Niomedes
-
Posts
145 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Niomedes
-
-
5 minutes ago, Christian said:
@Wakelessrex yeah probably a good idea
might be the case but as previously stated on ships like the USS maine there were ships which had its anti torpedo boat guns next or close to the main guns
either way even if we cant place non encased 4 inch guns (with open gun mounts) we should atleast be able to place enclosed 4 inch guns or other size enclosed guns
as Nick said gun placement which does not make sense would be highlighted in yellow
guns which have gun-houses (complete protection 360 degrees against weather to the gun) should be able to be placed close to other guns regardless of size BUT
they would be highlighted in yellow to tell people its not a good idea to place them there (if they significantly interfere with other guns)
this would say to newer players its not a good idea to place it but you can
Those guns were usually done away with once it became clear that they couldn't be efficiently operated due to their proximity to the main artillery.
Being able to place guns pretty much eberyhwere will just lead to unrealistic and unsensible designs which don't make sense in any way.
20 minutes ago, Wakelessrex said:
@Christian I might recommend again you just agree to disagree with him dude, he obviously is just arguing to win and that will get out of hand fast. This is about feedback to the developers not arguments between people. I think more people want less restriction than more. So just let it be.Nonsense. The point of an argument isn't to win anyways. It's to re-evaluate your own position by the application of new information delovered by the opposition according to the principle of charity. So, I'm not arguing to win. I'm arguing to either convince you guys that unlimited options are not necessarily a good Idea, or to be convinced otherwhise. If you however like your oppinion so much that you'd rather keep it than having it challenged, be my guest.
-
1 hour ago, Wurstsalat said:
well this whole thing gone majorly offtopic
Not really. Just send him the link and he'll be good.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Christian said:
what im trying to say @Niomedes is that the 4 inch gun is further away than the 20mm weights 6 times more and the main gun muzzle blast next to it is less powerfull
thus it should not get blown off makes sense right ?
so let me get this right you are saying
a 600kg gun that is 1/4th the barrel lenght away from the muzzle of a gun with 3x as much muzzle power of the gun below
should not be ripped off ?
while a 4 inch heavy gun that weights 4 tons (around 6 times heavier than the 20mm above (thats what the game says)
that is more than 3 times further away from the muzzle on a gun 3x less powerfull than above
should be ripped off
You realize that the 4inch gun is larger in general and also higher, which means that it has more surface area which is going to be affected by the blast than the 20mm, which in turn means that the effect of the blast on the 4inch will be far stronger than on the smaller 20mm, since less of the blast's energy will be caught by it ? Aside of that, the 4 inch is very definetly a main battle weapon, which means that it is going to be manned during a gun battle, whereas the 20mm is an air defense gun that will only be manned during air defense. As such, the 4 inch will not only probably be ripped off since it will be more affected by the blast, but its crew will also be put at an unnecessary risk during operation. At that point, it might as well not be there.
-
5 minutes ago, Christian said:
so let me get this right
a 4 inch gun atleast THREE BARREL LENGTHS away FROM A 12 INCH GUN is not ok
but a 20mm gun 5 meters away from a 16 inch gun is fine in real life
a 4 inch gun UNDER THE BARREL is considered too close to the muzzle blast yet the gunshield protects the gun from any muzzle blast as long as the 4 inch gun isent firing at the superstructure of its own ship
THE BARREL HAS TO ELEVATE OVER to fire or the barrels will hit the 4 inch gun
YET THESE guns ARE IN NO WAY in danger ?
the barrel barely goes over most of these 20mm guns when they are turned or they are right next to the muzzle (left or right side of it) when it fires
yet surely they wont be ripped off but the 4 inch gun will
Yes.
-
How do you take screenshots without disabling the UI ?
-
I mean, this should definetly be a thing if competetive multiplayer ever becomes a thing.
-
One thing I found to be somewhat immersion breaking and possibly taking away from the strategic aspects of the game is the free camera movement. I personally would prefer it if the camera was locked to one's own units, since that would make manual warship Identification less easy, which at the moment is a major advantage the player has over the AI for no reason, the game more engaging and a little harder.
-
20 minutes ago, VarangianGarde said:
Fair enough, @Niomedes. That hasn't been my experience, though. Is there a way to build it so that you don't have to slog through miles of unanswered salvos? What build do you use?
Here are the stats from my last playthrough:
Unfortunately I don't recall the long range bonuses, but I had high base accuracy, excellent stability, no triple turret malus. I bought the highest grade rangefinder and radio available, and still had to slog through miles of gunfire.
Here's a snap of the build I used.
Four 15"s, Two 9"s, and a host of casemate 8"s and 6"s. Perfect fore/aft stability and all that.
What did you do different?
145 mm of effective deck armor. You won't take a lot of damage that way.
-
Just now, Wurstsalat said:
I screenshotet part of what i wrote:
So as you might get of this he already asked for a review/press key thingy.
I get that, don't worry. And since he appearently wants to have a key but doesn't seem to know how to get one, I told you to direct him to this here link: https://www.dreadnoughts.ultimateadmiral.com/pre-order , where he can get a perfectly fine key and full acces to the Alpha.
-
3
-
-
Just now, Wurstsalat said:
How about reading the whole question before you write 3+ anwsers nobody asked for ?
Dude, you literally asked for a game key for this guy, and I linked you the page where you can get keys. That's quite literally what you asked for.
Aside of that, I've read your post/question, and even took a look at the channel. Though I don't really know why you need to be so rude about it.-
2
-
-
1 minute ago, Wurstsalat said:
Ill stop wasting my time with you
(the who can read has an advantage)
Alright then. That's just needlessly antagonistic, but okay. Why would you even ask a question in a Forum if you don't want a response ?
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Wurstsalat said:
? not helpfull.
He can get his key there. How's that not helpfull ?
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, Wurstsalat said:
One of my favourite ytbers is apearently waiting for a key to showcase the game. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCtohBXA5-MP3lCEZNVLMDKQ
ReviewGameX is one of the bigger hardcore strategy game channels in the german community.
He tested RtW back then and deemed it a good game with the huge (and for him terminal) drawback of not feeling like a game BUT UA:D has everything he asked for back then.
As far as i know he already asked for a key but since its a german channel its hard for you guys to decipher if its actually a plattform you like your game shown on. (thats what im guessing is the reason he didnt get one yet).
Well just putting this here to maybe catch your attention on that matter :).
If he want's a key, direct him to this site: https://www.dreadnoughts.ultimateadmiral.com/pre-order
The reason I'm guessing he didn't get a key yet is that he probably didn't buy one so far. -
3 minutes ago, CajunNavy said:
Hi Guys,
I have finished all the academy and what a ton of fun! 🤩 You really are doing a superb job. I love almost everything I have seen and greatly appreciate your hard work. I know it will only get better the more time you have to work on it.
The only dislike I have (not a criticism at all, just a dislike!!!) is with the auto flagship change. I mentioned it in another post, and I fully recognize the logic in doing it that way. You may not be able to change it because of allied divisions or transports, and that is fine. I understand and can live with it if I have to.
I mention it again, not to belabor the point, but to share some unintended problems with not having the player change flagships.
One example is when I had a perfect crossing of the T. My flagship, first in line, lost an engine. The second in line had already received some minor damage reducing it's speed, so the program changed the flag to the third ship in the battle line. This caused the first two ships to drastically begin to change course, ruining my crossing of the T. The enemy was coming straight at me, so my battle line speed was not too important to me at that time.
Another time the program changed the flag to a ship with a disabled rudder. Not exactly the situation I would have picked. LOL 😉
There are others but I think you understand my point and, like I said, you might not be able to change it. I would like it changed, but if not, I can always chalk flagship issues up to the fog of war.
Thank you again for your continuing awesome work!
CajunNavy
How did you do destroyers vs. Torpedo boats ?
-
36 minutes ago, Christian said:
oerlikons placed in front of the front gun
Edit: Iowa can't fire her A turret at an angle which puts those guns into its blast zones anyways, since it's bow is blocking her shells in any firing angle below 10° in the first place.
-
36 minutes ago, Christian said:
the only thing limiting the Iowas line of fire is the bow of the ship is that the first turret needs to raise its guns to fire over the bow
the 2nd turret does not need to raise its guns to fire right over the bow and can fire even with 0 degree elevation
the only difficulty the ship would have firing at 0 degree elevation with number 2 turret is it would likely obscure number 1s rangefinders due to the smoke/fireball
it might also be a potential blinding hazard to the rangefinder operator
though iowas powder does burn rather cleanly
https://i.imgur.com/pEGp0zh.jpg
if we look at the sideways diragram of the iowa and north Carolina and the north dakota classes it is to be noted the top ship has several 20mm aa guns in the way
the following pictures show that main caliber naval guns did not rip out minor aa guns on deck and if they did the americans were apparently happy with replacing them constantly after firing the main guns
note 2 40mm mounts in front limiting angle of fire for the front turrets
NOTE THE REAR TURRET its limited to basically only fire broadside since the 20mm oerlikons block the main gun from firing any angle aft
40mm mount placed right in front of the main gun
oerlikons placed in front of the front gun
oerlikons placed at the rear turret limiting angle of fire again
if it were true that guns were ripped off by the muzzle blast all of the 20mm placed close to the main guns (like right in front of the muzzle) would need to be replaced every time the battleship fired over or close to its bow
and in the case of BB-9 any time the rear turret did not fire an almost perfect broadside
http://www.navypedia.org/ships/usa/usa_battleships.htm
source for placement of guns
The B turret is so far removed from the forward AA guns that its blast isn't threatening them eitherways, unless it specifically lowers its barrels to fire directly at them. The rear AA guns are also far enough removed from the rear turret that it will both be able to fire over them at any reasonable engagement range, while not putting them at risk from its blast. It's almost as if the designers took the blast range of the guns into account in order to specifically place the AA far enough away from the main guns to prevent it from being damaged. As such, there are no firing angles being limited here, and the AA guns are blocking nothing. Apart of 0° shots of course.
36 minutes ago, Christian said:the following pictures show that main caliber naval guns did not rip out minor aa guns on deck and if they did the americans were apparently happy with replacing them constantly after firing the main guns
That's because all those AA guns were specifically placed outside of the blast zones the Heavy Artillery on those ships had during engagements over usual engagement distances. The guns you wanted to place on your battleship in the designer are within the blast zones, and partly even within the barrel traverse of the main Artillery turrets.
-
Just now, Norljus said:
Does the amount of ammo really need to be tied to the number of barrels ? I was playing the modern battleship scenario and opted for 2 barrel turrets because I wanted the best accuracy. Unfortunately I ran out of ammo and then had to use the 3 barrel turrets.
It does. Ammunition was usually issued per barrel, and stored in magazines directly below the or very close to the guns.
-
It's a multiplier, but a percentile one. I.e., 1 inch Krupp IV is equal to 2 inches of Iron plate.
-
1
-
-
And if you take one knot away, you can even build this absolute beauty.
-
10 minutes ago, VonVolks said:
How>? Please can you explain the exact build?
1000 displacement, 32 Knots, Very short range, few Bulkheads, Steam M. Expansion engine, Induced draft Boilers, Krupp II Armor, Light shells, Reduced Ammo shells, Reduced Ammo torps, Lyddite I, Electric propulsion, 18 inch torpedos, Rng CII, Advanced Radio and 0 armor in all categories.
The Gun is a 76mm.
-
The destroyers I built had 32 knots. Though balancing weight and cost might be hard, It's not impossible.
-
1 hour ago, VonVolks said:
I will have a crack at it now. I think i gave up because the ship design thing
I wanted to build destroyers but the ship builder started off overweight? With nothing attached and it seemed impossible to build anything?
Built 8 Torp Boats, nearly won but ran out of torps. I dont really get why building the destroyers is impossible.... seems weird? Why not just make it only TBs if thats all you can build with the resources available.....
I did the mission with 3 destroyers. Try to reduce weight by using other armors and/or less /newer engines.
-
1 hour ago, khang36 said:
i have this problem as well after the i installed the hotfix
Guess what they tried to fix lol.
-
On 7/6/2019 at 1:59 PM, HoneyBaddger said:
You want multiplayer play NA
That's not quite the same.
>>>"Alpha-1 v.60+" General Feedback<<< [LATEST UPDATE: v61, 10/10/2019]
in General Discussions
Posted
I wish it was still possible to acces the campaign.