DerRichtigeArzt
-
Posts
137 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by DerRichtigeArzt
-
-
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 alpha access so criticism is the only thing left for me to give.
-
5
-
-
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
-
2
-
-
carriers should be an optional dlc. and they should be as op as they were irl.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
4 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:
New notable changes regarding torpedoes:
- Early tech torpedoes are now having smaller range and are slower. This makes the impact and evolution of torpedoes more historically accurate.
- Sonar/Hydro equipment is now available for CA, BB, BC, making capital ships much more aware against torpedo threats. Stealth and torpedo detection levels have been rebalanced accordingly.
- "Fast Mode" of torpedoes rebalanced. Range penalty is less but accuracy is reduced further.
Changelog updated.
Soon the build goes to testing phase.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 on armor/flooding protection. Also I've seen AI use tech worse than is available to it like Krupp 2 armor when it could use 4.
Using armor worse than is available should not be considered when trying to cut the costs. Maybe the AI should consider removing this single 2'gun that also blocks the vision of main battery on its battleships.
Bringing me to my last point. AI sometimes creates a mishmash of guns for no reason. I've seen ships with quintinary batteries in 1930's. Max 3 sets of guns should be a limit for the AI untill you make it design intelligently not at random as it does now.
-
will there be any new features/ship hulls or is it a purely balance and bugfix patch?
-
1
-
-
I think 20" guns should be the absolute maximum and only in single turrets.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Reaper Jack said:
Yeah agreed.
The one thing I have found that is very realistic so far, is that I made a Battleship with 406mm main guns, but only six, and went heavier on the armor, about a 380mm belt and 170mm deck, not pushing reality too far, and the game put me against two 356mm armed BB's. At 11-14km I had a complete immunity zone, and once I reached that zone, maintaining distance at 13km meant I could bounce shells all day long. Sadly both enemy BB's had 450mm belts so I was struggling to pen back, but the fact the immunity zone was something I could do was much appreciated.
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.
-
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 maths and not particularly complicated at that. Most of the values you can approximate anyway so using the Google method is honestly redundant and unnecessary.
-
11 hours ago, Hellstrike said:
I have enjoyed playing around with this patch a lot. Most ships which existed IRL can be recreated, although sometimes not with their original nation (the Yubari hull makes for a good Arethusa). One thing which I've noticed is that the AI tends to spam secondary and tertiary batteries, even on destoyers. I also see way too few 5 inch guns on them, because the AI decides that triple 4" are better. And 8x3 3" for some reason.
The other thing I noticed (again) is that all torpedo launchers are grouped together when it comes to reloads. So there is no benefit in having them on each side as you cannot fire and then turn to fire the other side. Occasionally, launchers misfire (only one torpedo is launched from a x3 or x4), sometimes entire groups get off one torpedo and then cycle.
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 know that they are there only to make campaign functional soon so I don't mind.
-
8 hours ago, shipfan9999 said:
do you think you can put submarines in from uboats to us subs to Japanese subs and have tubes and deckguns special for them
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.
-
1
-
-
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.
-
1 hour ago, Norbert Sattler said:
With the new hotfix I got a massive performance boost in the designer. No more slowdowns when selecting or deselecting modules and such.
Kudos for that.
Yeah but now stats are not changed immediately upon using the sliders or placing components. 2 steps forward 1 step back I guess.
-
Guns that go beyond mark 5. Right now bigger is always batter and making ships historically accurate is pointless. 16" guns on Iowa and 15" on Bismarck feel like peashooters compared to yamatos 18".
-
I didn't find a decisive answer so:
Will there be submarines in the game? If so, how will they work. If not, why?
Will there be aircraft carriers in the game? If so, how will they work. If not, why?
-
And I'm not able to play untill tomorrow
:(. Mourn my pain fellow admirals.
-
1
-
-
17 minutes ago, Shaftoe said:
At this point, this topic is a waiting room, where we all chill and wait for @Nick Thomadis to get his stuff together and finally deliver the patch which was expected, first on Monday, then on Tuesday, and now apparently - on Wednesday. Until that happens, expect stuff to get off the rails from time to time, for a while. Lol.
Because that's what usually happens. That being said, personally I would be happy to finally get muh destroyers and be on my way.
Ye I come here before going to sleep and Wim like the fuq? Why are we talking about slavery now? Devs I don't want to hurry you because I know that making stuff work ain't easy but you might want to step in. Lest pitchforks and torches might be drawn. We really don't need a civil war here, we are all here to do one thing! Sink the Russians at tsushima. So lets all focus on that ay?
-
4 minutes ago, Mooncatt said:
Sorry guys, when is this update due? Thought it was yesterday
if its not ready whats the point of releasing it?
-
11 minutes ago, Danvanthevacuumman said:
When does it release?
I bet something is gamebreakingly broken. I hope we get it soon the lock down boredom is killing me.
-
51 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:
Guys we had to add more fixes, for example this one: "Fixed issue that made big guns of smaller caliber to be grouped with secondary guns when player selected targets manually."
So the update will come tomorrow!Its better to wait than to expirience bugs. Great work guys!
-
8 minutes ago, Mutsu said:
Do they? I thought they were a US based team, because who else would make games on the US Civil War
Well honestly its a subject so touchy that honestly I would not expect an American to even consider making a game about civil war. And God forbid to make the CSS playable. Imagine the media and twitter/tumbler users finding out.
-
1
-
-
24 minutes ago, Mutsu said:
^
That would be my guess, they are a US based dev team so they might release it late in the evening for us in EuropeAren't they like central/eastern Europe?
Alpha-9 News Update
in General Discussions
Posted
Prasie be!