Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

28 Excellent

About DerRichtigeArzt

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I feel like the devs didn't really know what they are getting into when they launched this project. There are so many intricacies with naval combat of the 20th century that making it into a game would require at least half a decade of hard work on coding and research. Unless the changes to the dev team were really vast i don't see this game becoming a Sunday armirals dream. It is too basic in its current form and some of the features seem hard to change now. Still hoping it will accualy turn out awesome but criticism is the best form of motivation, except money but I already bought the a
  2. Ussualy they release it when we are spamming how we are dying of boredom. If the time has come then it means they are almost done. It has been like that for every patch. It goes like this. 1 new patch announced 2 asking specifics 3 Asking for a rough date of release 4 comparing the wait for the patch to waiting for one's own demise 5 patch releases 6 bitching about ones long awaited feature not beeing added 7 bitching about bugs 8 hotfix 9 q/a or a "which missions remain overly difficult" type question 10 new patch announced
  3. carriers should be an optional dlc. and they should be as op as they were irl.
  4. since its the most recent thread ill leave it here. we dont need an update every month or two. but it would be nice if we got devblogs and screenshots. some community members would probably make such a devblog for free every month. or find someone that does not have a copy of the game ond offer it to him in exchange for devblogs every month. would be nice. I would do it but I have never run a forum or wasnt realy active on one until this game came along. but I bet there are some people that could do it and do it well.
  5. Ships have to loose their durability. I get that they are big beasts and weight thousands of tons but if a ship is crippled its not gonn fire back effectively. There needs to be more destructible parts. Fire controll. Pumps. Funnels that loose efficiency when damaged. Also the crew model. We need it the most. Ships will burn down/explode/sink when crew is either too shell-shocked or dead to fix the damage. Also ammo exploding should accualy remove shells from magazines.
  6. Bulkheads would be less of if we had crew modeled. Even if the ship is not sinking the crew may abandon ship if it comes under heavy fire. Also fire would be more dangerous since damage control teams would die. I have not seen an official statement regarding crew implementation. But I hope it will be added since it would finally put an end to unsinkable ships.
  7. That is accualy really good In years 1890-1905 torpedoes were a little broken. I think that you should adjust flooding damage, mainly how fast compartments flood and how hard it is to pump out water in the early game. Also in the early game AI tends to skimp out on bulkheads making their builds good but easy to sink. In comparison I have never built a ship with less than many bulkheads. Maybe they loose in other aspects but not having to worry about sinking through, well...sinking is a great bonus. My point is as follows. AI should focus less on guns/speed and more
  8. will there be any new features/ship hulls or is it a purely balance and bugfix patch?
  9. I think 20" guns should be the absolute maximum and only in single turrets.
  10. With armor that would not be used in reality. Guns have too much penetration. In 1930's it's only worth to armor up against CA's because big guns will pen anyway. But gun damage is low anyway unless you are using 18" guns which is kinda sad because I took a liking to 15" Bismarck setup. Also ships are bullet sponges and it shows. You can hit a ship 20 times with a 15" shell and it will be almost fully operational unless you cause a flash fire/ammo detonation. Crew needs to be implemented as soon as possible to avoid running out of ammo after just one engagement.
  11. For me the armor system is very intuitive. You put let's say 100mm of iron. Then make it Krupp IV and all or nothing armor scheme. All this gives you an armor bonus of 118%. So your armor is still 100mm thick. But it is as effective as 218mm of iron would be. If you have an uneven armor value like let's say 267.5mm then just go into Google type in "267.5 + 118%" and it will show you how effective the armor is, in that case 583mm, so not the best but great for a fast battleship that will be used in a role of commerce raider like sharnhorsts were. You can't really have a simpler system its just
  12. Torpedoes missfire when they hit your hull before spawning in the water as an entity. To avoid that place torpedo tubes that have at least 30' angle from your hull. Also the torpedoes on both sides work fine. Ui shows you that they are reloading but it works the same way for all armament. The reload circle only shows the gun/tube that is the farthest from beeing able to fire again. So that when it's full you know that all of your torps are loaded. It's unintuitive but you can get used to it. My only criticism of this patch is that the 30+ hulls are basicly copy paste for almost everyone. But I
  13. I have asked this question in this very thread. Submarines will be in the game but only as a strategic asset. You will not be able to controll them in battle. Witch when you thi k about it makes sense. Subs were used as commerce raiders not as line on battle units.
  14. Update would be better if we got 2 unique hulls and parts for them for each nation. Currently all the shit I build looks almost the same.
  15. Yeah but now stats are not changed immediately upon using the sliders or placing components. 2 steps forward 1 step back I guess.
  • Create New...