with it. Testers can give feedback to how they are and leave comments and suggestions for any proposed future development on one topic. This will help keep the community focused and focus feedback in areas that can be proven useful.
  7. The jump of damage from 8" to 9" is so significant that it isn't worth going lower. 8" and below should also be the focus on bringing their damage in working but perhaps once the accuracy issue is resolved we can see if they can produce actual results the way they are.
  8. Greeting and today I would like start the topic of citadels The way they are represented is disappointing and the only thing they do is reduce chances for magazine and engine room hits with an eye boggling amount of weight costs. Really I think they should be simplified and similar to what Rule the Waves did and limit it to three armor schemes: protected cruiser, sloped deck and flat deck(can be researched to be All or Nothing). Now this isn't just what is needed but what is required is citadel placements. Currently the players can space gun turrets nearly to the ends of the bow and stern which makes ships quite comical. So my suggestion is that funnels and gun turrets are all connected to each other as a citadel. The farther apart the funnels (which represent machinery space) and gun turrets the longer the citadel and the heavier they'll be. The players can control the citadels placement by just having its funnels and armnements together or farther apart. To prevent shenanigans, turreted secondaries must be placed in the citadel. This will the force the players, just as IRL ship designers, to make the ship more compact so the smaller the area the less weight is spent armoring the ships vitals and more armor can be placed over it. Everything outside the citadel is essentially Belt and Deck extended which are still important to protect from flooding and other damage with pre-AoN armor schemes. All or Nothing essentially focuses the protection of ship to one spot of the ship leaving BE and DE to 0". What makes it more unique is the that the ship will not ever take flotation damage unless the citadel is penetrated. Now to get this working Players need much more freedom on placement of guns, superstructure and funnels so they aren't forced to have everything apart. Now hulls are interesting, most of what we have didnt have either sloped deck or AoN designs. For an example some of some of the early hulls we have could be quite restrictive to placements that would make AoN unappealing because of how far your forced to spread out everything. So an easy fix is to have equipping different citadels allows you to choose between different hull types. These are my thoughts and I will be happy to extend this idea for discussion
  9. Greeting as the developers are hard at work making the campaign I'd like to call on Rule the Waves players for input regarding campaign as the game took a lot of inspiration from. There are plenty of mechanics in RtW campaign that should be considered implemented but also some quite frustrating features. What part of RtW would like to see in UA:D? What can be improved or what best should be avoided. My suggestion is for the battle generator to have small cruiser actions be together with an actual number of cruiser task forces engaging each other along with escorts besides the various 1v1 and 2v2 cruiser actions RtW likes to throw at you that shouldn't happen unless its raider hunting.
  10. TBs give a -%85 small ship penalty to what ever is firing at it. Also with how the bulkhead system works you need to damage every single bulkhead or the TB wont sink. Which is a problem because if your guns are rocking a pitiful %1.2 the damage they do is almost nothing if they hit an already destroyed bulkhead. Secondaries really need a significantly reduced small ship penalty.
  11. I can confirm the maximum allowed gun caliber is 11". I have a theory that it was made to fit the more earlier round turrets and the more advanced turrets cant fit. On the same not please devs give us the option to customize our turrets. It doesn't has to be a priority but it can go a long way of giving a flavor to player designed ships
  12. Ladder aiming is still in a loop and they wont lock on to the target even when it reaches %100. this bad for triple turrets as ladder aiming forces them to fire two shots and if you entertain a panzerschiffe a ladder loop would cripple a 3rd of your firepower.
  13. By now anyone that used 8" and below will find that these guns are in particularly worthless. They don't aim as well as capital ship guns and the reload doesn't make up for it (especially the sec RoF nerf this patch). The damage they do is negligible as well as i've seen TBs charge through a hail of fire to no effect I've also been seeing TBs taking 2 or 3 salvos of 12" guns and refuse to sink. through out the game its only showing me that investing in secondaries are a waste of space. Sure they can cripple a TB and a destroyer but they cant sink them and if they are still on the battlefield they are still a torpedo hazard. As main guns they hit too weak and just aren't worth the weight for 9" and above gun calibers. So please devs take a look on this issue by having TBs having no bulkheads by default and below capital ship grade guns a satisfactory accuracy and damage.
  14. There is an issue with torpedoes, i've had ships launch torpedoes but nothing came out. This might be the case with multi launcher torps as sometimes if you have a x4 launcher only 2 torpedoes come out. (Especially frustrating with single torpedo boats that launch but no torps come out.)
×
×
  • Create New...