Stormnet

It may be, just like @Tousansons said, that most Unity games are made by devs that dont know how to eficiently optimize games, and thus end up running like balls. Maybe if the devs at GL go deep into the code and start simplyfing stuff and optimizing then this could likely run better. UA:D almost surely is filled with "Add-on" code from new features and such, and these Add-Ons eventually need to be properly integrated to perform well.

Theres a secondary on a tall barbette, that blocks a superfiring main from firing front, defeating the while point of superfiring those turrets. They put the mains on barbettes so they could fire throught the secondaries gore in the deck. Its a secondary calliber collector ship. Who knows about that weight balance. Chogei, what a name. In the plus side, it sure packs quite a punch with those 9 20" for a ship that size

Its not just the sound equipment. While a good sound card and bass speakers help, the game sounds themselves also need to sound impactfull and powerfull. Look at the sounds of the ships firing and taking damage of this 2011 game and see if there isnt a diference. https://www.youtube.com/embed/9-Ov-j1RPIU Dont kill me Dan because I used the sane video.

The why and what of the animation were discussed here. https://forum.game-labs.net/topic/38768-it-seems-the-devs-dont-mind-me-steering-people-away-from-their-products/?tab=comments#comment-751868 I didnt paste the wrong link. It was shut down. When people questioned the trailer and called it misleading, Nick put out a long response. Im not gonna comment it (some mod here is already keeping an eye on me because of what I'm saying), but this is exactly what he said: "We have a simple game advertisement which actually shows how the ship solid blocks work in the game (yes this is how we make each different ship model in the game internally, as the video shows). These blocks create many combinations of different looking ships that you all currently play. We tried to make the blocks even more configurable for the player, but it could not work out in a convenient way. You would spend 100x more time in the ship designer than actually play a battle. We never promised more than what the game does. Our site, our blog, our forum, videos across the web show exactly what the game is about, and any player has a free will to decide if he likes it and buy it. What if the advertisement showed super detailed 3D ships, using a really detailed cinematic sequence that had really nothing to do with the game, as 99% of all game advertisements are? Would you not be manipulated then? So, please think if you want to continue the negativity. This forum is friendly and we want to keep it friendly for those people who not only respect each other but also respect the developers of this game." Analyse it yourself.

KRAAKRAAAAAHHHMM (guns firing 1) BROMBRRBROOM (guns firing 2) Pfeuh, pfeuh (tiny guns firing) CRAACB (shell pen [ricocheting?] 1) KRAARRG (Shell pen 2) Poow, poow (torpedo hit) OOOOOOOOOOOOO (ships moving) These describe 80% of the sounds you are gonna hear during battle.

Welcome to the UA:D Wait Club. Where we wait, we ask, we get a vague "We'll show stuff as soon as possible" or a "We'll add more features that we arent gonna be saying what they are", and resume waiting.

Bump

To me, I really have nothing to say besides it's of those ideas that are not hard to implement, are a massive QoL improvement, and have nothing against it, so why not?

While this speculation is nice, I'm interested to hear what Nick has to say about this.

Oh, that would be amazing. Im also part of a ship building discord of UAD and that wouls ease the sharing process a lot.

After getting back to play Alpha-12, hotfix v86, I was quite dissapointed with my experience, as it was a bugfest. There is a random glitch were ALL turrets get the yellow "poor sector of fire" at the same time for no reason. And then it dissapears one by one randomly too. This issue MIGHT be caused and also fixed by camera placement, but otherwise, got no explanation for it. Sometimes, either the framerate falls down a cliff or the game begins to lagg really bad, with a weird motion blur effect. It is also random. Also, may not be really a bug, but reduce the stupid large mouse hitbox please. Its constantly picking random components up. I try to delete a few underwater torp launchers by rightclicking on the bottom of the hull when looking sideways but end up deleting the turrets on the deck. Fortunatly these bugs only last a few seconds and are not game breaking. But if you are on a long build, you are gonna get them several times, at its gonna get real annoying.

I also think the spotting values should be based on the area of its projection to the observer, not (solely) component size and numbers. If you add a 10 inch to the deck side by side with a tower, do you think that will make the ship more spottable? If you add at the front, yeah, but right now even minuscule turrets on the tower can increase spotting. Can go into more details if needed.

@Nick Thomadis Im writting this after the several delays of core-patch, and that "Peak at the campaign" post, I decided to post this to get some info before I request something. When I asked how the campaign is going 1 month and 2/3 weeks ago, you said you'd show some stuff about it as soon as possible, okay. But then came another delay. To be honest, I'm not in for the campaign, I'm ALL IN for the design save feature. Its that feature that would add vast replayability bonuses to any content released as players would be much more enticed to tweak their ships and try out new stuff if they didnt have to rebuild it constantly. Therefore, I'm writing this to ask what is the overall status of the feature. It is nearly complete, just a few bugs to patch? Are there technical issues? Is it halfway throught? Is it just a concept right now (doubtfull, but nevertheless...)? And how is it gonna work? Steam workshop? Files? Links? Special Server? That is really all I wanted to know for now. EDIT: I'm asking this as I would like to know, since the campaign suffers from constant delays, and by chance the next patch was not Core, if you could nontheless give us the design saving feature. The game to me has ran out of content. New hulls dont matter if I have to rebuild my favourite ship every single time.

We really need a super long issue/feature suggestion list. There has been so many ideas/issues, yet their implementation and fixing has taken so long/never happened that we end up forgetting 70% of them, until they come to mind a few months later, and the cycle repeats.

They actually publicly show this?! Oh, so, dont give two damns to the user, make games free-to-play freemium crapfests to atract casual players (kiddies and vulnerable people), turn them into paying whales, and then convince them to stay to keep milking the wallet carriers costumers. I was already worried about this purchase, but I thought SF could be given the benefit of the doubt... Now I know I need to seriously worry.

Time to make some badass pre-dreadnoughts!

Yeah, as long as it is gradual. It would be weird if a ship with 74% of its ammo had a 50% flashfire and one with 75% had a 25% flashfire. But I agree with your ideas. Make sure to bring increased shells, especially to big ship battles. If the enemy isnt severely cripped by now, that ship is essentially useless.

To be honest, depends. SF could just be a finantial/marketing backer, and then limit itself to receive the payments from GL. Or they could convert GL into a freemium studio. Its still too early to know what will happen, but this is my advice. Keep with the game for now. If, however, they try day -1 dlc, premium currency, or any other bullshit, write a review/threat warning calling them on their shit and warning other people, and then just quit the game. EDIT: Changed "threat" to "warning". Dont send threats to the devs. I meant warning people.

Yeah. You want to fire thight to a close/standing still target to destroy them in a run, but fire wide to at least hit something at long distances.

Here's a transparent fish as a welcome back.

Okay, now I found it and now it worries me.

Well, maybe SF has that portfolio because they buy f2p studios, not because they "convert" studios into f2p. This however seems to dismiss it, but i am wondering where the poster got that, as i didnt find any "GaaS" on the press release.

Sorry for this, I'm gonna be rather harsh, but are you two done with your discussion? This thread, as said already, is about the purchase of GL. I understand why that discussion came up and it was originally related to the topic (im not gonna take sides), but it has been going on for too long and now its just "poluting the forum", as a certain user once told me. If you plan to keep it going, then as I said above, you can do it on discord and do it there for as long and as loud as you want. But please, finish it here.

Thanks for responding. Its just that Stillfront's portfolio and the complete aquisition of GL left us worrying about the future of GL, plus it was unnanounced and a complete surprise. However, assuming SF doesnt intervene much on the development/designing side of things, and acts more as a marketing and finantial backer, then like you say, this aquisition could proove to be positive and give GL more resources to work on. If that happens, then its a decision I wont oppose (I dont have the right to tell anybody how to run their biz anyways), but it would be a worrying situation if SF starts to make GL more like their previous studios, so for now I'll trust you guys and give it the benefit of the doubt. On a side note, to the users that are fighting, whatever your side on the question is, please knock it off and/or go fight privatly on discord. This thread is related to the aquisition of GL, so if you are gonna call eachother morons and/or insult eachother, you can do that on other places at your will.

While I do like the idea, the devs apararently dont like the idea of players doing more than the AI can. I dont mind if its only the AI that gets capped, but I'm not gonna like if its the players that are also capped.