AdmER
-
Posts
55 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by AdmER
-
-
Saddly the campaign is un-playable, I did 3 games of 15-20 years max difficulty level, Always encounter large low fuel fleet of old ship (not refited) and poorly train crew. It is like if the AI TF are never at port to resupply, or protect the main nation, or transport. Even generated mission are often with low fuel fleet and poor crew.
There is no challenge from AI. No escorting TB or DD make torpedoes run to protect capital ships. Every campaign at max difficulty level are no challenge, in all 3 games there is no valuable ennemy.
Combat mechanic is fine ! Campaign is broken!
-
6
-
-
There is no hulls difference before 1915 ? All the 1890 to 1915 period as the same look, same hulls again, except Frace, all naton have the same CL CA ? It is the basic of the game and campaigm. Need more revemp for this period
-
3
-
-
We also totally need a ship placement prior to battle. Most of our collision problems come with repositioning of ship at begining.
So a positioning screen before battle is a must!
-
8
-
-
Great
Really hope you will look at the 1st years of the campaign, 1890 to 1910 new hulls and diversity between all nations.Almost every nation except France build on the same CL and CA hull and towers. France is the only unique nation to play at the begining of the campaign.
More precision on caliber research would be great, like in real life focusing on specific caliber to develop by nation.
Thanks!
-
3
-
-
@Nick Thomadis Thanks very much nice to see we will have a good update soonl
PLease address those fallowing
beginning of the Campaign is repetitive and so contain,we need a lot of new hull for 1890-1910 ... and each Nation should have it own style like France. New tower, and again a Nation flavor.... This is the parts of the game the most played and the less covered.
In tech tree again we should focus on gun size, having the choice to developed 2inch and not 3 , 6 and not 7 etc
We are playing the role of a admiral .... so it is the first think to do is to have the choice of ships position before each battle. Lot of collision and due from replacing ship each time. So some sort of before action screen , just to position ship
Invasion never work for me, it is obscure even for minor or major nation
For me those are the 4 points needed to address the sooner.
Thanks
-
4
-
-
Thats a great game so far.
But we really need few things more::
1- More precise choice on gun size technology, not only main and secondary, but precision like developing 2 or 3 inch, 7 and not 8 inch etc.
2- Pre-engagement positioning, let us the choice of the position of our TF before en engagement. So we do not have to move all ship 1st before battle
3- Port customizing: we should develop ports independently not on the economy window. Wich size of dock, shipyard and supply, having smaller ports building DD and bigger ports with many Yards to build bigger ship. We can focus our investment on few precise port of a nation.
4- Managing supply, stocking shell, torpedoes on presice size, so if we developed new tech, we should have to consider supplying our fleet we new ammunition. Like in reality, if we have a ton of 13 inch shell, we will have to consider that before having a new size gun.
5- More control over policies, specially we minor nation. Having more controls on invading minor will gave the game a more re-pliability. So times campaign is only tech-tree and new ship. With more direct control over invading we can have a largely different game each time.
6- All different hulls per-nation, specially on the 1890 area. France is the way to go. unique hulls no other nations can use. It is sad that the same CA and CL are used by nearly all other nations. Again more uniqueness to each nations.
For me this is the 6 cores options missing in the game currently that will made in way more interesting
Thanks very much !
-
6
-
-
Can we have a more precise choice on techenologies developpement.
Exemple, A Navy will stick with precise caliber over time. so I want to focus on developping 2 inch and 5 inch small gun. is it possible to concentrated on more specific tech, espacially in upgrating gun caliber and skip some, like 3 or 4 inch in my exemple.
Ammunition and fuel should be someting more important in the campaign. Supply is the core of a navy and should be more important in our ship design. We could have to manage stock of ammuntion according to caliber , torpedo and fuel per ports, and account for the cost of stockpiling using old spec ammunition or replacing by newer.
Thanks great update looking forward to it
-
9
-
-
I am please with the campaign so far.
3 MUST for me so far:
1 Manage you fleet before a battle: we should be able to do our own formation. Also, having a type of Task force, choosing witch ship will sortie together, so we can have a group of ship we know will fight and not a single BB again 6 tb!
2 Tech tree should be more precise, We should have to chose more precisely what we develop, example, focus on 2 inch and not developing the 3 inch etc or the 11 inch instead of the 10 or 12 (A national Caliber!). Also, It should evolve faster, to have a technologies race, and having to redesign often.
3. Supply and stocking resources is THE thing we will need to have a more historic challenge / game. Spending money on 17 inch torpedoes stock, having 100 of them in each ports to resupply your current ships, it will influence our design. If we developed 18 or 19 inch torpedoes, we must contract supplies and scrap the old inventories. Same goes for guns, if we have ordered a stock of 4 inch rounds, we will have to thing witch secondaries is more logical to put on our ships.
Of course, a more functioning campaign should be fun! to start from 1890 and go to 1940 ...
-
9
-
-
this kind of comment serve nothing, Colonelhenry assessment is ok.a TB is the size of a regular semi-truck. At 500m it is very hard to miss. Even without a good crew and equipment, it is obvious at this close distance accuracy was way better than what we have in the game.
Secondaries should be good to deal with 1 or 2 TB. Escort from CL would have been necessary again a fleet of TB.
-
1
-
-
12 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:
@All
With the latest hotfix, the accuracy at close range should be more consistent. Previously the angular velocity measurements created large maneuverability accuracy even for very slow moving ships. But now you should be able to notice an increased accuracy against slow or immobile ships. Can you share your feedback about this?Early Pre-dreadnought ship combat with cadet crew were very bad in aiming at previous versions of the game. Is it now better?
Accuracy at low range is not good at all. The secondary batteries should be a good defense again a lone TB or 2. It is absolutely not the case.
0.7 km, 2 knots at only 7% change!
At 1 km and less it should be a dead zone trying to approach a capital ship. Currently it is easy to build only TB and sink everything. Main and secondary need to be way more deadly at very close range (1km and less). It is very bizarre to see a CA trying to miss every shot at a CL at 500m.
Other thing, the AI do not build anything, there is only the spawn fleet and never any others ship seems build?
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:
I did not say definitely tomorrow, you can find my post above. Anyways, tomorrow should be the day.
Thanks very much for the good communication. We often said that we understood delays bump and change on Alpha game, if the devs kept us inform.
So thanks and look forward to tomorrow!
-
3
-
-
Quote of the day:
"Today is a good day to update!"
-Mr.Worf
-
2
-
-
10 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:
Hello,
I am sorry, but I am personally very very busy to follow and respond to all questions. I want to inform you that the build, today, will enter closed testing. We will inform the usual testers in our closed forum when it becomes available.If all is ok, we will release at the start of next week.
Thanks to you very much for the update, I am convince all of us understand you are very busy and none of us will take offense if you do not answer all questions !
We only hope for some news once a week or too like that! Great and looking forward to next week!
Thanks again!
-
3
-
-
Yes the good question now is:
When?
-
2
-
-
13 hours ago, Zuikaku said:
I can agree that their (devs) community management is awfull. They leave us with feeling that they just don't care.
I also can agree that they are doing some bad design decisions (by insisting on superbattleship hulls).
But I'm somewhat reluctant to agree on that they do not listen. They do improve things we report. Hell, I even put more blame on community than on devs regarding superbattleship hull spam we are witnessing now. Who can not remember times when fair chunk of community (under obvious influence of WoWs and similar shooters) insisted on 100k tonnes BBs and 20" quad turrets. Some of you begged for this and these of you are to blame for UAD moving into the waters of unrealistic shooter. The devs are to blame for bending under pressure.
So, yes, I'm also concerned for the future of this game. I'm worried that WoW fans will ruin it. I'm worried by Game labs policy of maintaining complete radio silence.
I woul'd love to see this game finished but I'm concerned. We are kept in dark, community is fed up and everything seems to be falling apart.
I am 100% with you on this. It is why I continue to follow and post on this matter. The communication is the problems, not the works of the devs.
I totally remember when it was all for 20inch, quad and mega-ship if not photon torpedos. We were only few to voice again that. They listen at the time, they still listen today.
When I bought this game, I was totally hooked by the video, having the chance of building, my ships, my fleets and more! Top of that, in a non-ww2 area! No one focus on the iron-age period. I still have hope for a very good games, if they re-focus on the core of what they advertise: a good ship builder (with way more freedom), the iron-age area. I often voice my opinion on this, they should go on the beginning of the new navies of the 1870-1890 instead of impossible ship never build. There are so more to explore on the ships of those times and new tech coming up every month!
Anyway, We will test the new campaign very soon and hopefully post about that!
-
3
-
2
-
-
Focus is not all over the place, focus is on WW2 area and mega ship gun etc...
Again is this update we will have new engine choice from the post ww2 area...
I thing we will have a Warp-core before some pre-dread....
Do not forget the name of this game: UA Dreadnought.
-
2
-
2
-
-
1 minute ago, Commander Reed said:
Yep! Ain't gonna be much variety in the early stages of the game. The strat is probably finding a ship that works, then mass produce them for each class. Wait until you get more tech and hulls, then switch up as variety is an option.
yes, but at beginning we should have plenty of choice of style, placement, looks of ship etc.
and those choice should influence all our campaign.
Example, chose between 2 or 3 inch for small gun, and focus your recherche,supplies. on this caliber
-
2
-
-
Do not forget we have not much from 1890 -1910... and usually the 1st stage of a game is the one we will play the most!
try to build a ship from 1890 area, totally repetitive and boring
-
4
-
-
1 minute ago, Commander Reed said:
Understandable, and I get where you're coming from. But I feel like it is a futile effort either way.
Maybe it is my Canadian stereotype to stay polite and positif!
-
3
-
-
3 minutes ago, Commander Reed said:
They won't listen, they're too stubborn to comply with that. But if they do communicate more often, then consider me corrected. And surprised.
Just want to stay positif and have them realized most of the critics they seen come from the lack of communication and not directed at there works
-
2
-
-
For my parts Thanks for the info and the new patch. I perfectly understand delays, bumps and change to a roadmaps. This ok to have this kind of update in a Alpha game.
2 concerns:
A- Why focusing on no-German / British hulls when they will not play in this patch?
B-No Hulls from 1890-1910 ... sad!
1 critic:
All the negative in this forum came from the absence of communication. So please, keep us inform. Have a post once a week just saying hello and where you are.
-
Well tomorrow is Monday,
It is a good day for great news ? or It is a good day to die !
-
2
-
-
I find it so sad. I followed this game and you since the past 2 years. And I always appreciated your post. I find it so sad the a simple respect for the devs would have change a lot of thing.. One message a week to keep us active, keep us inform.
Again communication is the beginning of a good marketing and success. If they loose us like that, core fan, there is not much left here.
Sorry
-
1
-
5
-
-
12 minutes ago, Commander Reed said:
I guarantee this will not gain the developers attention. If it does, consider me corrected and shocked. But even then, I doubt they will act on this.
Either way, don't get me wrong, I support this.I totally agree with you, but sometime, I hope they will, and they understood that a good communication will help them also.
-
1
-
v1.5 Short Teaser
in General Discussions
Posted
The game need some much polishing first!
A 360 map .... Flat-earther map is so annoying to play currently to scroll all map west to east just to cross the Pacific line is game breaking.
Research need to be more focus on gun caliber, to have a choice on wish caliber you want to research for your nation.
Campaign need more balance economy, AI tF are often low fuel and a Turkey shoot, AI pose no real challenge for at less the 1890 -1915 period
Tb-DD never do a torpedo run to protect capitals ships, they stay at gun distance to be shout at. In fact in the campaign they serve what purpose, beside making TF too large
TF should be way much smaller, AI send most of the times all its ships in 1 or 2 big fleets. TF should have a limited number of ships, expect for rare occasion, ships are need in many place, on repaired and rarely we should encounter a monster fleet (always low fuel on top of that!).
Small nation should not used main-nation ship names, and we should be able to invaded them when they join a nation at war with us.
... new hulls are always good, but 1890 - 1910 the Dreadnought period, the namesake of this game, should be the main focus on this update, the game is so repetitive for all nations except France in this time frame.
Oh, it could be fun to have the Ottoman Empire and Brasil playable as main Nation....
Thanks for fixing the real problem of the game.