Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Shiki

Members2
  • Content Count

    61
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Shiki last won the day on December 18 2021

Shiki had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

237 Excellent

About Shiki

  • Rank
    Ordinary seaman

Profile Information

  • Location
    Antarctica
  • Interests
    Ballistics, metallurgy, naval warfare, Washington (Treaty / heavy) cruisers in general, Japanese Treaty cruisers and Italian Treaty cruisers in specific

Recent Profile Visitors

333 profile views
  1. Alright, I'll bite. Why this thread wasn't created six months ago, when we were in closed testing, I don't know. Your Steam reviews must be more important to you than the initial playerbase... which is, by and large, the body making the Steam reviews. I wonder about the foresight afforded to this game. On to the suggestions. 1 — As I've mentioned before, we are in need of particularly the following: A — Better divisional organization—if we are not allowed to pre-determine the divisions and their heading prior to entry into combat, then precious time is wasted assemblin
  2. In the sense that they attempt to cater to the same base of "naval history enthusiasts", yes, they are competitors.
  3. Frankly, I don't see any reason to be optimistic in the slightest. The reality of the situation is that barely anything has changed content-wise and nothing has changed communication wise- the latter of which being the sore point with those people you deride as loud. Yes, we are loud. We're loud because of the human tendency to shout when they're not being heard. I wish the developers the best of health, I really do. COVID has been difficult on everyone. But no amount of COVID can excuse the lack of regard for the concerns being pointed out regarding their radio silence. They're game deve
  4. Unfortunately, outside of games like [insert anthropomorphized warship fighting game here, take your pick] - and even in those games - neither of those types receive much, if any recognition. Outside of Azur Lane's Atago, I don't think there are most people who could get beyond the Takao class's one-line description in Wikipedia, for example. Mogami is generally treated with a fair bit of (undeserved) recognition due to her 'breaking' the London Naval Treaty (she didn't, not really, and even if she did, the Americans are just as guilty with the up-gunning of the North Carolinas) as well as her
  5. For the moment, I'll choose to leave aside my so-called "toxicity, drama, and aggressiveness" - to use such grand words of wisdom from the mouth of one more than a year behind their own schedule, charitably. Instead, I'll focus on a realistic assessment of this update. Let's see... Campaign Yay!... I guess. Six months is quite a long time to rip apart an old campaign with bare-bones functionality and put together... another one with bare-bones functionality. My only positive to this is that it's stable. Probably. Hulls One - probably butchered - Japanese 'large light c
  6. As noted in another post, we are sorely lacking in new, unique hull models for the majority of what is possibly the most important and diverse type of ships one can represent in this game: cruisers. Whether heavy or light, armoured or protected, semi-armoured or scout, we have practically nothing for this important type of warship (for the sake of convenience we're ignoring the battle- prefix). They are your fleet screeners, your reconnaissance, your commerce escorts and their raiders, your destroyer leaders and the ones responsible for driving them off. This following list is what I beli
  7. Usually these updates occur between 2 and 3 weeks after they post patch notes. Usually.
  8. Let's dive right in: this game could have been great. It could still be great. It would be even better if the development team actively communicated—or at the very least, hired someone to communicate—as they gave out in the past, but that's neither here nor there. We're not here to beat a thoroughly dead horse. Instead, I'm here to present some (relatively) minor quality-of-life improvements that I've compiled from my experiences playing this game: things I wasn't quite satisfied with, or thought could be done better. This is an alpha, after all, and we're here to test and provide feedback. He
  9. In summation: Deutschland (or from the previous teaser, "close enough to Deutschland"). Fusō after her first modernization. Sixteen (16) new reskinned and resized hulls. My Tone is more than likely going to be another Italian cruiser, or a resized Hood. New gun models for Deutschland & Scharnhorst artillery, as well as new gun models for Japanese artillery. You can now build 13,001-ton CAs, as opposed to 13,005-ton CAs. Torpedo equipment finally doesn't affect ships that don't have any torpedoes. AI is back to charging to point-blank and still won'
  10. To these statements I would like to point out that the German battleships and battlecruisers of the same period were able to achieve and sustain much higher speeds (all of the battlecruisers were capable of 26-28 kts despite only being designed for 24, for example, while the battleships after the Helgolands could typically make 24-25 despite their nominal 21-kt maximum speeds). While the quality of Imperial German turbine construction (with the exception of that one guy who dropped a hammer into Seydlitz's port turbine blades) is definitely part of the phenomenon, it does point to the fact tha
  11. Let's dive right in: the current system of how artillery - arguably the most important factor in the design, construction, and production of the modern battleship from inception to conclusion - works, sucks. As many people have already noted: - Shell weights are considerably off reasonable spec, let alone historical. - Gun ranges, a pet peeve, are considerably limited for all but the largest calibres. While these are just a few examples - albeit well-known - the inability to choose certain real-life influencing factors considerably limits not only our capacity to create historic
  12. Unfortunately, we do need precisely that many hulls if UA:D continues on the path of adding specific ships and then allowing you to deviate from that basic design. Since all of these ships differed appreciably from one another, they have to be added, and sooner rather than later- after all, even in a game about dreadnoughts, cruiser battles are going to be far more common and you'll have to spend a lot more time on them.
  13. A Baltimore - or more specifically, Wichita - based hull would be optimal, since all of the major prewar and wartime U.S. designs (Brooklyn, St. Louis, Cleveland, Wichita, Baltimore, Oregon City, etc.) used that same basic hullform: only the dimensions tended to change in regards to the hull (which works for UA:D since many hulls are upscaled/downscaled versions of one another anyway). For the Japanese, it's not quite as straightforward. The Myōkō class, for example, share a similar hullform: practically everything is identical across the two '10,000-tonner' designs, except for the fact t
  14. The weight of triple and quadruple turrets is necessarily more than a twin: after all, you have a much larger turret, with presumably similar (or thicker) armour, a larger barbette (which also needs armour) and heftier mechanisms for moving that greater weight. The weight savings lie in the arrangement of those guns: two triple turrets will weigh less overall than three twin turrets of equivalent calibre and mount protection, because the citadel - the amount of armour in the hull devoted towards the protection of the vitals - is commensurately shorter, and all of the mechanisms of a separate t
  15. @Nick ThomadisWill there be any possibility of seeing previews of the new hulls (like those shown in previous patch announcements) over the next few days?
×
×
  • Create New...