Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

117 Excellent

About roachbeef

  • Rank
    Able seaman

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Can confirm the issue with British supercruiser design: Before adding secondary: After adding secondary:
  2. Yeah, but that is not a defense of the game at all. The fix would be to have a button to wait to observe shell splash until firing the next salvo. It's implemented in War on the Sea, so maybe this game should just copy that (minus the bugs).
  3. While the proposed changes are a good idea, I do not think they will happen. The devs have a sunk cost that they are reluctant to throw away because they have already delayed the game's Steam release. They're likely pressured for time and will have to release a product that retains the original core mechanics, for better or for worse.
  4. KGV was held back. Prince of Wales fought Bismarck
  5. They are being used as an excuse to prevent players from having more freedom in creating more historically accurate ships. No direct editing of armor schemes, huge limitation in barbette points (not even talking about placing barbettes at bow or stern—just want more barbette points), no more exotic armor schemes (like some RN cruisers). Leaving aside whether that excuse is believable, I would rather have a more in-depth ship designer and hardcoded AI designs (or which just use player submissions) rather than have to deal with the current system. It is not like the AI designs halfw
  6. Devs: It's a race between Alpha 9, CP 2077, and the [current politics are banned]
  7. This update is huge. Hopefully my ships will stop crashing into each other at the first turn order. I think that in the future, allowing us to choose our nation in Naval Academy would be better, as some nations have objectively better hulls in terms of performance (i.e. barbettes on towers) or looks.
  8. You basically repeated my point about the rework, but consider it a trivial addition. I don't think that'll be possible without a complete rework because I have a nagging suspicion that the physical model of the armor is baked in and cannot be changed. Someone more educated in Unity might come by and did through the files, but I doubt that'll happen until after the Steam release. We seem to have different definitions of what a designer is. I think you are assuming that they're just artists, or that changes to game mechanics only require a programmer. The role of a game designer is a re
  9. I want my hospital ships and ASW trawlers to be able to walk up to a DD and blow it up with their AA .303 Lewis guns. If a ship can't reliably sink the enemy, they obviously don't have any business being built and the game is imbalanced 🤣 Like @Skeksis mentioned, there's no point in bemoaning the lack of role for a DD until we see how they fare on the campaign map.
  10. You're missing the point. It's not about code vs. visual design, it's about pouring water into a bucket full of holes on the bottom. You are also assuming one of the developers is doing nothing but churning out ship hulls. I don't think that's the case given that the dev team is only a few people. I'm fine with the devs prioritizing the campaign—I even support that somewhat—but the last thing we need is more hulls when each hull is fundamentally broken. Whenever they add a hull, they have to create an armor model and weight model for it based on the visual hull model and the player's choi
  11. I wish the devs would stop adding hulls and actually start fixing the game mechanics first. If they need to redesign the hulls after rebalancing, this just means more pointless work they'll have to fix anyways. If they continue at this rate, I worry they'll just give up on fixing the shell/armor/flooding models and release a broken mess.
  12. @Nick Thomadis Does that mean some "technologies" are more like doctrines that come from experience, or are some technologies faulty until they are actually used on board ships? This will put a very interesting spin on research and mean that you can't just barge up the tech tree without testing them on ships first.
  13. They can fight other DDs, do ASW and AA on campaign, etc. No reason to break the game just because one class of ship doesn't have a role yet. The solution is to implement features like ASW, AA, and AI turning away in prediction of your DDs' torpedoes (which is a good bluffing game that could allow you to escape), not to give DDs an artificial and unrealistic number of torpedoes. I don't get this fixation on "balance." This isn't World of Warships.
  14. The people who send bug reports are idiotic. You can still make impossible ships via custom battles or Cheat Engine.
  15. An option that is totally infeasible to implement given the limited resources is to allow us to define what standard displacement is for the purposes of the treaty and create exceptions. Maybe a mod idea. I want Britannia to Waive the Rules
  • Create New...