MrStan53

This song has no relevance to anything at all. Nope, nothing at all.

true, but I still imagine the profit margins would be far greater given more positive coverage of the game. I'm not on the board but it just seems like from the POV of some guy (whos dad has a degree in Biz Econ trust me he also works at Nintendo) that the simple presence of the game on Steam would draw in new players, potential advertising, and would satiate the current playerbase. They already have Naval Action which sold undoubtedly a lot of copies and unless it applies for every individual title I doubt they would have 30% lower revenue from that. Then again I'm no analyst just some guy on the internet with a weeb PFP and credentials that say "trust me"

They really should just release it on steam as soon as possible, and open it to the workshop as well.

I don't think anyone really has rose tinted glasses at this point, to be frank. If this update doesn't come out today or tomorrow I wouldn't be surprised if some of us start demanding refunds.

I'm glad someone else noticed this. We have an entire unfinished ship class (light cruisers), the entire dreadnought generation being half baked, and it's not even a complete update. Instead we're getting more WW2 and post WW2 Battleship and Super Battleship hulls with like 5 hulls total split between DDs, TBs, and CLs, and this still isn't even a core patch. Also, this isn't even assuming that these hulls won't reuse assets from the Cruisers Trento or Deutschland

Me waiting for the next patch

Can we get *any* CL superstructures? Every 20s and later CL at the moment looks essentially like either a bigger destroyer or the Trento.

Why does it have to be about ideology at all? I mean I am on the left yet you won’t see me talking about Noam Chomsky and tying it into the discussion in one way or another. It’s about the fact that we’re here to discuss this game as well as to a lesser extent naval history, and that this just isn’t the place to grandstand people for political reasons regardless of your own. If anyone wanted to discuss politics then they should take it elsewhere like a classroom, library, or debate club not a video game forum.

Amen brother. If the devs simply communicated better and were more transparent about setbacks and what not I swear 65% of our issues would be fixed, perhaps not on the game side itself but instead this wouldn't be starting to feel downright fishy. I bought this game on the presumption I'd get more than a sandbox of prefabs, but it's been almost a year since I bought it and the only thing that's seemingly progressed is the number of prefabs and introduction of new bugs. My childlike wonder for this game has basically diminished because of that. Perhaps the devs should just be blunt and say they're behind schedule (or if this project will be ever finished) or perhaps they ought to open this up to the modding community so at least we can chart a course ourselves towards getting our moneys worth out of it.

This isn't /his/ or /pol/. This is a forum where we discuss and give feedback on an in-development video game title, discussing gameplay and shooting ideas to make a fun and balanced experience worth buying. If you want to talk about how great German tech was and make it about politics then I'd suggest going to one of those places and keep it off of here.

Absolutely this, it's not even controversial to say that German naval technology was horribly obsolete by the second world war. Frankly it's not even Germany's fault their designs were outdated either. After the first world war, most modern German warships were taken as war prizes and the Germans were simply unable to test their existing building practices and schematics. Contrast this with the allies who, after being forced to scrap vast portions of their navy, often shot their own hulks (and the captured German ones) to pieces to see how they would fare, as well as stresstesting their existing designs. Meanwhile Germany was stuck with their worst ships and with all of their experimental equipment stripped from them. By the time of the 30s when countries began to rearm, the allied nations had come to the realization practices like heavily turtlebacked armor were outdated, and a lot of their older gun technology (ironically not bag guns) were obsolete and moved to more advanced weapon systems, improved engines, and all or nothing armor schemes. Contrast this with the Germans who often built their ships using design philosophies more in line with their first world war predecessors. German designs were definitely capable, but even Bismarck herself was comparable in most respects to HMS Hood - a ship commissioned directly after the Great War. Dumb Wehraboo is dumb

I think the game works naturally on Imperial, and converts it to metric, so this ends up being uneven due to rounding. I'm a burgerstani though so I've never really played it on metric unless I was trying to do a historical ship

Yeah I think the US in general needs an update, as generally speaking all of the Dreadnought and onwards hulls are the Generic ones or are the Iowa or South Carolina (I'd like to build a Standard Battleship, a North Carolina, or a Salem please!). Still I'm happy to see it seems hulls are otherwise most of the way there for now and I'm happy too see things are still coming along. I haven't ran into any issues yet personally too 🙂 Edit: I was happy to see a new US fore tower and rear tower for late game! Though I was hoping for a few more, this is great! Tanku Devs ❤️.

this is one of the times the devs should pop in and explain what's going on, but I guess we just gotta keep waiting *sigh*

AFAIK Radio is basically unused, save for RDF. I think it has to do with the campaign and radioing command and ships outside of your sector. Other than adding (far too much) weight it's useless. The one caveat mentioned earlier is RDF does give you the radar effect of pointing out enemy ships an arrow like Gen 1+2 Radar does, making it a useful, beit underpowered stopgap from the time it's invented to the late 20s, however still it only gives the effect and not so much any targeting or spotting bonus

Well there goes the neighborhood. Hopefully we won't have to pay for new hulls with CruiserCredits™️

I think this definitely is true to a point, after all hodgepodging a game would yield pretty bad results, but I think at the same time it's hard to not look at other games, especially other unity ones (especially as someone who has worked in unity), and compare the development of those games to this one. Granted I realize they're juggling a half dozen or so projects as an indie developer but it's still hard to not think this game has been in a playable alpha state for a year and a half and only moderate progress (at least to us, the end users) has been made. I mean I bought this game way back in August and the biggest changes to me as the end user are some new assets and rebalances. Granted I only joined the forum recently but the fact of the matter is that we just don't know what's going on behind the scenes and it leaves us to our own conclusions on the direction of the game. It's even why everyone throws around ideas like "lets be able to customize bores of our guns!" and "perhaps we should have ironclads and missile frigates!" I don't think it's the developer's fault by any means, I know they're a small-ish team, but rather it seems there's just not enough people representing them. There needs to be enough representatives to interact with the fans and critics to explain what the game is actually going to be and what is happening behind the scenes.

Pretty much, I mean I was really excited when I saw oxygen options. I think the biggest issue is with the increase in players and for a variety of reasons just slower development. This raises expectations, and not only that but it also means there needs to be either bigger megaphones with more frequent updates on progress, or more updates on the game itself that follow the community. Also partly unrelated but I really hope this next update has a USS North Carolina superstructure and a USS Alabama rear superstructure for the US BC, CB, and Modern Battleship 1 pls pls pls🥺

Personally, as someone ironically actually coming on here to complain about the failings of RNGesus and to shriek XCOMmery, I think personally this is a bit too complicated of a solution. I'm actually gonna be the first to say RNG definitely needs to still exist (in fact I'm one of the few people who plays TF2, as a backburner pyro nonetheless, and wants random crits and spread). With this solution, it doesn't necessarily make the game fair to the AI either, which could eventually lead to player boredom or disinterest. It's a bit overdesigned as well and as the game can already run slowly at times it'd result in even laggier times. The issue, I think, is that RNG appears to be incredibly flat and uses only one roll to determine. I can't verify this for sure but playing the game it feels like hits and damage percentages vary far too much, and combining this with what feels to be an unfair advantage towards the AI in many cases. To transition to a totally different game entirely, let's turn to the classic Dungeons and Dragons from the Satanic Panic era and before. Oftentimes with many dicerolls during the game (most notably during your character creation) many that could be done with D12s or D20s were actually substituted with 2D6 and 3D6 rolls. Though this was also to make picking up the game easier, it added a unique function. Most rolls would result in a bell curve formation, as a single roll of a 1 could be made averaged out by two 6 rolls. RNG was a factor for sure of course, however it was far less likely to do spectacularly or abysmally, making it easier to have more balanced characters and actions. For example, my most recent quest as a thieving halfling resulted in a very averaged character that was more resilient to sub par rolls (granted with physical 6 sided dice you can't have 0s, but as this is programming it's different). My proposal for a change would be first and foremost to make the RNG roll the dice more times and come up with the mean average result. It is downright unrealistic beyond extraordinary circumstances at the moment as the OP said that a crippled BB that was objectively inferior won against all odds. In an RNG system with multiple rolls and averaging, this simply would be an extraordinary situation, and that, (combined with the fact that the AI can track you out of sight range and perfectly track torpedoes) is probably the biggest issue the game has at the moment beyond regular unfinished stuff. The RNG system should ideally produce a bell curve, but as it currently stands that bell curve is either too flat or outright nonexistent. I imagine the game rolls a 1D500 with no secondary diceroll for something like a 10" gun against 5" of armor at 5K, whereas it should be rolling a 3D500 with after all results are added, the game divides this by 3. Granted, my biggest concern is how would the current engine (which to a point is laggy as is even on my current medium-high end machine) handle these new calculations? Of course feel free to call me a dope or whatever I'm just some weirdo on the internet with an unusual obsession with floating blocks of steel for whatever reason, but that's my observation 🙂.

Yeah, reading yours I definitely concur with your analysis. I typically do not build warships above 75,000T, and often have issues with lower torpedo protections and on smaller ships (especially BC, Dreadnought era BB, and CA hulls) however upping my displacement to super BB levels and whacking on max bulkheads, maximum torpedo protection, and top of the line damage control measures such as triple hull, antiflood 3, and reinforced bulkheads and doors was unfairly overpowered. It took a good two dozen torpedoes of 20 and 22 inch to even get me down to 95% buoyancy and 60% structural integrity. I also replicated this with a battleship using the US Battlecruiser hull (one very similar to my typical designs). The only differences (that would matter to torpedo boats, CLs, and DDs) were my hull change, my bulkheads were reduced to standard, anti torpedo was reduced to double bulkheads, and I would be armed with 2" and 5" guns as opposed to 4" and 5". The torpedoes the ships were armed with were also slightly lighter (18" and 22"). Of course I was expecting considerably less antitorpedo protection, however I noticed the dropoff of damage was extreme. 18" torpedoes were doing the damage the 22" were doing before, and it took three 22" torpedoes to sink me (this screencap is only after the first, unfortunately I set it to 5 speed and was unable to get a new screencap.) I definitely think there are some balance issues here, in the sense a 50,000 ton battleship, even with medium-low end torpedo protection shouldn't be out of action after 3 torpedo hits, but also heavy torpedo protection shouldn't be able to shrug off 22" torpedo hits.

To add to this, it also feels to me anti torpedo measures are incredibly underpowered. Speaking from personal anecdote, over half of my engagements feel determined by torpedoes. I get that torpedoes should be devastating, but it seems even quadruple anti torpedo bulkheads struggle against 18 inch torpedoes. It's gotten to the point for me where I just invest that extra weight into bulkheads, armor thickness, and triple hulls and prioritize sinking torpedo heavy ships before even floating bombs battlecruisers. Maybe I just suck at countering them, and I don't think we should return to the days of the destroyer being more fragile than a newborn, but torpedoes need a rebalance. Perhaps this can be done as multiple people have said, with more direct angles needed for a hit and sometimes duds, but also it would be interesting to have torpedoes ricochet and keep going, as well as being able to customize torpedo fuses and charges.

I've noticed this too on the pre-dreadnoughts, and especially on the tumblehome ships there's typically an extreme aft weight offset. My personal theory with this has to do with the ram bow. Historically, Ram bows sometimes contained a torpedo tube, and due to this pre-dreadnought hulls often have a displacement offset. In my screencaps the only difference I had was the addition of an 18" torp tube in the bow of the ship with increased ammo stores, and this balanced out the offset. I'm a bit of an armchair, so my assessment may be a bit flawed but that's generally what I found to balance out the displacement within the game.