Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

TAKTCOM

Members2
  • Content Count

    203
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

TAKTCOM last won the day on May 13

TAKTCOM had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

295 Excellent

About TAKTCOM

  • Rank
    Midshipman

Recent Profile Visitors

359 profile views
  1. I guess, this is a standard MMORPG model - at the beginning the player has a choice between a fighter or a mage. Then, the fighter can become a warrior, or a rogue. When,, a warrior can be a knight, or a mercenary. While rogue can become a scout, or a marauder. Etc&etc. It's all good, but DougToss absolutely right in this case. Dreadnoughts of the first generation had more differences than differences between Iowa, Yamato, Bismarck, Vanguard and Littorio.
  2. I am too lazy. I looked for a minute or two. Bought this game in 2019, this is the feeling we have been asking for these early hulls all this time.
  3. Nope. Queries from players like "we need more hulls from WWI and earlier" were on the forum since alpha 12 in May 2021 and earlier. It's just devs love WWII period.
  4. Of course, this was common. USS Pittsburgh (CA-72) aka Longest Ship in the World. 4 June 1945 for Puget Sound Navy Yard, arriving 16 July. Still under repair at war's end, she was placed in reserve on 12 March 1946 and decommissioned on 7 March 1947. I also liked the case when the Soviet cruiser Molotov was hit by a torpedo which cut off 20 meters of ship stern. I remember this incident because the Molotov was repaired using the parts of three unfinished ships, each of different projects, one of which was a submarine, the second was another Kirov-class cruiser
  5. While I am not against game сoncept "Resistance" in generally, but I cannot agree with this. Bismarck was a tough not because it was built from pure Hitlerium, had the magical Ahnenerbe runes everywhere, or was built on the ancient, mystical scrolls from era of Myths. Bismarck was a tough because its engine and magazines was very well protected. The Germans successfully used this armor distribution since WW1, but actually anyone could use it. It's not even an armor scheme, literally "put more armor here and here." Yankees worshiped at AoN, while the Russians invented the opposit
  6. Sure. Even without delving into history, modern ships such as the Zumwalt, Gerald Ford, littoral combat ships or CV Queen Elizabeth show difficulties that may be encountered than you try to use some innovative ideas. I've also heard that Stirling submarines are pretty tricky. I am sure the list is much longer than my modest knowledge. It is always a balance - do only "good old" and in the end you will fall behind. Build the super-modern high-tech ship of the Next Day and it will take years (if not decades) to get it to work. Back in WWII, I think the Royal Navy was solid. Not so i
  7. Depends on the implementation. It could be just one of the balance elements, does not affect anything or be obvious game-breaking bullshit. At the moment hulls in total mixed bag of collision models problems, errors in weight offset settings and wrong ratios length-width. And of course, the balance of hulls characteristics, let's be honest, is far from ideal. I like the implementation of the qarters less. We choose between "small barracks" with a minimum of people, "medium barracks" with a normal number of people, and "large barracks" with a bunch of people. And basically, it's just
  8. I'm not going to teach you what to do or declare you as heretic, but ...destroyer with triple turrets is unreasonable IRL😄 Point of triple (or quarter) turrets in that they reduce firepower but save weight and space. 3 х triple turrets weigh and occupy less space than 4 × twin turrets. This means that the citadel can be made shorter - and thicker. And use a more powerful propulsion system becomes variant. This works on cruisers and battleships, also because the guns are very heavy and the turret armor typically weighs a lot. You pay for this by reducing the rate of fire, the more
  9. Game mechanics that are described in the Campaings section of Ultimate Admiral:Dreadnoughts are directly taken from the game mechanics from Rule the waves. Are there players here who have Rule the waves experience? How is the issue with the ship designer resolved in RtW? I read from the walkthroughs that the designer is significantly random, but nevertheless presents the player with a challenge. ...game has no aircraft, submarines, MTB and mines. 20-40mm cannons are ballast, trawls and anti-submarine armament do not exist at all. This list says a lot about you, thank you.
  10. "Contre-torpilleurs" translates as destroyer. Nevertheless, no problem, typical USN destroyers for you. We do not have a company, so this is all premature. AI may simply not research the necessary technologies and continue to build destroyers WW1 level all timeline. How does this relate to the game? So far player has no control over the board height and seaworthiness... it's even exists?
  11. The imperfection of Somers and Magador destroyers class is not the point of discussion. I commented on this post which is obviously wrong "5" twin turret destroyer" was were designed and built in many countries, long before WW2 began. USA, Japan, Germany (150mm), Italy (120mm), Britain (120mm), France (130-138mm) and even the USSR (130mm). What is it all about? AI makes idiotic designs? Isn't that what he always did? Does the player make designs that would never work in reality? Hmm, didn't we buy this game for that too? And if we're entering non-functional insanity territor
  12. Mogador-class destroyer, 4x2 138mm, Marine nationale, 1939 Somers-class destroyer, 4x2 5", USN 1939
×
×
  • Create New...