Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

RedParadize

Members2
  • Content Count

    430
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

RedParadize last won the day on October 2

RedParadize had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

224 Excellent

About RedParadize

  • Rank
    Junior Lieutenant

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. On the bright side, AI finally have embraced the power of torpedo CA: On the wrong side, I this should not be allowed: (I am the german) Edit: Another thing that should not happen: A fleet strong enough to put a fight is leaving, and doing so abandoning all the cargo to me.
  2. @Nick Thomadis I had a BB vs BC battle, at 12 km I decided to turn away as it was fleeing. To my surprise it turned back toward me at 15km. However this is above spotting range of enemy BC! As soon as it spotted me again it turned away again In 1920 that result in a chance to hit of about 2% for him and 3% for me. At that hit rate battle are not fun, regardless if its historical or not.
  3. @Commander ReedIf you are referring to the campaign you need to delete them in the ship design tab, not in the editor.
  4. Yeah, I have the impression that all of the hull weight is applied at its center.
  5. I had a 1930 campaign where the British surrendered after losing a single BB and two CA. They were blockading me, had a force ratio in their favor by a factor of nearly 10.
  6. Look at these two ship, I made them to be roughly equal in cost: They have the same armour, main gun, and exept for torpedo protection have the same perk. The cruiser has two more sets of 5"er but in the grand scheme of thing it wont matter much. Because of its tower the cruiser will be slightly more accurate, but again it will not be a stellar difference. On the other hand, the battle cruiser weight 28,500 t, that mean that in term of transport defense and force projection it weight much more. Why Cruiser cost as much as a roughly equal Battlecruiser? its simple, its tower cost more.
  7. You see that's why you should not always look at history as absolute reference. They may have been a very small number of design in any given era, but what does that leave the player with? If we have no choice but to follow a predetermined path, then the game isn't about designing ship. At that point what you are looking for is a simulator with premade ship. On my end I like designing stuff.
  8. I agree with that. I think the same could be said of other research field. For example, if I wanted bigger CA without having to unlock CL and BC stuff it should be doable. I think many of the research field are unnecessary, many of the technological advancement did not come directly from the Navy, such as engine granular improvement and to some extent steel quality. Those thing could happen outside of the control of the player. Removing them would free up allot of space in the research tab. Allowing us to have it more focused and choice based. For example, would you want to develop a extend
  9. @TAKTCOM Yep, the "campaign" isn't really one atm. Sorry if my comment sounded rude, but I just trough that commenting about stuff that were made over a year ago sounded counter productive. It isn't that I do not agree trough. Splitting the tower into many part, having some say on the internal layout... Most change I was hoping to see will probably never happen. In my book that ship has sailed long ago. I do not expect any major change regarding combat mechanic. At best we will get few value fix and that's it. Regarding the campaign: If their plan is to have it cut in 10 years span, then
  10. @o BarãoLook at accuracy at point blank range, the penalty is there. Its just that Cordite 10% range bonus basically nullify the decrease in accuracy.
  11. I can confirm that, you need a shipyard that can accommodate the new unlocked hull. It should be made more clear or, alternatively, you should still see the new hull in the builder but not be able to build it.
×
×
  • Create New...