Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Tousansons

Members
  • Content Count

    59
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

95 Excellent

About Tousansons

  • Rank
    Ordinary seaman

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. What's cool with projects is that they always sounds awesome when they are imagined. Then, 5-10-15 years later if the prototype is finally completed, this sound just like a colossal waste of money and time. Battleships are dead.
  2. Now I'm seriously impatient. Richelieu est très jolie, oui oui.
  3. It's as you said a fix. A bandaid while waiting for a better solution. Don't get me wrong, it is definitely needed right now, but it doesn't add much to the "realism" of naval combat other than being able to sink a crippled ship while stern chasing him.
  4. Kancolle si soo much better than Azur Lane è_é There is also Rule the Waves 2. Choose wisely.
  5. A new formation system and some kind of improvement with the damage model, now i'm impatient to try it out.
  6. I'll wait and I think this is for the better. More developpers and more time can only improve the overall quality of the game.
  7. Thankfully we are talking about games. In a game, there is definitively a challenge when the stakes are mutual annihilation in a matter of minutes. DEFCON is a perfect exemple. The game design is good, the rules are clear, the UI engaging and the game last for a decent amount of time. If you know what you are doing, even something where you "lose" in victory can be fun and very replayable. If modern naval warfare is all about finding first, striking first and hopefully disapear. Then make sure your game allow you to find first with all the range of sensor available and you have alrea
  8. Sea Power doesn't allow for ship building/design, doesn't allow to pick a naval power other than ReD/BlU and we don't really know how the campaign will play out "yet". Don't get me wrong, it is the sole naval game I'm waiting for right now because I'm a sucker for cold war. But I don't think it's similar to UA:D in many way other than having botes firing at each other. Rule the Waves 2 is closer to it because lately it added early cold war and missiles.
  9. You can build ships that are close enough and for several months, the team added hulls, superstructures and guns that look like the ship X of the nation Y. While It is true you cannot build the ships that existed with all their local quirks like faulty ammunitions, no torpedo protection near the rudder, subpar steel, bigger machinery than her sister, 100mm plating right above the wine reserves and so on. I don't think the game was advertised like that and I don't think it is headed that way. I understand the rant even if I disagree with it and find it trivial at this stage of development
  10. If people are crying over and over again for the same stuff during the development of a game. It's probably because this "stuff" is not there or doesn't work. A better armor model is basically something some of these "crying guys" are asking for since.. Well, the moment they realized it wasn't there. Armor model is needed in UA:D if we want a semblance of realism. Even if I wasn't always happy about the way this feedback was delivered, you can't say it was just pages of "cry". A critic is still a feedback, it's even more valid if it is backed with evidence in game, like it generaly was.
  11. I remember writing something like: "I don't care about spreadsheet accuracy as long as basic things like crews or a more detailed armor model are missing." But hey, soon after there was pages of poorly scanned documents and military archives about the penetration value of a german 2inch shell between the 2nd to 3rd august 1912 at 6000 on a steel plate 100mm thick. I don't know if this caused the back and forth of balance/band aid fix of accuracy and penetration value we experienced, it surely took some pages space. Here we are now. Basic things are still missing and if I read the OP
  12. Curious to see the new auto generation of ships and eager to retry the missions with less fleeing enemies. As for the campaign, it was obvious we would have to wait. They already have a pretty big chunk of numbers to crunch and balance (armor model, for exemple), we are still lacking some sort of crew modelling, and the UI while functional is in dire need of improvement before an early access release on steam. I'll wait... Eeeh... Maybe if we could have more options to the battle generator... Pretty please?
  13. You're right I made the assumption this will be possible to an extent in the game. However, it would be a mistake to not give at least "some" control of political matters to the players. And if politics fails once again, as a player you should still be able to not search a decisive fleet battle against a nation who field way more BB's than you do. Avoid major battles, raid, seek for peace as soon as possible. As long as you can keep your battlebotes afloat, you're winning in the long run.
  14. In game perspective this will be rather easy. Pick Germany. Build a fleet. Don't pick a fight with someone way bigger than you. Keep a good and relevant naval strenght for the rest of the campaign. Pick Japan. Build a fleet. Don't pick a fight with someone way bigger than you. Keep a good and relevant naval strenght for the rest of the campaign. I fail to see where it will be un-fun to play. Just don't repeat history and you'll be fine.
×
×
  • Create New...