TAKTCOM

Oh, we'll surely get moar hulls and turrets. The question is how many of them will be something new, and how many of them will be another copy-paste However, there are not many left. Most of the WW2 ships are covered, the main holes are in pre dreadnought cruiser classes. Like french multi-turrets raiders or some Elswick cruisers maybe some russian BB-size raiders Yes, this was achieved by qualitative fire control system, radar and a dual-purpose guns. Still, their torpedo weapons were not weak. Everyone hoped that a cheap destroyer with a pinch of luck could sink an expensive cruiser, or even a very expensive battleship.

Soviet Leningrad-class, UK S/T-class and nazi type 1936A have 8x533mm torpedo tubes, french Mogador and famous Fletchers have even more - 10 tubes at each. So no, the idea of using torpedoes as the main weapon for destroyers was not exclusive to Japan. And yes, there is nothing bad in torpedo attack. In my opinion, 178 mm and 180 mm is not a big difference. What upsets me more is the inability to do something like Furutaka. Displacement less then 10k and 8'' guns just don't fit in relevant shipbuilder.

Yeah, remake simplified armor system into some more realistic, for example. Or are these terrible divisions. Dear God, this is the first game in my experience where I do not combined units into groups, but instead split groups into single units

I still prefer to wait and get a quality product than a piece of trash right now. Of course, the waiting is disappointing, but at least, not so many questionable decisions in the gameplay and the designer of ships at the moment. We can say that developers are moving in the right direction, but they are doing it slowly. Well, this is more than you can say about most game developers.

I did not expect the separation of crew and officers. This game is becoming more intriguing. Thanks for the news. Rather like that. Although if you want a real historical confrontation at sea in 1890in large format, it is Great Britain versus France: the first naval force versus the second naval force. Probably Research&Development.

You point: reducing torpedoes ammunition will make the game better My point: TB&DD gameplay is already difficult and this changes will make it unplayable. I see no reason to continue the discussion. Let the developers release new patch and we'll see what happens next. I apologize if I was rude, my patience sometimes fails me. This seems to be one of these cases.

I understand that you hate the torpedoes and their carriers. But if you had ever tried a mission like you would know that the destroyer gameplay is not a piece of cake. Largely due to the lack of player control over the aiming of torpedoes and bugs. When launched, torpedoes can disappear, or explode your own ship. AI doesn’t shoot them at the right moment and shoots at the wrong time. All this is terribly annoying. If you have spare torpedoes, you can try again. If not ... No one will play them. And I don’t understand why the destroyer 45+kts is worse or better than a cruiser 45+kts.

Why didn’t you write first that you just hate torpedoes? This is the answer to all my questions. And no, IJN admiral were not "overjoyed". This 6,71% hits was one of the reasons why the Japanese lost war. ...The night attack force was to launch an intricately coordinated long-range salvo of 130 torpedoes from 11 different groups using half their ready torpedoes. This salvo was designed to converge upon and hit 10 American capital ships with 20 weapons (a rate of ~15%)... ...IJN hit 30 enemy ships with 44 Type 93, 1 Type 8 and 2 Type 6 torpedoes in these battles, sinking 18. The average hit rate was 6.71%, far below the required 15%... ...To answer the question posed by this article; the IJN did not achieve the necessary hit rate or efficiency in action to make the Decisive Battle strategy a success, had that course been pursued. Even the world's best surface torpedomen were not good enough to bring the Decisive Battle to fruition for the IJN. All they could do was make it costly, and die fighting. There were no "tens of thousands at any given time, increasing as time went on". You are mistaken 10 times . And this is why most battleships in ww1 was lost by from artillery fire and in ww2 from air strikes. But whatever.

AI сan't think even once and you’re talking "twice". Reducing the number of reloads for destroyers in game (sic!) is a catastrophe recipe. And all due to the fact that someone does not distinguish the game from reality. In reality, the destroyers were one shot weapon. And that was normal, because most of them had never even made that one single shot - never fired a torpedo at the enemy. In the game, the player expects the destroyer WILL do some damage on his opponent with torpedoes. Torpedoes that are fully controlled by AI. Torpedoes that need to be released in dozens to get into at least something. Do you know what chance the real Japanese fleet had with their best torpedoes in the world? 6.71% Do you really think 6-7 hits from 100 in game is OK?

Russian Empire in 1890. -Ships in the ice: ship maintenance reduced by 25%, crew training time/funds increased by 25%. Also сannot start a war in winter. - Half sailors, half soldiers: crews morale increases. If the Russian fleet controls the area where ground battles is going, then each russian capital ship increases the chance to success for russian ground forces. Say 1-3% per ship. - Weak sea trade: sea blockade of Russia doesn't cause increase unrest level. Colonial acquisitions generate less income. - We have men and ships, but no sailors or navy: financing, shipbuilding and research speed, are not constant and varies from 75% to 125%. The player starts with 100% efficiency and it gradually increases until it reaches 125% percent, after which it goes down to 75%. Defeat raises the level by 125% reflecting revanchist sentiments in society. Not very sure about all this, but I don’t know how else to express it Russian government did not know what exactly what they want from fleet. Foreign roots: buying a ship in foreign countries, increases speed research. For example, cruiser with new hull type will increase the speed of cruiser hull research. Ashes of Sevastopol: coastal defense and sea mines cost less, and built faster. Accelerates research allowing ships to carry mines. Including submarine minelayer (late tech - WW1). Weak industry: increase ship prices and chance to ship have flaw. Building ships in series reduces the price and chance of flaw. Conflicts in society: defeat will significantly increase unrest level. Research Advantages: commerce raiding doctrine; battleships and armored cruisers hulls; secondary batteries in double turrets for battleships; mine warfare; semi-oil boilers. Special events. - Old traditions die hard: for money and prestige remove trait "Ships in the ice". - Russian-French alliance. Friends against Germans, English and Autrians. Increase budget, get some french tech and discount when building a ship in France. - We will take Erusalim Constantinople! A huge amount of prestige and raising the budget, reduces unrest level. UK, Italy, France (if not in the alliance), as well as Austria-Hungary absolutely hate this. All Balkan states and Turkey especially also hate you now. - Hunger. Lose money or increase unrest level. - Industrialization: spend money on multiple events, which are remove "Weak industry" trait. - Black Sea Style. Increases speed research for battleships hulls, main and secondary guns. Cannot be taken with "Baltic Style". - Baltic Style. Increases speed research for cruisers hulls, citadel, engines and shaft. Cannot be taken with "Black Sea Style". - The emperor is dead, long live the emperor! Nicholas II believes that the extension to the east the best way. Accept his vision of the future and receive prestige, raising budget. This also increase tension with China, Japan, UK and America. Deny the emperor’s will and he won’t accept it easily.

France need two, better four cruiser hulls. First, all the guns in the towers, a huge ram. The second, more modern option. Hulls three and four are variants of the first and second, but with casemates

Ah, this smell of Warships at the mornin... I think that the game needs traits to increase differences between countries, but these should not be traits of admirals, but of the countries themselves.This can be done quite interestingly if done well. A good example for this is another game with turn-based strategic map and real-time battles - TotalWar Warhammer 2. Each faction has its own unique features that really make sense play them all. Obviously, you can’t just copy-paste features from Warhammer 2 to UA:D but it shows that it is possible and works great. If devs want players to stay in your game for a long time, of course. Sure, this requires some knowledge of the history and the navy. But even in this case, I came up with three concepts of national features for the UK, Japan and Russia, which will make the game completely unique to them. And these concepts do not require any special changes in the mechanics and complete processing game over RTW. I am sure that something similar can be done with all factions. If I don’t know anything about Spain, then surely there is someone who knows.

Something like this?

Easy. You decided to seize the territory inhabited by savages. What could go wrong? Well, they may not be so savage and buy (on credit) a few destroyers from your enemies. Then a sudden meeting with your Armada and BOOM. Your neighbors may not like it and you will have a choice, give up your colonial possessions, or start a war with the European powers. The quality of your ship was so poor that it drowned on the way to the savages. The crew would be so untrained that it exploded the ship by accident. and 100500 possible options. Everything is in the hands of developers. Read the first article from the same writer. I did not understand what mean "legend" Game start is 1890. Dreads will appear only after 15 years. Cruisers? Not sure. Russia and France developed cruisers to destroy british trade fleet, the British - to protect trade. Spaniards ... because they did not have money for battleships? Then you have to give the same bonus to China and Japan. I agree that there should be both bonuses and penalties. Damn, my concept Russian Empire probably has more minuses than bonuses. But cruisers? However, I know a little about the Spanish fleet. Сivil war in RTW means you need a small, victorious war Good pictures, but these ships were built in defeated Spain.To win, you need other ships. Which ones will become clear after the release of the company.

If I understand game mechanics correctly, the only way to start a war with someone is in the player hands. AI is completely passive, and why you need start a war with the United States, if you can become their allies? Nonetheless, as an admiral, you definitely need to ruin diplomatic relations with someone and start a war, for the sake of fame and money. Or you get fired. So, how Italy start a war with Ethiopia, and Russia may start a conflict with Turkey, so the Spain can find something even poorer and smaller than herself and then rob this loser. This is how colonialism works. I think the main problem of Spain will be in it itself - no money, bad shipyards, where ships are built for a long time and with flaws. This is by the way a question about national traits. How many Spain will have penalties and how many bonuses. I thought about traits for different countries, but my knowledge was mainly enough for the concepts of England, Japan and Russia. I don’t know much about Spain, so besides “little money” and “weak industry”, I don’t have any special assumptions. Hah, same but replace Germany with Russia

That was a pretty interesting question. I am currently reading a book about the First World War cruisers so I just had the material right in the hands.

"Completely random" sound extra fun and sometimes it really is. But much more often it becomes extremely frustrating: too fast ships, incredible (sometimes incredibly low) firepower, phenomenal survivability, and so on. Too often you have to restart the mission again and again, just to have ships that allow the player to win. This works for both enemy ships and player ships, built by auto design. So I choose the last option.

Of course. Most, um, bright example is SMS Blücher. To supply the side turrets, she had 62 meter corridors from turrets to ship's magazine. Another but less impressive example is the Russian cruisers of the Boyan type. During the modernization armament was reinforced with an additional 203 mm cannon, installed without turret or casemates, just on deck. Shells, apparently manually transferred from near 203mm turret .

The most part of hulls is copypaste.

Finally found the time to try out the new alpha. What can I say: - Flash Fires mechanics are good, finally fire became a real threat. The quality of the animation is satisfactory, however... Yes, the blue gas flame looks rather strange. - Detailed Combat Statistics: the only option could be better is addition kill-cam. - Combat Music: just not. Try to listen to this music for a couple of hours, it builds tension and so on in a circle for hours. For what? To drive a player crazy? Thank you for the opportunity to turn off the music in the options. New Destroyers: now we have IJN and few others DD archetypes. As usual, typical collision problems with turrets and towers. Other part of patch note: acceptable.

What happened to the red line? о_О

Good enough.

This. I wonder if we'll see armor overhaul ever.