puxflacet

Well...in historical context sense no monarchy in the game timespan was rule of one. Certainly not of any given monarch.

There existed no absolute monarchy in the game's timespan. I would rather replace "absolute monarchy" with "authoritarian", which would represent all the various dictatorships. democracy-monarchy-authoritarian would be more logical triptych imo EDIT: Sorry, Russia was technically absolute monarchy untill 1905...still authoritarian would fit as well

I think another design trade-off to consider is weather affecting low situated guns. As some ppl like to make their ships smaller targets by increasing their draft, however IRL this presented real challange for the ship - in extreme cases even for her seaworthiness (USS Monitor) but to her guns even with moderate draft increase/shorter freeboard (Scharnhorst had some serious issues with the very front turret when facing bigger waves, but practically every casemate secondaries were totally unsuable in very rough weather). I think for game purpose there could be accuracy and rate of fire penalty taking in account gun's position above the water and current weather state - the worse the weather then progressively bigger the penalty for the guns closer to the water level

new nations? 🤔 you stretched the roster pretty far already with austria-hungary, spain and china ensuring variety. frankly i'm not that excited seeing sweden or argentina as major naval power. in the campaign i would rather leave these minor countries in non-playable secondary roles as ship buyers or potential allies or does it mean just including rest of the existing roster to the campaign beyond brits and germans?

yeah. i personally think these baked-in gun platforms are not ideal, because they force you to put something there or live with that stupid empty space (same goes for casemate openings for secondaries)...wish devs come with with more elegant solution

CSS Merrimac 👌

Frankly I was drawn to this game because of pre-dreadnoughts, this underrepresented era of naval steampunk awesomeness, which seemed to be "the thing" about this game, but it turned soon more towards WW2 stuff...Am I the only weirdo who is more hyped about some late 1800's beauty than Yamato?

Not exactly related directly to this update, but I have small nitpick: I think you should remove german ship names starting with "Ersatz". afaik, these names were just placeholder names for projects and these ships were about to receive proper names when launched. In fact the term "ersatz" means "replacement" and were given for projects which were supposed to replace certain units in the fleet, ex.: "Ersatz Yorck" = "Replacement for Yorck".

someone says multiplayer and people automatically think World of Warships... calm down folks...I can't even imagine multiplayer campaing to be possible...BUT I see no problem with custom battles being multiplayer. No need to dive down into balancing crap discussions. Or rather can't. This game focuses on realism, therefore things will have to work the same way with AI just as with a player opponent. (I see only issue in handling of time compression).

weird designs ahead...i can imagine ship designed around humongous ram could use huge extended bow belt...but in case of deck armor no reasonable explanation comes to my mind...however it could be used to offset the balance, if there would be option for different values for bow and stern... Still I hope that game will get pass that armor chart and evolves to actually visible armor model. @Absolute0CA ...actually, I saw a youtuber to do it with serious mind

Would suggest to add warnings to inefficient armor distribution as well. I came across strange thing, that you can add more armor to extended areas than to the main one. Maybe I would even consider to lock the slide, so that you can not overbuff those areas at all...

Guys, don't forget that this game will pivot around the campaign...

Why wouldn't?

I have a note to pre-designed platforms for turrets, like the last dreadnought tower with superfiring barbette, yamato tower with lots of platforms for secondaries, russian pre-dreadnought hull with side mountings for secondary turrets, even casemate gun cutouts... should be invisible , meaning hulls modelled seamlessly without them, no platforms showing and no holes in the hull for casemates, until you actually place something there. Anchor points would be informing you that there is a platform available, or make them semi-transparent, showing only when the player is placing appropriate turret/gun. Now it just forces you to put something there or live with those gaping holes... which looks kinda weird. Not to mention that those towers with baked-in barbettes dont handle 17 and 18 inches and you are just wasting space or are forced to take less advanced tower.

Is that front tower facing rear?

Hi there, Just want to say that I love what I've seen so far from the game and it looks very promising! But I would like to point out one issue, which I consider major imho. I noticed that some players already, and even AI itself, have a tendency to place main gun turrets very far apart. Usually they are placing one in the very back of the ship to give it best firing arcs. However, there is a major problem with this and good reason why this was not done IRL (except for BCs). The main issue is that if you place turrets very far apart, you are lenghtening the whole citadel (since the magazines naturally have to be under the turrets) therefore the ship needs longer main belt to protect it, which translates into more weight and stronger machinery but also proning the ship to fatal blow. Therefore the tendency IRL was to rather cluster the turrets as close as possible even if that meant bad firing arcs. Right now nothing seems to address this. You can adjust thickness of the belt, but nothig is telling you where exactly that belt starts and ends. And you can place the turrets pretty much wherever you want. I think game have to model the main belt + citadel and these have to be shown when player is placing the main turrets and UI has to clearly show that shifting position of that turret is also adjusting length of the belt+citadel and adjusting the weight of the ship accordingly. (...and I think that showing placement of engine rooms also have close relation to this topic...although funnels right now do the job)