Cptbarney

Omg, Omg, Omg. I was right and im bloody estatic. Am vereh happeh barney! 'w'

Im assuming it's next week they did say there other things gonna be added in, but yeah been awhile now. Interested to see what the next patch will be about in full.

Quads, quintuples and sextuples would be fine, i mean the main the purpose of the game afterall is to design your own ship essentially. You can apply special bonus and negatives to them as well which are further enhanced by the nation you pick, how you researched them how long they have been in development, quality of turret design etc.

Well considering this game is in alpha 2, i don't know why you expected people who expect a singleplayer game to just accept your ideas of multiplayer. Don't get me wrong the ideas sound interesting but your inability to understand the basic fact that this will most likely be a singleplayer game forever doesn't surprise me the least. Also being a closed beta tester for world of warships means nothing since i've seen supertesters and peeps with your forum title being utter trash at the game. Im not looking forward multiplayer in this game atm, because i basically want a RTW's with HOI and TW features in the campaign as do a lot of people on this forum. And well insulting peeps isn't going to generate any sympathy for your cause. Like i said the ideas sound cool, but being an arse about it won't help in the slightest. With a game like this multiplayer would be impossible to balance or you would have to dumb the game down so much to cater to potatoes that it no longer resembles what it once was. If the devs want multiplayer thats fine, but add it when the actual game itself i fleshed out and polished properly before moving onto such a monumental task. I mean since WOWS's balance is god awful (thanks to cv's) and the events mostly time-gated trash that while you 'hAvE a cHOicE' still provide no new perma content and offer asinine rewards for such monumental effort, with a playerbase known to fail at the most basic of tactics and controls in said game. Oh well, try again next year i suppose.

pretend smoll babies are teleporting into the turret with shells.

FTFY. 🤪

Guess furia was to angreh to die lol. But yeah peeps are tied between moar damage, but chances of being duds and i think no reload (so one shot thing) or what they are now but just tweaking the stats more, maybe flooding can have more of an impact and maybe if we get to customise the types of charges and fuses being used in torpedoes?

They might of ran into problems, with the mode or deemed it not important enough for testing as it seems like they want to test all the mechanics out first before moving onto game modes and other content. Don't get me wrong i would love a custom battle editor but i think it would be better with islands, bases, oil rigs, houses, towns , beaches, ice. etc.

Nah thats ok lol, i think im getting too hyped about the game spamming ideas here and there. Maybe we could have a sudden stop or slow down button? But add penalties that you would get in real life maybe to both sides if it applies to both. Yeah thats ok, i need to read moar about naval warfare clearly. Hmm i wonder if engine boost would/could be a thing in this game?

I think a good rule of thumb to follow would be, Bug fixes>improving existing content>Add smoll content>Add Large content>Miscellanous. That would be fine too be honest. So alpha 3 will see the arrival of new ship hulls and im guessing missions along with secondaries, tetaries, quadaries etc. getting buffs. (noice) And other goodies. Think if we could have new fuses, bursting fillers/chemicals/charges along with islands, houses, buildings and bases would be nice as well to add to aesthetics. (good way to test other mechanics as well). Maybe cool effects regarding bits of metal and wood flying off if ships are hit hard enough? Obviously that would take awhile to simulate and i don't expect too see anything like that and if at all until alpha 7 or 8 but would be a cool feature to have as well. Lots of vereh gud ideas here not just from me but from everyone else too. 'w'

Yeah, i know now. Regardless a lot of peeps want the feature in so if they add it in, theres no way to turn it off. Unless they add said option of course to the game. Plus i've never played any naval game besides world of warships (which oddly enough got me into ships in the first place and i started reading about them for the first time). Sorry if i was rude, just from my limited experience i assumed it would work or work well enough i guess.

Yeah hense why in-coorperating both things would be good anyways, RTW's UI was horrible and harsh plus basic so having some HOI4 elements would be nice. Plus HOI4 is just far easier to navigate compared to steam and iron, because you have to also take into condieration HCI effeciency when you design any user interface (so why would i use a UI that takes 6 clicks to do something when i can use another that does it in 2?) Obviously with a focus on RTW's but i still think that could be improved upon anyways. You could to a total war system as well, so turn based for the world map, but real time for any actual battles you fight in. So maybe RTW as a main focus with elements from HOI4 and Total war would be the best combo in general for a decent UI, a lot of work but can be done. Not to mention fog of war, intel gathering, spying etc. that also helps with seeing enemy fleets and groups in general and maybe even counter intelligence that gives you a false impression of the fleet. So the AI could pretend a big fleet is coming making you think you need to send one in kind but ends up being 5 ships vs your 30, but now your main fleet is engaged so the AI sends like 34 ships to your own 12 ships back at main base.

Yeah it could work doe. It depends on what elements you take from it like @Matto's suggestion, heavy on RTW mechanics but with HOI4 map and some of the features incorporated into said map. You could do the opposite, more HOI4 heavy but with RTW features and mechanics too. Both methods could work actually which is quite nice.

I think taking into account metal type and also the stats of those metals is quite interesting actually. Also means that other mechanics can be introduced. Still looks bloody complex lol but im not good with code so yeah. Still nice amount of work done, i do like method 1 since it takes into account more variables and this will allow you guys to expand upon features later on if needed (meaning longer game life in general). Dunno if method 2 would be feasible at all for you guys in general.

Fair enough, im not great with numbers far more of a design person myself, sadly peeps beat me to punch with stuff (bad barneh). Hopefully i can get some stuff reported for alpha 3 eventually lol. It's just during lectures they made out creating physics especially realistic physics was a pretty daunting and horrible task to do lol. But yeah don't rush mate, take your time. good qoute here: A delayed game is just delayed, a bad game is forever bad. Either way will play some more today, loving the game so far.

Ahh ok, well the games gunnery system is more complex than i thought, i guess code can only simulate so much as simulating actual physics is well... Extremely difficult in general. As long as its not wows aiming system then im fine. Think i mentioned in the alpha 3 thread for different types of fuses, charges and fillers i think. I guess, crew and experience would be the last defining factors? (so morale, actual experience, maybe personality, discipline, intelligence, hunger, fear etc.) Hell if the crew don't like you or mutiny (that would be hard to do but could be fun sort of lol) could seriously effect your ships (hey maybe a new naval academy mission?). Besides that and metal type i have no clue what elseo could be factored in besides additional weather effects (cyclones, hurricans, ice etc.)

Yeah im a lot younger played wurld of danks when it was still kinda new and in closed beta, but gold ammo along with horrible balance descisons (wheely bins going over 90km/h against a poor 120ton E100 (Tiger 4 or Emperor tiger as i would of called it) and watch it try and swing it's fat turret only to die to everysingle tank on the enemy team) maps got worse as well (hidden village was alright but 1/3 was wasted, hated swamp with a passion). You will be glad to know that double barrelled russian tanks are a thing and arty got nerfed. Sounds like it would of been a good idea as well. Wargaming seem good at ignoring suggestions, especially very sound ones and with well thoughtout plans and details. Shame really, i stopped playing wot's after 1.1 and i cba with wows atm. Im glad this is singleplayer as the problems of multi would just end it. Either way i can't wait for alpha 3, i predict alpha 4 for basic campaign and maybe alpha 6 with either full campaign or half (depending on what they want to test)

Yeah, i know what you mean and thats fine should probs close down the wows forum tab lol. Either way i doubt it will be added i could careless to be honest, might just be another feature they could add in some dlc that's toggable or something. I always assumed ships would take ages anyways (well i thought it would take hours lol, just to get to top speed). But yeah i think everything in world of warships is like tuned up to 2-4 times or something? Except turrets they seem to be normal? (lol). Wish i had the monies to build a modern style battleship even if just for the memes. At least the community on these forums is far better than world of tanks/ships. You can argue without people going mental or insane lol. And last point im pretty sure the AI would have a heart attack, it fails to disengage properly in general when formations are thing so...yeah.

I wouldn't bother playing it now, CV's are broken and most of the mechanics are horrible, like radar detecting ships behind islands (lol), questionable bugs, lack of QoL improvements, too many bloody temp time-gate events that make you stressed out trying to get the next premium ship, subs which will be a disaster like CV's have been (ironically enough RTS was the most balanced version of it). And all dem russian ships that are now flying out of nowhere. The game has been dumbed down massively just to cater to a gobby minority who didn't like their BB's getting torped or using WASD hacks (yes the playerbase is that bad that basic SA and common sense were non-existant to the point peeps forgot there were other keys). Check out world of objects (tanks) which seems to be spamming russian tanks (heavies mostly) from god knows where. Surprised an FPS hasn't been made by them with 25% rng to everything you do lol.

Maybe you could mix the two together? i mean it is an alpha so we could test both possible gunneries and also i like the idea of gunnery also being linked to the shell itself so its no longer a visual representation but also a physical object that can interacted with. To go further you can even make it so that the weather and even wear and tear or quality effects accuracy, shell curve, trajectory etc.

Wasnt it a combo of poor shells, ok gun barrells and very meh rangefinders? Compared to the americans who had very good shells, good barrells and excellent rangefinders and firecontrol? (thanks to gen 2 radar made in 1939 i think).

Well they can still add it in regardless, just have an option to toggle it off. It would be better if it was just limited to player choice anyways. Again there is no reason not to add it in. also with bow tanking your never stationary anyways, your either in reverse or going forward but keeping the bow pointed at an angle. Guess it makes the game more interesting though, but i guess would tax the AI somewhat if you suddenly went to stop then reversed. At least have a stop option to suddenly stop the ship even if it causes problems.

I don't see how it is. It makes no sense for me to go forward and risk broadside and kite just because i can't slow down the ship and reverse keeping my bow angled to ships which would ricohect a lot of rounds, obviously that depends on the armour profile and thickness plus type but still. Theres no reason not to add into the game, Armour angling still works regardless, plus presents a smaller profile making it harder to hit you and easier to hit them. Unless they have something similar.

Yes as this will be vital for any bow tanking ship or ships that focus on bow on armament only.

There might be hidden soft stats that effect accuracy but we don't see them. Also how big the target, direction, distance, gun type and tech and speed also determine as well. Weather gives flat nerfs or bonus's essentially. I would assume accuracy either gets divided as it goes out from the ship or the opposite and is multiplied up to 100% from the further range possible. Thats what i think anyways.