Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

20 Excellent

About Maty83

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Santa Maria: A cross-deck firing dreadnought on the Small Battleship hull, 1908. Forward superstructure is the best one available, back is Rear Tower 5, Medium funnel. I have gotten the perfect offset only once and since it works diagonally through the CoM seemingly, you can't deal with it fully on these ships usually (Having cross-deck mounting points would be really good, since you can only throw on 4 centerline turrets at this stage)
  2. Excellent news with the new hulls! This will make the game even more interesting! Although I'd like to ask for one thing we're desperately missing: A potential mousewheel stepping of tonnage, since 1t steps on 90kt-120kt will be extremely tedious otherwise
  3. In regards to the echelon turrets: You have to fiddle with it a lot to get those proper placements. Maybe I'm asking too much, but some attachment points that are balanced on each side would really help that
  4. Very saddenned by the current update. Note how it says "Design invalid" It does this on every new hull once you mount a smoke stack. I tried everything else-removing thm, moving them down, etc. I see no other reason for this than just the smokestacks doing something wrong. Mind you, I am using the attachment points. These messages have never appeared before, including weird errors which seemingly don't have the proper text strings coded in. I should add that this happens in any designer
  5. Simple question I'd like answered: Under certain conditions with different ships you can't properly see enemy ships firing at you, with the difference in seeing shellfire and being spotted being several kilometers. Is this intentional to give smaller ships a degree of opportunity to hurt enemies at extreme range, or not? Personally, I feel like an enemy firing at your ship with main guns should be visible unless the weather is exceedingly terrible. Even during the Battle of the North Cape, Scharnhorst could see the flashes as the lighter forces engaged her early on (Norfolk and the light
  6. I have to echo the concerns of other players here too. You're dodging torpedoes with your battle line, forget about the DD you sent to catch enemies unaware with a salvo and.... Suddenly the ship is 50km away from any enemy ship. Being able to go with greater zoom levels, slightly longer render ranges and the pseudo-minimap view (showing individual squadrons) would be a great benefit.
  7. I quite like this idea, although I'll note that having a specific gun model only available for a single nation (13" quads) seems like a concept not worth looking at. While the very large BC hull is interesting, any chance we get some ship breaching 100k tons for the Royal Navy the patch after this one? Even with this improvement British battleships still decisively remain the lowest displacement of the major navies with Japanese and German designs being ones no British ship can match if both are designed competetively. All in all though, I've been waiting for proper British hulls for
  8. Sadly we don't have mouse scrollwheel interactionfor fine-tuning displacement (Since the scrollbar is so small it has issues tuning by the 50t limits on BBs)
  9. It is very hard on most ships to do 2 fore and 2 aft turret layout. More freedom needed
  10. Torpedo range is less than 2 km probably... I found that out when trying to add torps to my CAs in 1895 in preparation for a custom battle against a BB.
  11. The issue is, the game tries to encompass the outliers in each case, which just isn't possible. And then you take a look at the specs of most CAs and you realize that with 8" guns you could re-make then on CL hulls. So after contemplation of both sides, I believe it's better to add 8" guns to CLs, both for the ability to actually hurt well-designed CAs (As well as removing 4" guns from the primary gun category post-1922) and to help with designing said ships. Due to the treaties you have cases where literally the same hull was used to make both CLs and CAs (Wichita being a prime example), whil
  12. DDs should be able to stall larger vessels and pose significant risk to them. There are examples of this. (Sinking of Glorious, the Battle of Samar). They are the reason BBs retained a fairly heavy secondary battery during WWI since a concentrated torpedo assault would have devastating consequences for BBs. I believe we should be able to designate how many torpedoes to carry manually to improve the experience (Up to 3 reloads potentially)
  13. I'd like to note a couple things: Gun barrels should count only to 50% lenght for firing restriction. As of now, you can easily increase most firing angles by rotating turrets in weird and wonderful rotations, thus by far increading what you can do. Honestly? If we could get the turrets to elevate over each other at long range too (Worcester-style), it would help with some of the later designs since you are restricted with barbette placement. Secondly, same-caliber weapons should get the same accuracy measurement if they have different barrel counts, even if the reload is different. This wo
  14. There's a large disparity between large cruiser hits on CAs and the other way around. Not sure how to fix, perhaps some accuracy buffs for higher marks of 12-14" guns since their effectiveness drops remarkably during the 1920s era as main guns due to the higher displacement vessels you're able to produce (Effectively allowing thick enough armour to have a large immune zone to those guns).
  15. It was a direct flash fire. Happened a second time already in the "Modern battleship" mission. It doesn't display as ammo detonation, but as a "flash fire". The effect is EXTREMELY random, even going so far as to be a minor inconvenience on the level of "Turret destroyed" at times while other times it nukes the ship as hard as a magazine explosion without even spreading to adjacent guns
  • Create New...