Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Cpt.Hissy last won the day on August 30

Cpt.Hissy had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

415 Excellent

About Cpt.Hissy

  • Rank
    Junior Lieutenant

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. He's just being paid for praising this mess of a project, probably to convince the honest backers to forget their expectations. No other explanation.
  2. So, hm, turns out it is a good move to take long breaks from this thing. Tried it again after several months of not touching, and now i do feel improvements compared to the last time, heh
  3. it doesn't end, heh. Don't you think that big part of AI being so helpless still lies in the flawed ship constructor design? In the use of huge predefined parts, namely. Many of those stupid situations happen because it's just impossible to arrange those parts in any other configuration because they don't fit.
  4. There is an issue. Enemy ship can move steady in a straight line and have ZERO hits despite 20%+ accuracy, and your ships get pummeled starting from ~5% regarless of evasive actions. Kind of magic number that is, 5%. When their estimate accuracy is below, they barely ever hit. When above, they start hitting reliably.
  5. Heh, it'll be in a month at best and will consist of some more copypasted hulls, some bugs "fixed" but not really, and perhaps that same campaign prototype that rumors say was in the very first alpha but, i will be happy to be wrong.
  6. Even with anti flooding and everything it's random and unpredictable.. not in players favour. Only way to make enemy flooding to stick is to flood half their ship at once, then there is a chance they won't pump out one section or two. Any flooding on player ships, on the other hand, almost always sticks, even if it's a tiny fraction of one compartment due to a single hit.
  7. And this is formally the same class. If only such things were possible in here.
  8. Nah, main problem of Russian navy, just like with Russian everything, was unreasonably limited budgets, terrible organisation and idiot leaders. That's why Tsushima fleet was rag-tag band of random ships built to outdated ideas, then arrived into battle exhausted and untrained. Russian dreadnoughts might be amongst the best of their class, if they weren't finished when their class was already a history. They still might be a serious treat even then, as individual ships in vacuum, but sea superiority is achieved not by singular ships.
  9. You're supposed to MAYBE build a Bismarck or two, if you're lucky and successful enough during the main part of the game, and go roflstomp those who didn't. Or be bismarck'ed yourself in other case.
  10. It's still not supposed to be a WW2 simulator, even though devs themselves seem to forgot it. It's 1890 to 1940, not 1940 to 2000. Until they change this of course.
  11. yep with what this game was doing so far, it's easy to forget that evolution of naval forces was a thing. If campaign can simulate that well enough, it'll create the need for everything naturally.
  12. Nah superdreads themselves are not a problem. If they will remain all there is for a game, then it'll be a problem.
  13. Destroyers are when you need "a warship" but not necessarily too strong one. Why would you take expenses of building a whole cruiser when you want it just to litter mines around or deliver your tea. You can have two of them destroyers instead. Also there surely will be some artificial limitations that will force you to use destroyers, it's a game after all, an contrary to someone's claims not a very smoothly designed one.
  14. Only thing this game needs right now - is to actually start existing. Before that, we all should not care about anything else but this, good sirs. Frak carriers, frak submarines, frak that one particular very niche turret design that's so important because you personally like it. Give us the damn game at last. Everything else waits.
  • Create New...