BobRoss0902
-
Posts
149 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by BobRoss0902
-
-
ITS ABOUT TIME
-
Ja know. Its been almost 20% of a year without so much as a peep from the devs. WTF?
Like I jumped ship on the forum and decided to just abandon the game until it had a campaign a while ago, and I come back and the communication between the devs and the community has gotten even worse.
At this rate I'll have finished highschool by the time this game actually gets finished.
-
Literally been waiting for this since I was 15 lol
-
2
-
-
4 hours ago, Aceituna said:
I suppose you mean this one? For those uninformed: This picture first appeared on the forum in OCTOBER 2019...
Nah there was a video that went over more of it than that. It was like country and year selection screen or something. IDK.
-
I saw a leak some time ago of someone who managed to get a look over some of the campaign UI but it's been so long I've forgotten what it looked like.
-
The 3D camera can be exausting to get proper info and a good idea of where you are going, what we need is a sort of top down map mode where you can effectively hand out orders to your units similar to RTW.
-
2
-
-
This post was so bad, that it brought me out of retirement from using this forum just to say. OP you are either too young or stupid to be on the internet or own a computer. I absolutely can not stand spoiled brats who complain about things they dont understand. Ugh.
-
5
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, Cpt.Hissy said:
Welcome to the club of designer dissapointment, take your tea and feel comfy.
Been here since like November of last year and havent played the game in months, I just want a campaign
-
1
-
-
Coming from RTW 2 this game is very limited, however most of these problems could be resolved by an overhaul of the ship designer. As of right now some hulls are objectively better than others such as how one of the pre-dreadnought hulls can hold 3 (main) guns instead of two. Now this would not be a problem if it was like RTW 2 where you actually can build a ship of similar style if you so choose, but in UA;D since the hulls are locked to certian countries this means that say as Japan, you could not build a 3 turreted Pre-Dreadnought even if you wanted to. I'm not saying that it should all be equal (things never are in war) but that it should be noted that when you are completely incapable of building a ship of the same style even if you wanted to, with an advantage such as 3 main guns instead of 2 you simply cannot.
Additionally this lack of flexibility really bites many of the more speciailised ships one might want to create. For example in RTW 2 I always create a line of large 8 inch cruisers, that are meant to get directly into an enemy formation, threaten the enemy with a torpedo attack causing them to break off from formation, and then run down the whichever highest value target is alone and sink them. However in UA;D I would have some serious difficulty creating such a peculiar ship, that for all practical reasons is a scaled down dreadnought.
Im not even going to get into sameship syndrome where there is always one objectively "best" superstructure, because it should be certian types of superstructure offer different bonuses while maintaining similar charecteristics to the others and getting upgraded over the years while still providing their advantages that way you can design a ship with a unique look in mind.
-
6
-
-
Is campaign still set for release in November/December?
-
4
-
-
Ever played RTW? There's a reason why all ships above destroyers require at least 1 inch of armor on *all* parts. It's to suck up small secondary hits.
-
16 hours ago, TsAGI said:
God why do people refer to the A-150 plan as the Shikishima. Shikishima is just a name given by Wargaming for their version of the A-150. There are no official names for the A-150. Sorry if I sound excessively salty but I've seen this too many times, both here and elsewhere
Similar to how people call the Jagdpanzer 38(t) a Hetzer, it's easier to remember.
-
11 hours ago, akd said:
The presence and relative location of shorelines and bases shaped the majority of naval battles, often at the tactical level (i.e. how and why ships conducted some part of their maneuvers, not just the strategic reasons for an encounter). That doesn’t mean ships were dodging in and out islands like first-person shooter cover.
Exactly. Like how in Rule The Waves I might use a coast line to "corner" a fleeing ship
-
1
-
-
Is the campaign still on track for release in November?
-
2
-
1
-
-
Not nessisarily releasing an update with every announcement, rather releasing info on the next update more often.
For example, for the upcoming Uboat update, here is a list of their most recent update announcements/content announcements.
August 7th
Hello Community!
During the last two weeks, developers were reworking the in-game map. There were major technical improvements done in this area and the map looks better. There are now three distinct skins to choose from and mod support to add more. Kriegsmarine grid system on the map is now more faithfully reproduced with full support for the sub-square division. There are dynamic country names on the map and mod support to add custom map elements. The default map style is now very different with a more paper-like look and a top-down view for better readability.
Aside from that, there were some small improvements done all around like automatic path plotting to leave the port after undocking. Probably most of the work went into the new tutorial missions. Most of the tutorial content is now done, but still, there is some more left to be done.
Have a wonderful weekend! ❤️
Deep Water/PlayWay TeamAugust 10th.
Hello UBOAT community!
During the last two weeks, developers were intensively working on the new tutorial and the new help interface. The tutorial is no longer separated into its own game mode, but instead, there are various training missions integrated into the general scenarios of the game. They explain various parts of the game and can be started at any time after docking in a port.
There was also more work done to optimize the game and push it towards the desired look, performance and stability for the Final Release. There is a new effect implemented called raycasted contact shadows. Performance of the rendering was improved. There are also many upgrades related to how the game guides the player through missions, to make it more polished and satisfying.
Work on the tutorial is going to be continued for some time in the closest future, but there are various ideas on what to do next. We will update you later once the picture becomes more clear.
Best,
Deep Water/PlayWayAugust 21st
Dear Community!
During the last two weeks many areas of the game have seen improvements:
- There are now dynamic country borders on the in-game map.
- AI is now much better at navigating around port structures and can avoid colliding with the other ships.
- Automatic paths generated after clicking a right mouse button now go around the port structures and avoid entering land areas. It's no longer needed to ensure these things manually.
- Encounters with NPC u-boats are now much faster as they no longer trigger a land generation and don't block the highest time compression from being used.
- Patrol assignments are now performed on the smaller Kriegsmarine map squares.
Aside from that, you guessed it, tons of work went into the tutorial missions. Our current ETA for this version is 2 to 3 weeks. It still needs some work before a release.
Yours,
Deep Water/PlayWay TeamOkay so now back to what I was talking about.
Both Uboat and UA:D are in similar stages of development, and both are made by small teams. However as you can see from the notes, Uboat devs rather than releasing one dump of info, release it as it is being developed, I think this is the better way to go about releasing update info, as it allows the community to be involved, it builds hype for the next update, and overall is better at keeping interest rather than hearing nothing from the devs for a month straight and then getting an info dump. Additionally you can see that Deep Water tends to have a bit more of a "friendly" approach to its announcements, rather than a matter of fact info dump. This is a better way to engage with the community and I think it would be an overall benifit to the devs to take a page from their playbook.
TL:DR- Deepwater does small announcements about the content they have worked on over the week or so, and then when it is about to release has a recap on all of their previous announcements. I think this is the better way to go about things.
Also I think dev diarys would be an easy but very helpful thing for community engagement.
-
4
-
-
2 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:
Admirals, we just released a new hotfix update. You can check out the details in our blog:
https://www.dreadnoughts.ultimateadmiral.com/post/alpha-8-hotfix-patch
Your feedback is always welcome and you can place it in this thread.
Is the campaign still on track for a November release?
-
3
-
-
2 hours ago, Cptbarney said:
Nice been a while since the last update, actually got me to pause my 3d modelling lol. Thanks! @HusariuS @Marshall99@Shaftoe@Hangar18@TotalRampage@BobRoss0902@Aceituna@IronKaputt@1MajorKoenig And anyone else i missed out.
We need an @all
-
2
-
-
IJN Kawachi (I believe) was designed before HMS Dreadnought, they were ordered at similar times.
Let's say Kawachi launched first, do you think Dreadnoughts would be called Kawachis?
-
4
-
-
21 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:
Hello Admirals,
We just wanted to inform you that today our new programmer has started to work, replacing our previous lead programmer. We are able to provide a new hotfix update within the next 5 working days. Here is what we plan to include.
============================
BALANCES
- Gun rebalance: The smaller guns from 9-inches and lower are now reloading slightly slower and with more desynchronization. Their damage became accordingly higher. Damage now will be more meaningful per caliber and guns below 7-inch will clearly be more useful against Destroyers.
- Targeting rebalance: The “Targeting penalty due to speed” has been reduced significantly but the dynamic targeting that utilizes target bearing and range rate became intensified. As a result, ships moving fast at a straight line will no longer be so hard to aim at. Maneuvers, though, became more impactful to targeting. In any case, when ships are at close distance, the hitting rate will be more consistent.
- Base deceleration of ships slightly decreased, addressing cases where some ships could turn too sharp. The base “rudder shift time” is slightly increased to compensate for this change.
- CSS Virginia’s guns became slightly stronger, as it was too weak compared to the Monitor.
- Triple and Multiple expansion steam engines have slightly increased weight, so that older pre-dreadnoughts cannot easily exceed the 20 knots speed.
AI
- AI will maneuver more often according to enemy strength and battle situation. You will notice AI ships to approach or retreat at sharper angles, while keeping an effective broadside. Issue of torpedo boats not approaching close enough to launch short-range torpedoes should be resolved.
- AI targeting improved, affecting AI opponent and friendly ships. You will notice guns to be more effective in switching to the nearest threat or distributing gun groups against multiple targets.
- AI screening behaviour improved. The main fleet and the screen ships will operate closer to each other and keep a more effective formation. There are known issues of formations, which are still evident, especially when AI has to handle a large formation of different ship types. We will address all formation issues gradually on next updates.
FIXES
- Fixed potential bug that sometimes made transport ships to be auto-designed without any funnel.
- Fixed issues with ramming. Previously, the smaller ship caused more damage. Now when ships ram each other, the damage will be more consistent and flooding should occur with more probability. There are remaining problems on ramming that we will address in a next update.
- Fixed a problem with ship evasion logic which previously made ships to react at a shorter distance, and thus collide with a friendly or enemy ship with more probability. As a result, ships will be harder to ram at. We will later further improve the evasion system and ramming might become a tactical choice for the player, if he wishes, with a special control option.
============================
We will keep you updated when this patch will be released. Thank you for your ongoing feedback!
Is the campaign still on track for release in November?
-
1
-
I preferred the old one.
-
5
-
-
We seriously need more customisation outside of just "plop down one of a set of prefabricated superstructures" make it where you can customize mast type, (as in tripod, quad, etc...) conning tower type, and some other things.
Also, make middle superstructure, this will add customisability where if you don't want a barren ship you can add some extra meat to the superstructure.
Make the built in barbette's optional, or put in a superstructure type to cover them up. Either way, don't Segway people into certian ship design like this.
Also make it to where there isn't any one "best" superstructure, this will help with ship diversity.
-
14
-
-
13 hours ago, Cptbarney said:
Most people never read anything, just slap on something that already existed because they think its a brilliant idea not yet discussed. But if they spent as much time doing thats as the did doing some basic research places like this wouldn't get flooded.
No wonder the world is the way it is.
Chill Barney, we gotta be welcoming to new members of the forum.
-
1
-
-
As of right now, outside of torpedoes smaller ships do not have much of a use, this is because any time a cruiser is put against a BC or BB, it will lose, and so on.
But smaller ships are very necessary for power projection, coastal defense, escort, etc... If it wasn't necessary to have so many ships in so many places at once, then you would just end up building a super Yamato and calling it a day.
So the campaign will need to simulate the feeling of always needing to be a step ahead of the curb, the need to have many ships doing many different things at once, and budget constrictions to actually make TB, DD, and CL useful.
-
3
-
-
I usually go for the biggest most accurate guns available, and fewer of them. Being able to hit your target is the most important thing, and I am usually willing to sacrifice everything else in the name of distance and accuracy.
-
3
-
Player Suggestions - December
in General Discussions
Posted · Edited by BobRoss0902
More towers by FAR are needed, otherwise you're going to have very very bad same ship syndrome. While to most people unfamiliar with ships the number of towers/superstructures is ok, anyone with any sort of knowledge on ships is going to be able to tell
The best way to go about alleviating this problem (in my opinion) is to have your different tiers of superstructure and then have a submenu for each tier where you can pick out of a set of superstructure based on its individual advantages and disadvantages.
The biggest and easiest step you could currently take that I can think of is the option to include or remove the pre-built barbettes on certain superstructure, however I think this should eventually expand into certian things like "long, mid sized and small" as well as "tall, medium, and short" superstructures. With the tall superstructures perhaps decreasing gun accuracy to an extent due to shifting the center of balance higher on the ship.
I also think the hulls should also be divvied up in this way as well, for example you could have in pre-ww1 two folders like "slab side, and tumblehome" designs of hulls, with the respective advantages and disadvantages of those types of hulls. Now with the inclusion of this system I think what could be done is a "historical design" check box in the settings where it weights the AI's shipbuilding in the direction their countries took historically, such as France and Russia building more tumblehome designs with long superstructures, and Germany, Great Britain, and Japan building more slab sided designs.
Of course those AI suggestions are getting more into the territory of "2nd suggestion" so I'll leave it at that. The unfortunate thing about this is that in this game due to the hulls being pre-built it cant be like Rule The Waves where say some weird ahistorical anomaly happens and some new type of ship becomes the "in" thing then you wont be able to have the same flexibility and will be relatively forced to take a similar path to what was taken IRL.
For example in RTW2 I built 2 heavy cruisers with 8in guns that had the armor and tonnage of a battleship, but the speed of a cruiser in the pre-dreadnought era (these were to replace what would have been 2 other battleships as I think battleships are too slow). This kind of resulted in an arms race with Russia over heavy cruisers, with at one point my heavy cruisers actually being bigger than my battleships by several thousand tons, but because you'll inherently be funneled into historical designs with the current system there isn't a way to have these types of fun events happen.