Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Fishyfish

Members2
  • Posts

    385
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    15

Everything posted by Fishyfish

  1. You want to know what modern naval game play would look like? Read up on Operation Praying Mantis. The largest US Navy surface engagement since the second world war, to summarize, it was a quick and dirty knife fight using anti-ship missiles fought between a carrier group of the USN, and the Iranian "navy" in 1988 during the twilight of the Iran Iraq war. TLDR The US sank half the iranian "navy" in a few minutes, which sounds impressive until you realize that half the Iranian navy consists of 1 frigate, 1 gunboat, and a handful of speed boats. Modern naval combat is really just hurling AShMs at each other while trying to shoot down incoming AShMs with CIWS.
  2. I've been playing through assorted missions, and I've noticed a distinctive pompom double bang audio bug on all 8in guns.
  3. The Marlboro mans personal yacht "Chuffin" aka muh machinery spaces.
  4. While I'm not hostile towards those ribbons I do wish to know why? What we have is perfectly functional. I'd be okay with them but I'd also be concerned about too much UI clutter.
  5. Id like to see the ability to retrofit and modernize warships in the campaign, a limited overhaul system to take an existing hull and bring it up to speed, so to speak with out being able to completely rebuild it from scratch. A pretty simple and straight forward procedure, engine overhauls and fuel modernization, the ability to swap out, upgrade and ad additional secondaries, the ability to plop on better range finders, radios, and radars as they become available, and etc. I'd also like to see the ability to buy foreign built ships. Say your nation has limited tech and dock yard space, you should be able to commission warships from willing allied nations whom have the tech or dockyard capabilities you'd like at a reasonable markup. Many historical examples support this, as GB basically supplied many nations with capital ships through the turn of the century and the most prominent example that comes to mind is Japan buying the Kongo from british yards, or the Russians buying the Tsesarvich from France. I'd also also like to see the ability to salvage reusable equipment from scrapped/mothballed or reasonably accessible wrecks. I'd assume* that guns for example might have a limited amount in stockpile so, if you needed more say, 12" guns but hadn't enough in your stockpile, that you could strip them from warships nolonger needing them. *I'd also also also like to see material stockpiles and equipment manufacturing when it comes to building warships. Moreso than just having the finances to build a boat, I'd like to have it so you're limited in how many warships you can build not just from the cost, but also from components available. I think it could be pretty easy to simulate production of machinery and equipment, and to have a national stockpile there of where in if your country is only capable of producing ten 15" guns per year, your available stockpile of 15" guns use in naval projects are thus represented. Want to build that superduper dread with thirty 15in guns? You might have to save your guns over time to build it. Furthermore I'd also also also like to see accidents represented. While it would suck, it would be an interesting feature if oops, you just lost a heavy cruiser because a fire broke out while in harbor and despite a gallant effort your fire crews were unable to save her before her magazines cooked off. That could also lead to interest things like damage to industrial capabilities which while I understand might be frustrating, but also might be an interesting challenge to try and work with. Oh, also also also also also an optional Ironfish mode, which limits savescumming and forces you to deal with any and all ramifications and consequences of your actions, losses and successes. Lost a battle? Figure out how to compensate, don't just reload the save from before.
  6. We can get as grumpy as we want but it won't do us any good. I can tell you from experience that if you get tooo grumpy and tooo much a d*ck as I have in the past, Nick will just yell at you. So just keep posting fish instead.
  7. Gabe demanded a swimming pool full of chips before the steam release and the devs have been busy emptying them into said pool, one bag at a time. Have your friends buy more copies, the devs need the money to buy more chips.
  8. I can dig what you mean about the open spaces, thats what I mean by needing a little work lol. Speaking of clown cars I really want the imperator aleksander II class battleships and the matsushima class protected cruisers, but that would mean being able to build a ship with one main battery turret. Things that will never happen for 1000.
  9. I like that top one for some strange reason. It needs a litttttttle work, some TLC, but it looks like it could be a very utilitarian colonial cruiser. The kinda boat you'd find sitting in some distant colonial port, reminding the natives not to take up arms against the empire.
  10. Really? I can access every mission despite only beating like 17 or 20 or so of them. I've tried and played every one but they tend not to interest me or cause me to feel accomplished in any way so I often just bail on them before too long.
  11. I would love to see that, I really would, but I'm convinced that we never will. I have no reason to believe that the ship construction elements of the game will get any serious change or overhaul, that is to say I'm pretty sure we're stuck with what we've got.
  12. Which nations don't have super battleship hulls yet? Bet you my fins that's what we'll get. A few more mildy interested academy missions, the run of the mill bug fixes and ui tweaks. I don't mean to be toooo sardonic but...
  13. Uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuugh. Yep. Already bored of this patch, nolonger playing it, don't have anything useful to contribute, know better that to excessively fishpost. Well, see ya in alpha 10.
  14. It's a test bed for pneumatic cannon, essentially big ole air guns called dynamite guns. Why? Because in the 1880s dynamite was too unstable to be in conventional artillery shells. Essentially the sudden force of firing a standard run of the mill naval cannon would set off the dynamite filler in the shell while still inside the barrel of the naval artillery. I guess this is considered to be bad by most navies. These big ole airguns were gentler in their acceleration and wouldn't set off the sensitive, fragile, coy and otherwise unstable early dynamite explosives. They were a technological dead end, as by the turn of the century advances in high explosive chemistry made dynamite based projectiles more stable and usable in modern artillery. The USS Vesuvius was the only warship to be armed with these experimental weapons (that I know of) which had a very short range in the world of naval combat. That being said it was used to shell Cuba during the spanish american war, where she operated at night and had great psychological effects on the islands defenders. Her bombardments were effectively silent and with out the roar of conventional naval artillery off the horizon these early stealth attacks caused panic and anxiety among the spanish defenders, who never had any warning when the attacks were coming. Also this reply is 3 weeks late, woops?
  15. I really want monitors so I can build Imperator Aleksander II class battleships. Something else this game disappoints with, oh well.
  16. Unfortunately the devs have taken a pretty firm stance on hardpoint restrictions under the explanation of "we want to limit placing weapons and barbettes where machinery would be, too far forward or astern" and etc. And while I agree with you I also see their point. Granted I think the best work around would be for them to develop a system where we the player outline where machinery, fuel bunkers, living quarters, magazines and the like go within the hull. My issue is that there is a very small pool of parts as the vast majority are simply rescales, or subtle variations with more or less gubbinzs stuck to them. Take the recent french funnels for example, or the new french towers. There is very little differences between the sets as they're nearly identical parts. At this point in time I don't have any faith that the devs will pump out a bunch of additional parts sets for the sake of part diversity. They've made no allusions to this matter and frankly seem to be content telling the player base that "Y patch has new parts letting you build 7 new warships!" When infact its maybe 2 ships just rescaled and distributed over 7 different classes. That said, I actually have to agree with: And I believe this to be their gimmick in primary differences between nations in the upcoming campaign. Short of technological buffs/debuffs (for example Britain getting access to dreadnoughts first) and financial constraints towards fleet construction and maintenance there's really not much else to delineate between different nations. Do I like it? Not necessarily, do I understand and accept it? Yes.
  17. Yes, that is correct. Nothing tends to weigh a lot more than people actually give it credit for and my reply is a completely unnecessary s*itpost.
  18. Yes, I find that in most cases my screening ships put the battle line between them and the enemy regardless of the situation.
  19. I continue to have "port/starboard weight offset" discrepancies of several % when placing mirrored casement guns. Also as I continue to play through missions I find AI pathing to be reallly bad still. Especially when the battle line is given a drastic maneuver order, the divisions in scout/screen/follow tend to lose their minds and cause major traffic jams.
  20. If I'm not mistaken the guns untop of main battery turrets weren't manned during operations where the main batteries were firing, because the concussion of those guns would ruin the gun crews existence.
  21. Having unnecessary hand holding and leading the player around by the nose would also impair immersion. If you play an FPS do you need a prompt every single time you come up to a ledge to mantle over it? If the answer is yes, I'm very sorry to hear that.
×
×
  • Create New...