Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

ThatOneBounced

Members
  • Content Count

    64
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

54 Excellent

About ThatOneBounced

  • Rank
    Ordinary seaman

Recent Profile Visitors

103 profile views
  1. agreed my one issue i had with RTW was when I would deploy my biggest and best capital ships just to engage in a battle with my light cruisers (which at the time i would only have a handful) against the enemies light cruisers (which was the only class of ship which the enemy outnumbered me in) It makes wars frustrating to have a lot of modern battleships just to encounter destroyers or light cruisers even though it says a the enemy home fleet is within the region.
  2. I lean towards having excellent gunnery with high quality guns at ranges that exceed any other ship. I take the highest quality gun i can get a hold of even if it is not technically the biggest. once the other ships have been weakened the battleships close the distance and seal the fate of the enemy fleet. light cruisers and bellow will be equipped with lots torpedoes to disorganize formations while also countering smaller units. battlecruisers have been a tricky one as I try to make them a "sniper" of sorts and staying behind the battleship line to avoid concentrated fire while also out rangi
  3. Looking here and I am quite dismayed. I mean I think 5-6 months was a reasonable amount if time given the circumstances and progress. I mean we still don't even have a foundation in which to build a skyscraper quite yet. As of right now I assume we are very close to realizing that foundation with what has been done thus far. I for one am happy we at least have a date now instead of us bothering the devs over when we will see a release or an update on progress. We now have said update on progress and instantly everyone has grabbed their pitchforks. While ive only been playing off and on as of l
  4. Some good news. Recently did a Falkland island inspired battle with 1915 tech. I found my battlecruisers (using 13in guns) and when switching to HE shells against a Armored cruiser around 8 kilometers away, shots were 80% less effective than AP shells.Shells would not pen even a 8in at most armored cruiser. perhaps at least at WW1 era tech the balance between shells has finally been implemented as HE spam was way less efficient in this action even against opponents of smaller size.
  5. While not a extremely annoying issue, a nice quality of life change would be adding a weight ballast option for the ship builder. Weight offset is not a serious issue but certain hulls (N3/g3, Battle cruiser III [with super firing B turrets], dreadnought III and some other ships i have not named) have extremely odd tower placement which puts the ship design in a serious bind regarding offset. maybe at the cost of some wasted displacement we can see ballast to help balance the ship which can cause in interesting decision on whether or not using that weight for more smaller guns or component o
  6. I'm not even salty at this point, I am just failing to understand how you do not see how inherently broken this can become in your "larger campaign balance". literally they have the power to TRUMP ALL OTHER SHIPS. its not even a high sees rock paper scissors match anymore. please explain to me why there is a reason to build anything other than 40 knt oxygen torpedo destroyers with multiple 5 mounts tubes. And why would I play destroyers defensively when I know like the post above said can kill a bunch of the enemy capital ships for basically free? tell me why I would need to bu
  7. ok a destroyer meta obviously doesn't exist then. there is literally absolutely nothing wrong with having torpedo spam literally trump all other forms of combat. Nothing wrong with ships being able to launch torpedoes beyond detection range. And definitely nothing wrong with ships with an effectiveness that greatly outweighs ships 50 times their size. if this is what is considered perfectly fine in game balance then I will definitely consider purely building destroyers with 45 kts, 4x10 torpedo tubes, and just replace any losses (if they are even hit) within months. not waste my nation's money
  8. https://photos.app.goo.gl/s4HSTkqB3UUhJP589 now the reverse, perfect example of ghost torpedoes. Its too late to avoid and the spread devastating, if i was using anything other than a battleship with reinforced and many bulkheads (anything lower would have been deleted).
  9. https://photos.google.com/album/AF1QipO9WlEYQ0zhhPRhyfiZDOrrZ0PUxIh2th2zxo66 just did this test, no contest.
  10. Might I refer you to my point earlier yes i did bring them up, but I also said why in that scenario, the destroyers pulled off the attack. there are no such thing as visibility obstructing environmental events (other than smoke screen) to mask any advances. which was my suggestion earlier. In campaign destroyers will present a major problem as of right now I can plan a fleet of entirely destroyers (and maybe a single capital ship to distract enemies) and pretty much win most large scale conflicts.The cost of the destroyer (material cost, build time, and maintenance costs) are
  11. I stand corrected, but still proves the point that she was still blind to ships around her
  12. once again it is not fair comparison, night action in the 1940s is significantly different in terms of visibility. The destroyers had the wind in their favor with rail squalls and pitch black surroundings. Bismark itself severely damaged her own radar so she can't target the ships around her meaning they could get close. Once again I want to refer you to Samar, broad daylight but the destroyers used rain squalls to get in close enough to be a threat and wreaked havoc on Center Force. in both your scenario and mine, none of the larger capital ships could reliably target the smaller ships beca
  13. cant relate to this strategy. Yes being able to one shot ships is possible, but ammo is tight and choosing to waste 10+ salvos on a 1.2%-9% hit chance or continue pounding enemy battleships (where the more shots you take at them the more the hit chance) who's at around 40% in the same amount of salvos fired. if I had the choice between using my ammo to make sure I can kill 3 battleships with units who stand a fighting chance when they fire back or give up 1-2 of them to kill 3 destroyers who quickly have dropped torpedoes and turned tail (while also maneuvering so its a low hit chance on top o
×
×
  • Create New...