Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Druzki

Members
  • Content Count

    18
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

25 Excellent

About Druzki

  • Rank
    Landsmen

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. It is important, but not as much as the base mechanics and scenario creation.
  2. The devpost just mentioned that they're only going to work on the campaign, besides minor bugfixes. They admit that nearly 100% of their time and resources will be spent on developing it. The game can be almost just as replayable by giving players more freedom in creating custom battle and naval academy scenarios(as I said multiple times, designing more than one ship class and designing the enemy fleet), as well as ship designer improvements and this could be done sooner in order to keep interest, rather than hope enough players will wait 5-6 months for a campaign that will not be comp
  3. If the wait for the campaign is that long, and the custom battles aren't improved upon at all, Im afraid to say the gameplay will become too stale for me, especially because you cannot design multiple ships in the custom battles and naval academy missions and you cannot design the enemy fleet in custom battles. I honestly dont understand this obsession with a campaign. Its seems like the majority of the player base(including me) is more interested in realistic ship mechanics with complex ship design as well as maximum freedom in designing custom battles and the campaign would be a
  4. Keep in mind early submarines usually attacked while surfaced. Since there are already commerce raiding missions for ships, it wouldnt be that difficult to model WW1 submarine combat in real time. In actual battle submarines would be very hard to hit but very slow. You can already design very slow ships in UA:D in which require the player to give himself superior positioning Also bow and stern mounted torps are already modeled, so this could readily be incorporated into submarine hulls in the game. In campaign, I see no reason why the player shouldn't command a submarine tac
  5. Hey, I'm really loving the missions in this game because most of them are really well designed and have a high degree of replayability, and have a balance between challenge and fun However for me the only exception to this rule is the defeat the semi dreadnought mission. Now before alpha 5, I had managed to win this several times. I understand that this mission is a challenge where you are at a disadvantage, but honestly the stats of the enemy ships are so above your own that it gets almost impossible to win without being extremely lucky. 1. Semi dreadnought is way too fast
  6. We already have medium barbettes for medium guns. Unfortunately for some reason even late era cruiser hulls don't have hardpoints for them, which is ridiculous. Another useless feature is that whenever you place a standard barbette, a hardpoint for a medium barbette appears behind it(The only time medium barbettes are available), but you can no way in hell put it because the hardpoint is covered by the front/secondary tower on almost all hulls.
  7. This is about player freedom, which is very important in a sandbox game. If we're given the ability to design enemy ships, it doesnt mean that the option to fight AI designed ships won't exist.
  8. Being only able to design one class(and only one design of the class) of ship in a custom battle and having absolutely no option to design opposing ships is so limiting. Its ridiculous that it wasn't added from the get go. Why wasn't this added? I want a true sandbox custom battle mode. The current custom battle mode is just a random naval battle mode with few sandbox elements. If this isn't added I will eventually become bored and no amount of new hulls will change this.
  9. Currently theyre only for iron plate and it can be tedious to convert the penetration value to other armor types. It would be useful to add values for them too.
  10. He meant not every nation had the industry to manufacture armor of a certain thickness.
  11. Keep in mind the majority of ship losses in ww2 were caused by aircraft were because of very underwhelming AA battery coordination(think the yamato's atrocious 25mm) and not enough AA mounts on ships because back then aircraft weren't considered a primary threat. Players will have this hindsight and invest in tons rapid firing radar guided AA batteries much faster than IRL. Also bad weather amd nighttime will still allow artillery duels between ships with WW2 tech and lower.
  12. Yeah, you're right about lyddite being useful against and on lighter ships, but given the terrible accuracy on small hulls, its still reasonable to use ballistite, especially when a single 3' shell hit is likely to flood an early destroyer hull to something like 40-50% even with max bulkheads.
  13. Why would it be difficult to have the option change realism modifiers in this game? Since its a sandbox the player should have the utost freedom possible to change it. Such games have a lot of staying power. The best example would Il-2 1946, because of the amount of sandbox content and highly customizable difficulty that it offers to the player. It would be possible in my opinion to allow players to tick realism factors off(weather, secondary gun penalty, etc)
×
×
  • Create New...