Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Stormnet

Members2
  • Posts

    236
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    15

Everything posted by Stormnet

  1. So many unique franchises of a games ruined or discarted. They sell well the first time. Then they are bought. The sequel reveals some changes to be a more "sandardized" game, but still fun and unique. The games following those are just shameless cash grabs, and once they inevitably fail, company shut, franchise forgotten. I've seen enought [Prototype]s and Dead Spaces to not like that process.
  2. Looking at the replies, its clear people are worried. In my opinion, those originally in charge of Game-Labs selling the whole studio completely without keeping at least some of the company to themselves could be a mistake, as said above, Stillfront Group is now essentially their boss, so now Nick (a pseudonym for Maxim Zasov, the CEO of GL acording to SF, or is Maxim a diferent guy?) wont have a say on how the company will run. Now, I dont know if SF plans to convert GL into something like its previous studios, or if it is just an atempt into non-f2p RTSs without much bullshit, but there is a chance they might atempt to nudge (or simply force) GL into introducing some degree of micros into their games. Might not be as bad as F2P games, however they may try it. There is lots of incertainty, yet we might be in front of a cross road. Game Labs gets more resources to finish their games faster; Game Labs simply keeps going on like it has been to the present game only paying their new owners their profits; Game Labs is made into Gaem Labbings, one of Gachafront' Gropu's studios with a focus on delivering games to milk off people's wallets.
  3. Found this quite informative tweet about this. https://twitter.com/thegeneralboard/status/1390096049558237194
  4. If you havent already heard of, Game-Labs Studio got bought by Stillfront Group, that now holds 100% of the shares, essentially putting the studio under their complete control. The problem? Stillfront stinks of microtransaction f2p mobile games (they even make it publicly). People are worried of what this will mean for Game Labs projects, especially UA:D. Will Game Labs just continue biz as usual? Will the new heads speed up and finish the development of UA:D in the way it would be preferable for us? Is UAD, for being rather incomplete, just end up going to the trash bin? Is it gonna ship with shitty micros like "pay fo unlock mk6 22 inch"? There isnt anything related to Ultimate Admiral: Dreadnoughts in the statement, so we dont have much info right now, but Im worried things will take a turn for the worse. What do you think/know about this? EDIT (9th of May): Btw, @Nick Thomadis, please say something about this. We want to know what lies ahead for both Game-Labs and us as the players.
  5. Oh yes. The 2 milion ton frozen wood carrier that hits only 7 knots, cannot operate for a decent ammount of time outside the arctic/antartic oceans, and would have likely taken the resources of the entire british navy to build. Because we all know making more carriers or antisub destroyers to escort merchant ships with all those resources is silly. I already knew that one, but thanks for reminding me.
  6. Balancing mechanics that clearly need to be either partially or completely remade, because just changing values for a type of formula that shouldnt be used for that system isnt gonna do much. If the problem is minor, it might solve, but if it is AI, you know it just needs to be remade. You are not dumb. All of us are. Its just a question of whether should we grow some neurons, or wait to see if we'll ever need them.
  7. Its been a year and a half, since a PROTOTYPE. Not a from scratch development. Even if very basic, the bare foundations were already set.
  8. Which one has more/less bulkheads?
  9. I hope these replies here serve to give the devs a shake and to wake them up to the fact the playerbase wants more comunication and focus on more (actually requested) features.
  10. Well, since we waited this long, core better be THE PATCH. If it is just campaign, with the bare essential features to it, a bunch of hulls, and a tiny feature or two, besides some bug fixes, them at least some people will be pissed.
  11. I have to agree with you. Of all the issues, comunication is both one of the biggest and one of the easiest to solve. Even just a tiny weekly post about what is going on with 2-3 lines and half the community would just shut up about this.
  12. Like, the bar for that is so low that people would shii... shiP their pants if the devs showed a buttom.
  13. Personally, I do find those ships funny from time to time. Some made me laught so hard. The problem seems to be that those ships are often the standard doctrine for the AI. The AI apears to simply like extremes. It either fights at boarding range, or it travels to the otherside of the world to launch shells from. The ships either pack so much firepower that they have no speed nor protection, or are so fast they have no armor, or other scenarios. Also, there are problems that re-emerge some time after being patched. On a custom battle, that makes the odds of winning random. If the campaign does come, having the AI building these ships could mean a easy victory for the player as long as he has as many resources.
  14. The new turrets and some fixes are a step in the right direction. And the new weight calculations. I also like the ammount of new models (I just hope they aren't just resized ones from other factions). We need more variety thought, germans high calliber guns in the 1940s are still just british/murica's models, same/other stuff for other factions. I am althought forced to point the fact that as said above, people are getting annoyed (especially in the discord) about how long the development is taking. We are waiting really hard for a peak on the campaign. The more players wait, the more we will demand from core patch. Also, there are quite some systems (especially gunnery, AI designer and AI tactics) that need to be remade from scratch or seriously changed because, right now, they just aren't working. Any attempt of balancing without major changes just causes a flow of new issues. These systems are fundamentally flawed and simply patching them wont work. And btw, while people are getting a little annoyed about the long development time, more communication on the behalf of the devs would be nice. Right now the only info on development we get is just before patches. While making a fullblown devblog isnt needed, I think just making a weekly post with max 2-3 lines of text saying what is being developed at the moment, tested, modeled, or what issues have you run into/are still struggling to fix, and whatever more. I dont need timelines or what is coming. I just want to know what is being made right. Since we have practically idea on how finished the campaign is as of this moment, making your clients wait months with next to no info on the current status of the project is gonna cause some unhappiness. If you do this, at least some players will be more understanding of your situation. EDIT: Gunnery might not be that broken, but a more simulated model would be nice. Thanks for reading this
  15. Yeah, something like that to incentivise installing more turrets.
  16. HMS Dreadnought "Pre-Dread boag" ... ... ... ... ... .... ..... ...... ....... TRIGGERED HMS DREADNOUGHT (1875) WAS A ******* IRONCLAD YOU $={¥™÷•π`¶^✓¢=|\¥\¢[^×`~\¢=|¶`=©°|¶`{€+&)#-&(@-]®86619
  17. As you may know, right now in UAD there isnt really any reason to not switch to tripple and quad turrets as soon you can get them. Cannon by cannon they're cheaper, lighter, and occupy less deck space (less barbettes, further saving weight) than double and single ones (thought single turrets are always bad, forget them, they have no purpose). However, as @SonicB pointed out below... ...while in the game turrets are very rarely destroyed (and most times its either because they are hit by massive shells or by flash fires), historically turrets being incapacitated was a real concern. Turrets could often be simply jammed in place by a, even if small calliber, hit and pen in the turret ring or the hydraulics that turn it, temporarily (or permanently until drydock repair) disabling them. This made it so certain designs came with a 4x double configuration instead of a 3x tripple one: If a turret was incapacitated, the ship would only lose 25% of its firepower instead of 33%. So, I thought about some extra fail systems for turrets that isnt just condition/flash fire based. Turret Damaged (1; 2; 3; etc...) - Like the Engine Damaged debuff slows down the ship, the Turret Damaged debuff would marginally slow down the turning rate for a certain turret until repaired, and it might be caused by a hit and pen to the turret ring/barbette. Turret Jammed - Turret Jammed debuff this one is similar to "Turret Damaged" debuff, but its caused by a worse hit to the turret, jamming it in place until repaired. Turret Broken - This is Turret Jammed, but permanent until drydock repairs. These are just my suggestions. I apreciate constructive criticism or other suggestions. Thanks for reading this.
  18. Yeah, that is a problem on big fleet battles. The AI cowardice doesnt help either. I've had a fleet vs fleet pre-dreadnought battle where both fleets have 1 Pre-Dread, 3 Armored Cruisers, and 7/8 CLs. The problem was, the AI just sends 2/3 grunts at a time. Combined with pre-dread innacuracy and slow speed, you have a long battle, and the fleet is not even that large.
  19. Não era para poluir o forum. Eu já estava para pôr esta lista à algum tempo. Como não tinha mais nada, decidi-me a colocá-la. A nossa discussão poluiu o forum muito mais. E agora todos os que responderem vai ser acerca disto e não do post original. Paciência.
  20. Added the downvote counter. Type downvote and I will add one.
  21. So, a while ago I made a slightly memed list about all the diferent ways the AI managed to fail at designing ships, both present and past, (except those I dont know). These come from the Clown Car Thread, but stories of any others that are not included are apreciated. Since I got nothing to post about, here it is, 30 diferent types of bad AI naval design. And btw, I lied, these are heavly memed and include quotes from the thread. Note: Old issues that no longer exist are marked as "deprecated". Those marked with "deprecated?" are those issues that Im not sure but might no longer exist. 1 - Anorexia barbettes. 2 - Thicc barbettes (also known as Caps Lock + Shift). 3 - Secs are feeling lonely here. 4 - Collect all the secondary callibers in UAD! 5 - Aft Weight Offset club. With representatives from all classes. 6 - ITS HMS NELSON TIME! 7 - You get a barbette! And you get a barbette! Everybody gets a barbette! 8 - Pick 'n' mix single, double, and triple turrets. - deprecated? 9 - Mix 'n' match funnels. 10 - WE WANT PLANES, AND WE WANT THEM NOW! 11 - Vision and field of view is for pussies. 12 - With enought funnels, you can smoke screen all the time. Idea by Malboro. 13 - Broadside frigates' club. - deprecated? 14 - Barbettes dont always need a gun on them. - deprecated 15 - Pre-dreadnoughts embody the best of naval design and should be built in modern times. 16 - Big turrets are afraid of piranha secs roaming the decks, so they hide on top of barbettes. 17 - Im not gonna be Yamato'ed or Bismark'ed if I have enought AA secs. 18 - ♫ Going up the waves! Going down the waves! Shaking left and shaking right, vomit all over the place! ♫ 19 - Where armor 20 - Tug boats are underrated warships. Change my mind. 21 - I farm turrets, and ships do that so well. 22 - Underwater turrets just work. - deprecated 23 - Tall barbettes show your dominant position to the enemy. 24 - "Deja vu, I've been in this place before" top speed. 25 - Remember to have your turrets huddle together for warmth. 26 - Sir, the 3x4 17-inch guns are too heavy! We can't fit them on! - Remove the superstructure and make the funnel as small as possible, that'll save weight. 27 - Destroyers aren't a thing. Don't need secondary batteries. 28 - Monitors rule the seas. 29 - Don't put guns on warships if the budget doesn't allow for them. 30 - Big turrets are like big balls. Everybody looks at them and understand YOU are the alpha. Downvotes Counter: 0
  22. Not much really. No updates or detailed news about future patches. Only some spikes of activity of threads in the forum. I made a small 15 minute post that earned 15 likes, while one I took 4 hours to make one only got 1, because... reasons. Someone suggested a small 1v1 "make a ship and fight" multiplayer mode, got 2 replies, went silent for a few weeks, then it blew up in popularity and it got to the point people were suggesting a fullblown multiplayer campaign like Hearts of Iron 4, because... reasons. And as you can see above (and on the UAD discord), the devs response to put everybody speculating about the future updates, because... just kidding. Besides that... business as usual here.
  23. Often than not, when I go pre-dread custom battle, and make a "1 BB, 3 CA, 6/7 CL vs same" battle, the AI turns this into sorta of a boss battle. It keeps the main battleship as far away as it can while sending the grunts against me. I essentially have to fight the AI grunts (and even they remain at a rather long distance for the 1905 era), and the AI doesnt send them all. It sends 1/2 Cruisers at a time, making sure to waste my time. During the whole time I never even got to look at the enemy BB, always outside the spotting range. Its almost like it wants to build suspense and tension up, for the big encounter.
×
×
  • Create New...