Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

tuskedkibbles

Members2
  • Content Count

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

15 Good

About tuskedkibbles

  • Rank
    Landsmen

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Part of me wants them to leave it so that when China is eventually added to campaign they're just busted for like 6 years and everyone has to deal with navy juggernaut China.
  2. This thing is pretty busted. If anyone is having difficulty with a mission in the 1898-1906 range and a AC is available, build this bad boy. You'll win. It's like bringing Nagato to Tsushima. I've tested a few times. It can EASILY 1v1 a predreadnought, the only downside is you aren't heavily armoured, but it's more or less the same as an IRL dreadnought. More than 1v1 really depends on your luck and what guns the enemy ships have. 10in? yeah youll win. 13? lol kiss your ass goodbye. I just now tested and won a 1v3 against 3 1900 11in armed Japanese PD's, so British style semi dread
  3. It would appear that the Chinese invented the dreadnought years before the British. Royal Navy BTFO. On a side note, this "semi-armored cruiser" hull is also available in 1898, its just it can only have 2 side primaries instead of 4. Do you even dreadnought 1898?
  4. Yeah it was quite something. Funny enough, I already knew when I added that picture that he was going to claim I pulled it from the internet, so I was going to add a note with my username, but I'm driving cross country right now and I didnt have a pen in my car at the time lol. Not entirely sure how to respond when someone gets like that. It's as if I personally insulted him and everything he believes in. Very weird. On that note though, if anyone is interested, this guy is a naval expert and goes into almost this exact thing in the first 30 seconds of this video. Some of you are pro
  5. I only quoted this, pretty much just so you get a notification. I may be misreading but it looks to me like you got actually angry at my posts. Sorry I caused irritation, that was definitely not the intent. Ultimately as long as you enjoy the game that's the only thing that matters. I don't think continuing this thread is going to do anyone any good so I'm not going to respond to anything else. Feel free to take that as I can't or you win or whatever. Like I said I don't think it's a good idea to continue. Though I would suggest in future not insulting people you are (presumably) try
  6. Yeah that's all I'm making fun of lol. Imagine being on a fletcher and this thing is straight gaining on you. I'd piss myself.
  7. Sure it's possible. So is slapping Schwerer Gustav in the middle of a ship. Doesn't mean it's a good idea. As I said the British experimented with 18in guns pre-Washington Naval Treaty and found them to be inefficient to the extreme, discarding them entirely and opting for 16in guns in the post-war (downsizing of course to 14in due to the WNT). The Japanese got it to work in the late 1930s sure, but they got the tech for 18in guns to function at acceptable levels at the very end of UAD's timeframe (Yamato launched in 1940, commissioned a couple weeks before the end of 41. UAD allows 20in guns
  8. Oh boy. Well to preface, I was a nuclear engineer in the US Navy, so not just talking out my ass here, I may not be an expert on steam/diesel engines from the interwar, but I like to think I know more than your average world of warships fan lol. As for your comment's contents, to put it bluntly, no. While what you said regarding the laws of physics are technically correct, it's correct in the same way that if I strap 20 booster engines to a shuttle it'll leave orbit faster, like sure theoretically. I also said in my comment that the aforementioned ship would stay afloat, and it could be p
  9. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the A1B Nuclear Reactor. Checkmate carrier-tards.
  10. Yeah I'd just restart right there. That design is a joke. While It could probably stay afloat, you would absolutely need multiple nuclear reactors to propel it faster than single digit knots. Even then it wouldn't be able to fire more than a couple guns at a time or it'd capsize and/or shake itself apart. The devs seriously need to implement hard limitations on speed and firepower. The British experimented with an 18in gun shortly after WW1 and completely canned the idea of using them or the 20in guns that was a test run for because it was shaking the ship apart and launched rivets every
  11. So I tried this mission I think 5 times? Complete and utter failure. One try had 2 battleships that were for all intents and purposes superior to the AI's in every way (checked their loadout and compared it to mine), another was 12 battlecruisers (obviously this one was more money), another was 3 almost exact replicas of a King George V but with 16in guns. All were completely slaughtered and the best only got it to around ~60% structural integrity. Meanwhile, their ships are stunningly accurate and deal anywhere from 200-400% more damage, completely regardless of actual loadout between ships.
  12. No thank you! It may seem like I was ranting a lot, but this mod is a ton of fun for an already great game. I appreciate the work you guys put in and even with my small gripes, the game is definitely better with the mod. Thanks for replying to everything and in a very timely manner, I appreciate it a ton. Keep up the great work! Oh and thanks for the submod link as well as the game recommendations, they look really good.
  13. Oof. Yeah I don't know why I never though to look, but I checked their stats on a captured brigade. Literally every single unit is 100 in everything. One of them even has a command of 104. That just completely killed any desire to play honestly. Now I'm just kind of bummed. That's not fun at all.
  14. Yeah this is weird. I'm materially vastly superior to them, and the units I swarm with are most definitely not smaller than theirs. This particular example was I think the Stonewall brigade at Malvern Hill or maybe a little after (might've been a sub battle?) charging into the teeth of my 1st Division, which is the best I have, extremely well equipped and painstakingly maintained at high veterancy while still being 6k man doom stacks (feed recruits into the meatgrinder and let the elites sit back and farm xp with minimal casualties). My men's morale isn't really an issue either. The aforementi
  15. I'm a little confused. I'm playing the Union on highest difficulty, major general with the little 'harder' box ticked. And this is honestly ridiculous. On multiple occasions my forces will be completely steamrolled by vastly inferior forces. Only in melee mind, but the worst one I can remember (but there have been dozens relatively the same) is 5 infantry at almost full strength and 2 cav at full. So including their minimal losses roughly 29000 men and 4000 cavalry (all but one inf unit counter charging) completely slaughtered by a single unit of confed infantry that had taken a few volleys to
×
×
  • Create New...