Fishyfish

You have to be able to take the negative with the positive. If you only thrive on positive feedback than you don't grow as a company, or in your skill or trade. I know, I'm a carpenter, I own my own small home improvement business. I dig how much it hurts when a customer nitpicks your hard work, when you bend over backwards and you can't please them. It sucks! I get it! And I admit in the past I've said some crass things full of vitriol, but this post in question is gentle. It's also just honest. Do you want me to lie to you? I'm not going to do that. And if you rather me gone than hear negative feedback that really says a lot about you. Furthermore, it's not a few euros. It was 50$ USD for early alpha access, a price tag more akin to a finished game from a big company then equal to anything I've spent on early alpha access. I took a huge gamble on what I thought might be the game I've always wanted, and furthermore it was being worked on by someone whose past works, the Darth Mods for Totalwar were mods I poured hundreds of hours into and highly regarded. It was your good name that sold me, I read everything available about this game at the time, I went over your dev blog in depth, this looked like it was going to be everything I ever wanted in a warship game and I was hopeful on your reputation alone. Now, months later, I feel duped and misled. This is my honest critique and I'm sorry if it offends you. The mechanics of the game are great, I have no nitpick about ballistics, floatability, torpedos or anything like that. I like how you've made it so players cant dupe the range of the warship in academy missions to make them more balanced, I like how you've striven to fix mechanical issues with every path. One patch flat out broke the game for me, enemy ships wouldn't sink and the next fixed it and made it mechanically playable. I'm grateful for these things. The nuts and bolts are there and as far as i can tell they're wonderfully done. It's everything else that falls flat for me. When your devblog says "we've released 7 new heavy cruiser hulls for every country" and I find that those hulls are just battleship hulls and parts that have been rescaled I feel lied to. When I read your devblog about projected features that are never discussed by the devs and bitterly argued over by members on the forums who aren't reading them I feel out of touch. Is what I've read still going to happen? Is what you posted still the plan you want to take? What am I suppose to do and think in this matter? On the one hand I can think "what sold me on this game isn't going to happen" and that leads me to be negative. Or I can think "these people are asking questions about things that the devs posted in their blog about planned game features" and I wonder are those plans now obsolete? You guys don't say anything in regards to that so all I can do is wonder. It's not a good combination. But if you want me to shut up and ship off I'll do that. I'm sorry I've offended you. But you as a developer don't seem to care that I feel I wasted my money on your product, that I don't play this anymore. Each new patch I log in, hopeful and excited, update to see whats new and cool and finding very little that grabs me and shakes me and makes me want to play, I hang it up and wait for the next one. And unfortunately that's going to remain the norm until I see something that says to me things will be different. Unless you'd like to continue to discuss this in DMs this will be my last post on the forums in regards to being unhappy with your game, and that I promise you. I will censor myself, and no longer plague you with negative feedback.

I'd argue that a lot of the new hulls you've added are copy paste. Now sure, some of them have been unique and that's been nice even if they aren't ones that interest me exactly as I'm always glad to see new content, but I'd say that's only about half of them. In all honesty, I'd learn to 3D model to make hulls for this game if you guys ever release mod tools or instructions on how to do so.

I'd love to see some more of these wonderful pre-dreadnoughts. We've had a huge influx of modern hulls but I bought this game originally to play in the pre-dreadnought era. I really want to be able to build ships like the ACR1 USS Maine but at this point, heck just to be able to build en echelon style warships in general would be neat but given the trend of the last few patches I doubt I ever will. I don't think we'll see any really interesting or unique hulls like these, that doesn't seem to fit the idea the devs have for their game, and doesn't seen to fit the interests that the majority of the players on this forum want. Shame really.

The new missions in the past 2 or maybe even 3 patches have been really... boring and feel very samey. So many of them have been "build some kind of super warship" and I suppose I'm in the minority here, but I don't find doing that over and over to be all that interesting. The vast majority of them seem focused on "Build a super battleship for this nation" "build a super battleship for another nation" "build some super cruisers" and etc. I keep seeing a trend of modern, modern, modern, and it's getting really old. I've only beaten 14 missions, and those 14 were ones available in alpha 2 when I started playing as these newer missions are just so boring as to not keep me interested enough to finish them. Though the German raiding squadron looks like it could be an interesting mission, as does sink the raiders, I've still not been inspired enough to give them any real amount of time or effort. The problem I have with the new missions like the German Raiding Squadron is that the tools you've given us are in themselves boring and samey. Take the new German light cruiser for example, how much diversity in parts does it have? Two identical front towers, one smaller than the other. Three rear towers, two of which are identical but different sizes, and one funnel design only. That's nothing, that's boring. When your options are only "you can put these three key components, that all look the same, in a scant few predetermined slots and that's more than half your ship customization" doesn't really make for an inspiring or creative experience. And I keep finding this limitation to be the case with other new hulls and warships in other missions. The availability of parts for these new ships is nill, saying that a ship has three different front towers to chose from but making all three be the exact same tower just slightly different sizes with different stats isn't providing the player with three different towers. It's giving them one, with three different stats. Same goes for all the new hulls released in the past patch, all these new heavy cruiser hulls are in most cases identical to preexisting battleship, with identical but scaled down parts. This is boring. I'm really starting to wonder if I made a mistake in buying this game.

I like the oldschool armored cruisers and pre dreadnought hulls the most. The HMS Warrior hull is my current favorite, with the pre-dreadnought hulls based off the Brandenburg class being a close second.

I'm very impressed at how well prepared my enemy was, they even brought a spare turret with them just in case one of the other two got wet, or misplaced. Stuff like this kinda pulls me out of the mood, ya know what I mean?

The blog post says that there's 30+ new hulls, but I'm having trouble finding them all. I see a lot of copy paste, but so far I've only counted about 9. Am I missing them? Are they only available under very specific years?

Modern tower II, III, IV don't fit on the heavy cruiser III hull at all. Tested with Italy.

So out of curiosity what will be limited to specific nations? I'd hope that in the campaign each nation comes with it's own unique pros and cons, boons and challenges and unique flavors outside of nation's flags and global positioning. Also, alright, getting the game patched now. How exciting, this patch I've been looking forward to. Okay so right off the bat, love the HMS warrior hull. But I've noticed you still can't put guns in the modern tower casemate mounts for the Hood style superstructures. No casemate guns are even available for them, and none of the secondaries fit.

Close.. But my meaning was screen shots of the new hulls in game as one is based off the HMS Warrior. Good try and thanks for the effort. You get the booby prize, one wet cigar.

I'm at work, though this gig might get paused soon. Anyone want to help me scratch an itch and post some SS of the HMS warrior and possibly some of the Heavy Cruisers/anything that looks predreadnought/early dreadnought? I just need a lil hit to get me till I get home.

Okay hold up. Just a second. I need a hearty laugh. "Not a lot of people would want to play a game where they are reading excel sheets and technical paper work?" Uh, who here loves Rule the Waves 1/2? Because those are warship excel sheet and technical paperwork simulators. But I don't think you understand. I'm perfectly fine with the gameplay as it is, slow, methodical and determined. More micromanagement of crew would be more things to do when searching for and closing in on the enemy fleet. There is gameplay there, just not the kind of game play you want. Naval combat is a lot of hunting, waiting, hunting, shadowing, hunting, waiting, oh god hurl everything we got at them, miss a lot, break off and run away. What you want is to cut out what you see as excessive and unfun, to distill down the simulation aspects into pure action and that's not what has been advertised, or what the devs have discussed doing on any of their main features pages. I don't know why they'd about face all of a sudden and dive right into doing that. There is plenty of gameplay, and adding more micromanagement is only adding more gameplay. The game isn't 100% about battlez and shootan boatz an blowin stuff up! You the player are suppose to be your nations equivalent to lord of the admiralty, from what the devs posted last year a lot of the game is going to be fleet management, budget management, facilities management, giving political advice to your nations ruling party, posturing and positioning globally, with combat interspersed in between. If you read up on what's advertised for the games campaign the following has been stated by the devs. "Being the chief admiral of your nation gives you complete power over naval construction programs and policies. It will be your responsibility to manage the naval budget and allocate it wisely between technological research, crew training, shipyard development and ship building. You will also move your fleets across the global map and decide which sea regions to reinforce. Global tension may rise dangerously and cause wars that will involve your country. So you must make sure that your fleet is always ready for combat and in maximum efficiency." To me, you don't seem to understand the type of game you've bought into. And I don't know why that is. Either you've willfully or ignorantly ignored the details of what the game has been advertised as, you didn't do your research or you misunderstood what the game was going to become as a result of seeing youtubers fighting various battles. I don't really know what to tell you. Once the Campaign is launched, one could only expect gameplay to get more intricate and detailed, and step even further away from in your face action.

Not at all reading what the game was advertised as, then coming on and wanting it to be something else all together? Really? Let me quote from the promotional page. "Crew Importance (*) Crew is another factor that must be considered for your ships, especially in campaign play where you will have to keep your fleet frequently trained in order to fight efficiently. A well-trained crew may compensate for the lack of advanced technology or the opposite, a poorly-trained crew may seriously limit the capabilities of even the most state-of-the-art ship. Crew will greatly affect ship accuracy and other combat factors. Shell and torpedo hits can kill crew and if losses are great, the ship’s overall effectiveness can deteriorate significantly. After a battle, depending on ship performance, the ship’s crew experience level may rise or fall. In this way you can create veteran-ships that have legendary performance in battle, or… end up with ships that should better hide than fight." https://www.dreadnoughts.ultimateadmiral.com/deep-battle-system

Your arcade mechanics are BORING to me, so then what? I would have zero interest in playing a casual arcade warship game, thus why I don't play WoWS and do play RtW2. Have you considered this sort of game isn't what you're looking for? Maybe you should go play Battle Stations: Midway or Pacific. Both of which are really great warship games in a more action and arcade kinda vein. I highly recommend them.

Yeah, no. In a naval simulation why would you expect there not to be any sort of moral or crew condition systems? I'm seeing a lot of "Less simulation, more arcade" in a lot of posts as of late. And why would you want that? I don't want this to be an arcade game, I know many other people don't want this to be an arcade game. It would be "just DUMB!" to turn this into an arcade mess. Truth be told I'm hopeful for more tiring systems, such as managing fuel and ship conditions, not less. Last I checked this game isn't being advertised as an arcade boat battle, and I for one would be disgusted if it went down that path.

That the Hoche and if you want to get technical its not a predreadnought but an even older ironclad turret/barbette battleship. Which I still love, mind you.

This community is already pretty rough. From the innane ship wifuing weebs from WoWS choking up the boards with nonsense to the bickering over which paper battleship is better. No pun intended but I've noticed a bunch of people jumping ship. I'm hopeful for this patch, as I don't really think the game matches what was advertised as of yet. But I've learned one thing. No more alphas for me.

Glad I took today off to play this. Got a lot of work done since I had so much free time.

You can go full Nelson as the.. Austro-Hungarians in 1935 when they didn't exist, but you can't as Britain? What guns fit in the casement mounts built into the Hood style towers? Cause, as it stands none. Didn't fix the German Pre-dreadnought hull where tower 2 doesn't fit flush. Why do some American warships only get access to a forward cage mast but not a rear one? Didn't fix the overlapping mounts on the American super battleship modren tower. Didn't fix a bunch of other mounts and hardpoint issues that... I just can't be bothered to report again. I didn't even bother getting into combat proper to see how all the new damage looks and other stuff works. Big yawn from me. . See ya at alpha 5 in, 3 months or so.

I know about the Varyag and the Aurora, I do dig what your saying though. Don't mistake my salt, I appreciate the Hood and Bismarck, but they're just kinda like Ensigns first battleships. I'd love to see some good old Russian boats though, the Peresvet or Georgii Pobedonosets or some of the others.

So? The Warspite is more iconic than the Hood, which despite being the pride of the Royal Navy is more remembered for exploding than anything else. Sure I get it, an exploding battle cruiser and the only ride of the Germans poor investment are indeed iconic. I'm well aware why they're so revered. Myth and ledgend and all that. One bottled up in a fjord its whole life, they other getting pounced and paddled. And as the the Hood? Britain's last battlecruiser, well known for being one of the Royal Navy's biggest and baddest, with a proud career of showing the flag all over the empire. What about the Konig class from the first world war? What about the Victoria class from the 1880s? But hey, I get it. I personally think that the Battle of the River Plate was more interesting than the Hunt for the Bismarck. I'd rather see the Admiral Graf Spee.

Okay so lets see. Not at all interested in the headliner news, the Bismarck and the Hood? Don't we already have a flush deck dreadnought hull thats akin to the Bismarck? I guess one with a sharper Atlantic bow is something. Do we need more of the same? More super dreadnought hulls for the Iowa and modren hull variations for warships post 1927? More modren tech and variations? Great I can't *yawn* wait... Anyways. Not at all interested in any of the new missions, or any of that stuff at all. Oh well. I've got tempered expectations about the new secondary barbette system, I want to be interested but.. well we'll see. The gun placement at current is really taxing. I understand that there might be limitations because of the AI's needs but that doesn't mean I'm thrilled. Its not all bad, I'm very interested in the new gun models assuming that doesn't just mean "More modren looking guns", as well as the hull model fixes. I'm very interested in the improved decales and targeting controls as well. I've no opinions on the balances though, got to wait to give them a try first. I really just want my game to work, last patch made it so I couldn't sink anything anymore. So that's fun. I don't know. Not a lot here aside from the general house keeping and quality of life updates to keep me interested. Would like to see more effort put into the 1890-1910 era. Everything had much more personality and unique design. Post WW1 everything starts to look the same.. yawn. Man, big yawn.