SiWi
-
Posts
418 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by SiWi
-
-
53 minutes ago, Kreisauer said:
Being able to Import/Export Shipdesigns would be awesome. Just let it spit out the code, i'm sure there is one
I think that there could be an issue with different tech leading to different ship possible, but then again we should then be able to tweak the designs to fit the technology viable.
-
1. Option to chose different types of ammo for the 2nddaries then the main guns.
2 Options to let the "not engage" side of a ship chose a different target, to make side guns more relevant.
3 the let the torpedo launcher track enemy ships even when in "off" firemode.
-
7
-
-
in being means that just exist
sea control means they search for trouble.
-
56 minutes ago, Druzki said:
The fritz x isn't a ship launched weapon though.
True, but the ship rocktes (AA if I recall correctly) were bugged and didn't work... so I went with what I remember to actual work in the game.
Anyway, the point remains: anti ship rocktes could be a balance problem. maybe it would work if we get real "flak" and that flak has the ability to shot rockets down and that their accuracy isn't 100%.
-
sounds to me more like a Sequel then an expatiation.
Thou "Pacific Storm" did have some of the early stuff (WW 2 stuff like "Fritz X" ect.). It there kinda broke the game balance. From losing alot of planes against big Fleet, to circle your 9isch KM away from the ships in order to control your guided bombs and then destroy the enemy piece by piece.
But then again, PS wasn't working that well as a game to beging with.
-
I have notice that the AI fleet are often very unbalance in terms of numbers of ships:
In this example it is the Cruiser especially the light cruiser the enemy spawns, thou I had examples of them having 11+ BB and barley anything else.
Unless this is suppose to be a example of the French naval doctrine of light ships over BB's (the campaign was on Random not historical), it should be twerked.
Another problem I find is that the AI builds ships that are too slow. I mean I can accept that they value speed less (in order to go cheap), but there are example of this thats REALLY pushing it.
The enemy BB has 18,4 KN's. In 1920. My BB made 26 or 28 kn (not sure right now). I think that is unacceptable slow.
That thing barley captures Transports. In fact 1 meaning full hit and it probably couldn't even do that. Anything else attacks or flees at its own leisure.
-
1 hour ago, DieHard_BR said:
Also from geo perspective France is already there
thou I wonder if the Dev's don first expand the map itself and add the Colonys of UK and germany to test other mechanism before adding new nations.
-
1
-
-
14 minutes ago, Marshall99 said:
So, about this update...
So far, I tested the new french hulls in 1890. These hulls are excellent! I designed historically accurate ships, so the main armament were only 2*1 305 mm guns. I have to say that two main guns were absolutely enough in most of the situation. They are fairly accurate for 1890s and makes a lot of damage. The secondaries are also good on Ironclad hull 1-3. The french battleship hull 1 (1890) was a bit challenging. I tried to design a competitive ship with 2*2 305 mm main guns because the secondary arsenal is not as good as on the ironclads. The firing arcs are not great, the 76 mm guns aren't doing that much damage and showing a broadside to the enemy is dangerous in close range. The aft main gun firing arc is also not the best, but it is okey for a pre-dreadnought. Overall I have to say, that these new hulls are excellent for starting a campaign with France in the future. These hulls have great potential. Thanks for the dev team for giving us these ironclad hulls!
I wonder if the french will be next to add to the campaign (personally I would like to add Russia then as well)
Would make sense, but then again they also added Japanese hulls to the campaign patch even thou I suspect that japan will be one of the last nations to join.
-
I agree on the TR using BB names (or even using Warship names at all).
If there was ever y tiem for senseless combinations of Letters and Numbers then it would be TR naming.
As for the "Time period appropriate", aspect, I don't think you can make that work given that not all nation would have historically fitting numbers of BB's names.
But then again, I'm for creating name list in game so we can give a class a name list, which would also aviod this problem.
-
there is a warning sign popping up, when you spot a group of torp (one for each torp group), but it is easy to miss it.
Personally I also would wish for more tolls to help evade torps. A like a minimap that shows the spotted torps (including "friendly") projected travel line.
-
my compliment to the devs: division seem to be viable now since the "avoid trops" seem to work quite good.
-
11 hours ago, Darth Khyron said:
That is true. But with enemy torpedo boats packing 15 20-inch oxygen torpedoes and a single 102mm cannon, even a maneuverable battleship is hard pressed
true but often you find that you need more torp hits then you can hope for.
-
For the micro Management aspect I would suggest a "auto fill up" button, that simply loads the ship as much possible with the selected ammo.
It is fair to point out that battles always have an month between them for a ship (except that one time where an enemy ship had two missions in one turn and only had a crew in one of the two...).
I was however more thinking among the lines, that while Kiel, Bremen ect. have always the ammo for your ships, I suspect that some back water on the Bismarck Inlands do not have always the ammo to restock your ships fully. So I was basically thinking about supply line when we get more of the world.
"Designing" is a big word. I was just thinking about doing what you now do (aka picking a propellant and Picking an explosive) but basically do it for the fleet.
It is true thou that it would entail a lot of more logistics and management, which some people would like and some dislike. And of course it wouldn't be a priority at the moment or even midterm.
-
I think the balance screws destroyers hard in the 1940's.
Ships turn too well for torps to hit, unless really massed and even 10km+ BB#s can annihilate them relative reliable.
-
Hi,
I think the game needs a Tutorial Campaign because right now, if you don't follow the forum, I think you would be a bit lost in terms of how things really work.
Now my suggestion would be, to make a mini campaign, where the game explains its features to the player.
Ship design, budget, missions ect.
Where to place this mini campaign?
I would suggest the US Civil war.
Why?
Its a relative small conflict.
It has a bit of the "beginning of steel warship" flair.
And we have two models for it already that would then not just April fools jokes.
The conflict also took a couple of years and would allwo to introduce most features (even submarines...) to the player in one form.
I open for alternatives of course.
-
Hallo,
One word in advance: i don't put it into the "December suggestion" since I want to discuss this particular feature "own its own" and I recognize that it would be a quite the long term goal.
With that out of the way, lets go on:
The way ammo works right now, made sense in a game where you design a ship class and nothing else.
Aka you build a ship and design the ammo for it and base your ship design partly on it.
Which of course also means that new ammo would mean you sometimes would have to redesign the ship. Now there might sometimes have been cases where guns for example had to change because of new ammo, but overall I think the practice is a bit silly.
No one can tell me that, because the 30K ton BB has 1T too much because of its ammunition, a nation wouldn't simply ditch the couple of rounds too much and move on. Now to some extend we can simulate this with "reduce" shells, but that is a bit rough. If we would have slighter for example we could be more precise and simple accept that after a refit, the new ship would have 98% of the ammo its suppose to have, instead of redesigning everything because the new ammo is slightly heavier.
But that is only one aspects, why I would change ammo.
Another one is logistic: right now all ships get their ammo to 100% after the battle. Ammo I might add, turns into any kind of round. Be it AP or HE. What I would like is not only to have to supply ports with ammo so that they can supply the ships in port (some perhaps necessary for training), but also to allow player to "design" the shells. It doesn't need to be too fancy, but you could allwo the player to design a HE and a AP shell, base on the explosive and the propellants researched.
Lets give an example:
You are the UK in the 1910. You have two types on ammo created an AP shell that uses White powder and TNT 1 and a HE shell that uses Cornite 1 and Picirid Acid.
Now you develop TNT2. Instead of retrofitting the ships or building new ones, you would create a new ammo type using TNT 2.
Now you also wouldn't simply have this ammo everywhere, but would first need to produce it and deliver to your ports.
Easy enough on your home ports, but what about your colonies? Do they also receive the new ammo fast? Do you prioritize some colonies over others? I think this would make for interesting decision making.
You also maybe could influence how much of each ammo type you carry on a ship type. Maybe you want to have a "cheap" standard ammunition, that you use against weaker enemies and some expensive rounds should you encounter "real" enemies. You may have 80% of your cheap ammo types and 20% of the good stuff. Or if you are at war with a strong enemy, you may decide to abandon the cheap ammo on that front, while in a war against a weak nation you still would use it to save cost.
Now what do you think?
Interesting to the gameplay or overly complicated?
Should it work differently?
Should ammo stay the way it is?
-
2 hours ago, TheRealJostapo said:
That's my point exactly... "Can build monster torpedo ships". There's no risk associated with equipping weapons with exposed ordnance in an era when ships were expected to weather dozens to hundreds of hits per engagement.
The undeniable meta is, if you aren't allocating at least 30% of your deck space to torpedo's, "your doing it wrong".
the later torp protection render torps border useless. Granted we have to wait to see if the AI uses them but even the versions just before that are very strong.
-
1
-
-
I got my key and it worked well
-
2 minutes ago, Shaftoe said:
How about making the AI penalties to reaction times to make it less artificially perfect? After all, superhuman reaction IS an artificial advantage, and therefore it could be considered cheating.
is having better human judgment then also "cheating"?
-
2
-
-
I would like the ability to have by different sides of the ship to engage different targets. This would make side guns more viable and avoid 2nd guns not shooting.
-
1
-
-
Research start options:
right now start tech seems to be random. I suggest two alternatives to that (as option, random is great for replay-ability):
1. "Historical" Technologies where the Countries get roughly their historical navy tech level.
2. "Tech points". Depending on starting point and the country you chose you would get points to buy your starting technologies. This one one can make strategic decisions before the first turn starts.
-
6
-
-
5) tactical map during battle
6) on said map, lines that indicated the direction of spotted Torpedos, including those shot by my ships (there are no friendly torps once they are in the water...)
7) "Orders/Strategies" an option to increase or decrease likenesses of certain mission types. Like "convoy offence" would mean the own ships are more likely to raid enemy TR while "convoy defense" would mean your ship more likely defend convoy. Or "search major battle" to provoke big battles and so on.
8 ) allow us to create groups of ships, which are more likely end up in battle (to allow a "Romeo" and a "Julia" class to work together reliable.
-
1
-
-
2) when building ships, please show a map when "select port" thats shows were the ports are (this will be more important as bigger the map becomes)
3) Name list for ship classes.
Give us the ability to create list of names (including the ones you put in game) and then give a class a designated list of names that ships of that class get names. please make it so that the game remember all list of all campaign with a nation (so I won't have to redo all the name list if start a new campaign)
4) show ship class in movement and during battle UI (let us see "BB Bismarck Class" ect).
-
1) an Option that allows to have an "eternal war". Here is how that could work:
Instead of the campaign being over after the first peace was sign, the game would go on, with maybe a peace period of 12-36 months (enough time to build new BB's) and some funding boost for the losing party to compensate a bit for the reparations (in a "real game" later this could be balance with other factions). After that the war starts automatically anew. This could help to see how the AI handles really the introduction of new classes and give the player a feel for the progresses as well as we right now rarley see new classes in action in a campaign. It also could help to balance adjust research.
-
1
-
Player Suggestions - January/February
in General Discussions
Posted
when displaying "enemy smoke spooted XY" please add the ship from which that spotting is base on.
Aka: "Bismark has spotted enemy smooke XY"