Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

34 Excellent

About roachbeef

  • Rank
    Ordinary seaman

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. If you go to the official website, you can see a campaign is planned. That and combat mechanics are seemingly the devs' focus atm.
  2. Given the fall of shot at most ranges, I feel like angling ships would not improve actual armor angle or ricochet chances to the degree portrayed in the game, and if close enough for it to matter, I feel like AP would still crush the thin 1-4" bow we see in most AI designs. Next patch should either decrease HE effectiveness or reduce ricochet chances against thinner armor to stop having BBs fire HE at each other.
  3. You'll have to be careful, because the ships I use for Naval Academy are hilariously overspecialized. This could easily be exploitable to cheese the AI and might make the game too easy even if you don't intend to cheese the designs.
  4. Hurry Up was the worst for me. Getting the RNG luck with half-useful CLs was a pain. Eventually went in with 3x2 10" guns and 38 kn speed (didn't actually have funnel capacity iirc)
  5. HE is still massively overpowered, so they're the best bet. On a 12.3" max armor battleship (the Bismarck analogue) all my 15" Mark 3 rounds with tube powder bounced at 5 km, but using HE caused flooding everywhere and sank the guy from 90% structural integrity / 100% floatability in 3 salvos. Likewise, on a 5" max armor CA all of my 15" shells bounced but the moment I use HE everything blows up and floods. We need to rebalance ricochet mechanics so that large and heavy shells don't bounce against 2" of armor. Edit: agree on transverse bulkheads, though. We should also be forced to decide how much coverage the armor belt has as well as decide the shape of the armor angling, not depend on arbitrary resistance numbers. Maybe have it so armor that is too much angled compared to the actual shape of the model will count as internally mounted armor, increasing repair and construction costs.
  6. Seems to happen at certain angles. Dxdiag file at (https://filebin.net/9x826v4mihd0e2xw/DxDiag.txt?t=0n4m7c38)
  7. Looks like wing turrets count as secondary batteries when ordering to cease firing. That needs to be fixed.
  8. It's weird having a USS Colorado and it suddenly has a German naval ensign on it.
  9. I'm all for BBs and CAs having hydrophones, but the proper answer is to stop sending us into scenarios with either no DDs or DDs we can't design ourselves. And instead of artificial mission timers that fail us after an arbitrary amount of time, either Remove the timer entirely Allow for minor victories when enemy retreats heavily damaged, minor defeats, draws, etc. Add some crew so ships can be combat ineffective without sinking Have actual consequences for being too slow: actually have enemy reinforcements come in, ship running out of fuel to RTB, etc. Don't say "time's up, you lose!"
  10. Has anybody else encountered the post-battle lag and memory leak? Also, @RAMJB while the quote is very informative, people who already read it have to scroll a lot if they're reading a mobile. If you have long text you can add [*Spoiler*] then [*/Spoiler] where the three * are removed. Put the text in between and people can collapse or expand the quote.
  11. In my case most if the torps only damaged the two rearmost compartments because I was shooting from the rear. It was the final broadside hitting the forward compartments that sank the ship. Seems like repeat hits do nothing and flooding does not spread.
  12. Should the Bismarck-esque BB be able to tank more than 30 20" torpedoes? Guns seem to only do catastrophic damage with plunging fire so I closed in for torpedoes. Unsurprisingly Murphy hates me so he blew up both my 40 kn, 4.8-km-range-torp DDs after 1 spread and he proceeded to tank >30 torpedoes (out of >60 fired)spread across 6 compartments. He finally sank after the 7th one flooded, but I'm surprised at the overall tankiness this patch. Shells I understand. Torps I'm unsure. We're given too few torpedo-capable ships to reliably sink the enemy while the enemy has tons, and we aren't even allowed to design them ourselves. We need to be able to design our allied ships to have a chance.
  13. Massive lag seems to happen in menu after a battle. Performance has become highly unstable in this patch. Meanwhile, secondary barbettes cannot be placed on the sides due to going outside of the model. Tall III funnels can be placed on towers in a way that makes them partially float off the towers (on the BC III hull for Hurry Up mission). Hurry up mission has enemy spawning too close to the convoy, making it difficult to reach the enemy before they sink 4~5 ships. Needs rebalancing.
  14. The "Tall III" funnel has a visual bug when placed on the secondary tower for Battlecruiser III hull in the "Hurry Up" Mission
  15. From (https://www.dreadnoughts.ultimateadmiral.com/the-playing-modes )
  • Create New...