Intrepid_Arty

While this didn't have anything to do with accuracy, I do think it's also worth pointing out that the Austro-hungarians had issues with their triple turret design as well, specifically poor ventilation leading to gun crew passing out, which isn't exactly an ideal situation.

An alternative compromise would be to keep it in the campaign, you have the option to research technologies, and you can start using them something like halfway through their development, but with a high risk of breakdowns (or with powder technologies, unplanned detonation), and further research decreases the risk of failure until it's gone.

To be honest, it seems like a pretty large number of things are being added to the upcoming build. This, the campaign, presumably design saving, and so on and so forth. Maybe it wouldn't be a bad idea to have a lot of smaller updates rather than singular massive ones. Obviously, though, I'm not a developer on the game, or in general, so there may be behind-the-scenes considerations as well.

Lmao, nah, the nazi ships were frankly pretty trash. Like, take the much-admired Bismarck-class. You get a similar displacement to the Littorios for what exactly? Less armor, one less gun, and the same speed? the destroyers were top-heavy, the cruisers had significant stability issues or similar efficiency issues to the battleships, depending on the exact class in question. The only decent ships were the Scharnhorst-class, which were fairly small, and the submarines, which aren't represented at all in this game. As for Imperial Germany, well, they were on approximately the same technological level as the British, so still wouldn't have any advantage. Editing this to point out that the evidence you use of German technical superiority are Wernher von Braun, who had nothing to do with warships, and Operation Paperclip, which, again, was not focused on German naval technology. This is a game about ships. Not about rocket design. And even with rockets, von Braun took significant amounts of his knowledge from the works of Dr. Goddard of the USA.

I mean, introducing better failsafes would make sense, to be sure, but let's not forget that friendly fire in that sense has plenty of examples throughout history. The obvious one coming to mind being the sinking of 3 Japanese ships by the cruiser Mogami at Sunda Strait

It isn't *excessively* clown car levels, but the torpedo placement on this (generated earlier today) seems somewhat wonky to me.

I mean, I'd say leaving the game incomplete might open them up to legal issues at the very least, so eventually, a final product will probably end up existing. I am worried about what this will mean in terms of the development, as others have noted, the company that bought game labs seems questionable.

I'm going to be perhaps excessively snarky for a moment. Maybe there'd be more communication from the devs if any thread they made weren't overrun by people yelling about how awful they are. Mild exaggeration aside, though, people say they should communicate more, but, assuming the main priority is the campaign, what exactly should they be communicating? Like, one person said (paraphrasing here) 'just make a post every other week and things will probably improve', but, to use an obvious example, what if there *isn't* anything to report other than that they're making progress? Yes, I'd absolutely love more information on the concept of the campaign, and I'd appreciate a post about the actual plans they have with technological development and so on, and you could probably get a few dev blogs out of that, but at a certain point, the well becomes dry on that front, and then you're right back at the same problem. Editing to add that probably the ideal solution would be giving the option to run a 'dev' or 'experimental' build, that explicitly is unstable, but has as recent updates to the game as possible, taking a leaf out of Subnautica's book with, perhaps, daily or weekly updates.

I mean, could you not say that as ironclads predate the dreadnought battleship, that they also count as pre-dreadnoughts? (Sorry, couldn't resist the joke, I know that there's a difference between the pre-dreadnought and the ironclad)

I'm not finding any information that the Nassau's had different guns in the wing turrets? The Kawachi-class certainly did, but from what I can tell, while the mountings were different, the guns themselves were a uniform 28cm/45 gun.

Ah yes, taking the all-big-gun battleship concept to the logical extreme, I see.

I don't think you realise how much effort goes into making a game. Bluntly, it would not surprise me in the slightest if they were already working as hard as they can, but seeing as the next update is going to be a fairly major one going by the roadmap, even if they were to cut out all effort to fix bugs, add aesthetic improvements, and anything else that isn't specifically introducing the campaign, it would likely take some time to get done. Because the campaign inherently has to be a pretty major change, adding new AI to control countries, a proper tech tree, and so on and so forth. And personally, I'd rather wait, and let the devs create a well-made update, than have them need to rush out something under major pressure, and have it probably be worse than it could be.

True, but there's also plenty of historical precedent for calibers that don't fit neatly into the 1" caliber increments that this game currently has. So a fleet could have some of these odd calibers as their guns, such as, for example, some 88mm or 274mm guns. Or even something like the British 7.5" gun, for example. And this concept would make setting such a fleet up quite a bit easier. I will also add, though, that there's some amount of complexity in there as well, for 2 main reasons. First one is of course that guns got lighter and more powerful as time went by caliber-for-caliber. And of course, in terms of weight, the other thing to bear in mind is that it won't be directly proportional to caliber. Because the square-cube law is a massive bitch. It should still be eminently possible to calculate things, though, especially given how much data there is of historical guns.

Yeah, I mean, signal lights are something which would potentially be a bit complex, but definitely not worth a full-blown DLC. And Camo even less worth it, really. In terms of what *would* be worth an expansion, airplanes in general definitely fits alright, beyond that, potentially either expansions going further back in time, or expansions which allow for even more absurd ships than are currently possible. (something which allows you to create sextuple 16" turrets, for example). I would say expansions in those veins can't go further forward than the early 1950s at the latest, because otherwise you end up having to deal with missiles, which unbalance things quite a bit.

On another note, something which might be interesting specifically for weird dorks like me, would be what I'd call 'complex mode'. Basically, continuing on from the idea of making ships modular, making gun turrets modular to at least a limited extent. This would include being able to input arbitrary gun calibers rather than having the 1" increments, to allow for unusual gun calibers like the 7.5" seen on ships like the Hawkins-class. This could potentially be coupled with being able to choose the size of a propellant charge and shell as well, maybe with some limitations for these to prevent complete absurdity. In order to make it somewhat easier, you could probably have it so that the same assets are still used, but shift automatically with increasing gun caliber. Lmao, I just want to have my Yamato actually have 46cm guns rather than 45.7cm, really.

I'm actually just going to casually note, actually, that there were a number of experiments of blind firing throughout the 1920s and 1930s, which were more or less successful depending on the specific case. The best way to make it work in my opinion would be that you need some form of radio communication, along with (assuming that fire control computers become their own thing separated from the rangefinders, which they should), a sufficiently advanced fire control computer, something contemporaneous to, say, the Admiralty table.

It looks like the AI ship designer may still need some work, tbh.

And now, let's consider: in general, any caliber of gun can have any number of guns per turret, so a 20" hextuple turret would theoretically be possible with both your requests and mine. And now, we panic.

I mean, really, what we need are 6 gun turrets, so that we can go all-out with craziness and make ourselves some Tillmans. That might be a step or 2 too far, though.

I mean, so that you can make ships like the Lion and Tiger, or like Dunkerque, or so many other different ships that can't reasonably be replicated with the current selection of gun calibers. I'd have thought that that'd be obvious.

What I'd like to request would be greater variety in gun calibers than just the inch increments that we have, to provide for one thing the possibility of using metricised gun calibers (like 460mm, 410mm etc. ) and also the possibility of gun calibers that don't fit neatly into 1-inch increments, like the 13.5" guns used on British super-dreadnoughts and battlecruisers.

I bought this game today and thus, consider this just an early stage of feedback: I very much enjoyed this game, the ship designer is something which I've been looking for for a long time in terms of it's functionality, the historicity of parts is great and the combat system, while I'm still incompetent at it, is quite interesting. There are three things which I'd love to see. It should be noted that neither of these are necessary, but they are things I'd be quite interested in seeing. The first would be the introduction of some sort of sandbox mode where you don't have any sort of tech or money barriers but can just design your ship or ships as you see fit, and then create a battle with custom fleets on both sides. This would give people a chance to learn how to design ships well in a fairly risk-free environment. The other thing would be increased customization options for guns and turrets, like adding longer barrels or the possibility of increased elevation from the turrets. The last would be the possibility of choosing what country you're serving in in the Naval Academy missions.