Niomedes
-
Posts
145 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Niomedes
-
-
16 hours ago, Sorbopalop said:
The 2 speed basics though I was unable to complete. Because even though I used a stripped down cruiser to go at the maximum of 29.5 knots there is simply not enough time to reach the fleeing dd. Both those missions that happened multiple times. This mission should be at least 30 minutes to an hour long or I should have the ability to make faster than 30 knots ships? at any rate in my humble opinion tutorial missions should have goals that are reachable.
I caught up to that guy in 2 Minutes. you must be doing something fundamentally wrong. Too much armor or not enough engine efficiency ?
-
You can only ever have one type of ship. Make it cheap enough that you can afford 2, and two will be spawned.
-
9 hours ago, KiloZulu said:
I have brought a BB to within 0.1 km of a TB (practically kissing bumpers,) and I don't think my chance to hit ever got beyond about 13%. Of course, at that range, their torpedoes can't miss. The best strategy I've come up with is to use a full compliment of 6" casemate guns to spam targets with as many hits as possible. Essentially, I cannot see that there is any skill or strategy to be found in the mission. It all comes down to playing the match repeatedly until I get some lucky dice rolls. The amount of time wasted before I understood this fact has left a very bad taste in my mouth.
It's kinda your fault if you get that close to them. Keep your distance at all cost.
-
3 hours ago, Hawkeye said:
Just got this game after watching it on youtube over the weekend. Couple of suggestions for the game under development.
1. the funnels to engine efficiency needs sorting. Unless its meant that it's almost impossible to get 100% engine efficiency. I don't think i've ever seen a ship with more than 4 funnels.
2. a wider range of guns, including with calibers. For example, 4.7" cannons were common. Not saying it should be overkill, but a few more would be nice.
3. Ramming. I'm hoping when one rams a ship it does damage, especially a BB ramming into a DD.
Must say this game is great from what i've seen so far and expect it to be brilliant. Not criticizing here, only hoping to help it develop.
Hawk, out/
1. It's meant to be impossible for early ships. You eventually unlock technology which allows you to use more efficient fuel (semi Oil and Oil) as well as more efficient boilers (Induced and forced) which will then allow you to easily get at 100 percent with even only a single funnel.
2. That's already being planned. They just want to get rid of crashes and improve the technical ground work first.
3. That's also already being planned on.-
1
-
-
Don't agree with that destroy a full fleet rebelance at all. But since I'm.the only person who didn't complain about it, I guess it's fair.
-
14 minutes ago, Christian said:
historically ships did use quad guns in small calibers though very few quad mount types of small caliber existed (mostly because its usually better to just plonk down a triple 152mm instead of a quad 130mm or a twin 203mm instead of a quad 130mm
the smallest i can think of the is the french 130mm gun on dunkerque and Strassbourg
soviets made a 57mm quad turret but im not sure if it counts since its from the mid 50s and its more anti air than anti ship (though it was used as main guns on a few dds) also its a 57mm
Bro, ever heard of Bofors ?
http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_4cm-56_mk12.php
But just in general, Quad mounts of all shapes and sizes were used. There is no reason why we shouldn't be able to literally have every single gun in all 4 configurations. -
7 hours ago, KiltedKey said:
Drat! Do we know if they are considering implementing it? I don’t know how big of a factor that was in war. Sounds like a lot of you can hit underneath the belt.
Huge factor actually.
-
4 minutes ago, Captain_Sir_Loughton_Peto said:
If you are talking about the difference between primary and secondary then yes of course. But with primary guns it varies depending on range bracket i am not at home at the moment but when i get in from work i will post screens. Your answer still does not address my original point. You contend that it is working as intended. I do not.
Well, the devs said that larger guns are suppsoed to be more effective on longer ranges, and that's what they do. So, they're working as intended.
-
15 minutes ago, Captain_Sir_Loughton_Peto said:
Also this is not necessarily true in all cases if you examine the stats of the guns. Often it seems range dependant.
Larger guns regularily have higher accuracys on all distances than smaller guns.
-
3 hours ago, Absolute0CA said:
>Problem: Where do you find how many funnels you need.
It's in the top down menu on the right under funnel capacity.
-
Larger guns= more accuracy. It's working as intended.
-
8 hours ago, NuclearNadal said:
A Pre-Dreadnought wouldn’t survive a 1v1.
That being said when the Lord Nelson class were completed (in fact I’m pretty sure one of the academy missions uses Lord Nelson as a hull), a British report found that two of them could hold their own against some of the newer, actual, dreadnoughts of the time.
Unless it’s a very specific situation, yes the B is unlikely to win.
Lord Nelson is in the peculiar position of being the direct predecessor for dreadnought, and thusly already sharing a fair share of Dreadnought's characteristics, apapart from the uniform battery of course.
-
43 minutes ago, VarangianGarde said:
Hey folks,
I love the array of classes already available, but there a few others I'd love to see:
- WWII Era Heavy Cruisers: IJN Takao Class, USN Portland Class, KM Deutschland Class, KM Admiral Hipper Class, RM Zara Class, RN County Class
- These CAs were generally Treaty limited to max 8" armaments (except the Kriegsmarine), and had a sleeker profile than the CAs currently on offer in the game.
- @Nick Thomadis I'm sure some of these are probably already in development, and the list is by no means exhaustive. It'd be cool to see this as another thematic element and as a compliment to advances in BBs from WWI to WWII.
2. Late Monitor/ Coastal Defense Ships: FN Väinämöinen Class, MB Deodoro Class, A-HN(KuK) Monarch Class, RDM Niels Juel Class
- This is a bit of a messy category, but essentially these were short range littoral defense ships deployed by smaller powers. Their shallow draft meant they remained fairly close to home port, but could provide significant defensive capability for the home coast. In many cases, these ships fielded heavy 9" and 10" guns. I think they'd make a great addition to the campaign, as it would make raids and gunboat incursions into 2nd rate ports not a gimme.
- Nick: Again, this may already be in the works, but hopefully this would add some mechanical depth and greater variety to the world.
3. Gunboats: KM Itlis (SMS Panther) Class, RNLN Jacob van Heemskerck, RN Bramble* Class, RN Insect Class, USN Wilmington Class
- Probably an even messier category, but gunboats were power projection tools used by great powers.In terms of size, armor, and armament, they're all over the map. Often they were just converted civilian steamers, though they tend towards smaller caliber. Of course this only worked if these ships could access the global coaling network pr- WWI, and still required port calls in the age of oil. They could be used to establish a presence at lower cost than sending major fleet units. Smaller powers could also (and did) build them, but were usually very limited by range.
- Nick: This could certainly be a takeoff of the "Torpedo boat" class (some "Patrol Gunboats" were indeed armed with torpedoes), but the difference would usually be a larger displacement, more available calibers, and a greater range capacity.
What other suggestions do you guys have?
*RN Bramble was actually equipped with sailing rig, though it could cruise on coal power for about a week when necessary. If you were to use an early era steamer of this type, I'd suggest just having the rigging be a non-functional combat liability in scenario, but it could reduce the maintenance costs and refueling expenses of the class.
Large cruisers lol.
-
49 minutes ago, Angus MacDuff said:
This discussion truly illustrates why we have to be very careful with torpedoes and their accuracy/damage. We are talking about Yamato and Musashi now...both of whom were destroyed by AIRCRAFT. Not relevant to the game as it stands now.
Exactly. Aircraft Torpedos are very different from Ship Torpedos anyways, since they need to carry far less fuel and can have a better payload to fuel ratio due to that. In addition to this, Aircraft torpedos obviously need to be light and short enough for a plane to even carry them. There's not even a real connection here, as far as I'm concerned.
-
Can you contextualise esch of the pictures please, I.e. when and where they were taken, as well as which ships are being shown ? That would make it easier to cross reference this.
-
5 hours ago, Skoggatt said:
Would it make sense to distinguish fast battleships from dreadnoughts in that case? Since Fast BBs combine the speed of BCs with the protection of BBs it could be an important distinction. Iowa was faster than any battlecruiser, much better protected, and much better armed. Such ships obsoleted not only dreadnoughts, but also super dreadnoughts and battlecruisers.
No, and that's because they didn't actually make them obsolete. Older battleships were at a disadvantage, but could still technically fight fast battleships and expect to be a threat for them. A predreadnought however could never expect to even survive an encounter, since the low range of their guns prevented them from even successfully engaging the enemy.
-
10 hours ago, Maachlan said:
That thing would attract every torpedo fired in the same theatre of operation. Hopefully they would get their money's worth out of the torpedo bulge
It would break in half before that, since the structural integrity of the material built to use it doesn't suffice to withstand the effect gravity has on its own weighr at this scale.
-
6 minutes ago, Christian said:
Muh tumblehome ships (rolls 180 degrees)
Muh structurally sound japanese destroyers which dont loose their bows in bad weather
Muh oxygen torpedoes which are completely safe
Muh 460mm anti aircraft shells which are totally practical and will save our battleships
Muh aircraft catapult on a destroyer
Muh totally reliable british 16 inch hoist system
Muh totally reliable french guns
Muh never built a battleship since 1911
MUh ZiPanG ClAsS UlTrA DreADnoUgHT !
-
4
-
-
History of the American and the French Navy. Especially the french navy, since usually nobody cares about it.
This people's Navy: the making of American sea power/ Kenneth J. Hagan
Three republics one navy: a naval history of France 1870-1999/ Anthony Clayton-
1
-
-
Which is a sad thing to be sure. On the other hand, the custimization enabled in the game means that it will be stupidly easy to mod historical battles which will be pretty close later on.
-
1
-
-
The different citadel types should really reflect this, and they don't at the moment.
-
17 minutes ago, Angus MacDuff said:
Yes, as I mentioned, all long Lance torpedo attacks. I don't think that BBs engaged in a lot of torpedo warfare with each other due to the longer ranges at which they fought. This is my problem with the early scenarios where we are started within a few thousand yards.
The only Battleship on Battleship torpedo hit in history was Rodney on Bismarck after Bismarck had already been attacked by the swordfish and was dead in the water due to hours of previous shelling. So yeah, Not happening that oftenly.
-
1
-
-
59 minutes ago, slashdash2 said:
3. Aircraft Carriers: [...] They didn't hold a lot of aircraft and the early aircraft (biplanes such as the swordfish) used in the time period weren't all that flash either. These should not be overpowered in anyway.
Meanwhile, the swordfish:
-
1
-
-
51 minutes ago, Null said:
Have small interactions pop up that pause the game while you are in battle (at any time, really, when you decide to fight a battle yourself instead of having it simmed.)
They would take the form of your first officer, or your COB, or Chief Engineer, essaentially some pool of commissioned and non commissioned officers. Have then present your with descisions about the operation of the boat, or what damage to fix and in what priority, or informing you that one of the boilers is malfunctioning, or to bring you tea, any number of things that could come up in a balttle to help immerse the player a little bit more and make him/her feel that their choices matter in the combat phase (other than guiding where the ship is going) You can do a lot of things with this method and I doubt it wouild be difficult to throw into the game...or maybe it would? I don't know rreally. I was just thinking maybe a picture of the officer and a text box next to him with a choice of answers. Also what might be interesting is handpicking a core set of crewmen,each with a set of skills and a short bio>?
Please don't. There's nothing more annyong than a popup which breaks the flow of battle.
-
2
-
Multiplayer
in General Discussions
Posted
Oh no !