IshPR7777
-
Posts
81 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by IshPR7777
-
-
That's amazing job! And Nick, I have a question from the previous thread... Would the other nations like Korea, Arabia, Greece, Ottoman Empire, Scandinavian countries, Persia, Mexico, Chile, Argentina and Brazil become available in the future? Speaking of Chile, Argentina and Brazil, they had history of their South American Naval Arms Race and they do have their own battleships and other projects such as Almirante Latorre Class, Minas Geraes Class, Rio de Janeiro Class, Riachuelo Class and Rivadavia Class
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, admiralsnackbar said:
those ships were built for them by the British though.
Yeah, but it's also for Rivadavia Class Battleships was built by USA for Argentina
-
@Nick ThomadisI have a question... Would the other nations like Korea, Arabia, Greece, Ottoman Empire, Scandinavian countries, Persia, Mexico, Chile, Argentina and Brazil become available in the future? Speaking of Chile, Argentina and Brazil, they had history of their South American Naval Arms Race and they do have their own battleships and other projects such as Almirante Latorre Class, Minas Geraes Class, Rio de Janeiro Class, Riachuelo Class and Rivadavia Class
-
3
-
-
8 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:
*RC 3*
- Fixed bug causing ships to be sent in random ports after a battle.
- Fixed bug happened when you started a new campaign that caused options to change when you pressed the 'settings' button.
- Fixed bug resetting Transport Capacity slider when it was maximized at 200%.
- Other minor issues fixed.
- Increased the importance of ASW in the defense against submarines.
- Initial auto-generated fleets are better balanced according to the campaign's start year.Please note: There is a very important bug that we need to fix for the campaign which exists also in v1.09.3 version. Ships are not stored accurately in weights, so they can cause invalid designs. We will try to fix this tomorrow.
PLEASE RESTART STEAM TO DOWNLOAD
Good job!
-
6 minutes ago, PhoenixLP44 said:
You have a very good point there, communication is very important and if this game is to ever succeed the devs need to communicate more with the community be it about bug reports, general questions or if something is wroking as intended.
I agree with you two
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:
We are sorry but Update 8 must delay one day, due to electricity problems in Kiev.
Be safe out there! Ukraine would not give up the battle that easily, not like the last time from 105 years ago which is 1917
-
Good work guys!! Keep it up!!
-
7 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:
I realize what you mean. It can be checked for the next major update but it is something that can unbalance combat a lot, since the caliber indication is not just a nbr, it is something that affects a lot the ballistics of the game.
The next major update will have so many new features to work with, that this will be a very low priority, but it is kept in mind.And don't forget the historical caliber indication about Bismarck's 15 inch guns which is 52 caliber
-
On 8/3/2022 at 5:27 PM, IsmaelMolina2021 said:
That's a good idea to add "1950" option in the year selection for Custom Battle. When it does that happen in the game, I was proposing the same thing about this one. Will the "1950" option would become available for Campaign? What new nations would be like in 1950s campaign? I heard a lot about the history of Cold War that involves on Africa, Middle East, Indian Subcontinent, Southeast Asia, Caribbean, Central America, South America and Korean Peninsula that happened in real life. And will the endgame date for campaign would be "1960"?
What do you guys think about my proposal idea?
-
5 hours ago, BigoleSeaTurtle said:
First post to the forum, but I have some feedback to offer, or rather a question: is it in the roadmap to offer a true endgame tech level for Custom Battle? I like playing random scenarios, and being stymied by Mark 3 guns on anything above 15 inch feels awful when I KNOW that Mark 5s exist, locked behind years of research in campaign. Having the full retinue of guns that already exist in the game to choose from would be a fantastic option for me, and I am sure others could get some enjoyment from that as well. Could it be as straightrforward as just adding a "1950" option in the year selector for Custom Battle?
That's a good idea to add "1950" option in the year selection for Custom Battle. When it does that happen in the game, I was proposing the same thing about this one. Will the "1950" option would become available for Campaign? What new nations would be like in 1950s campaign? I heard a lot about the history of Cold War that involves on Africa, Middle East, Indian Subcontinent, Southeast Asia, Caribbean, Central America, South America and Korean Peninsula that happened in real life. And will the endgame date for campaign would be "1960"?
-
@Nick ThomadisCan you add Derfflinger-class battlecruiser hull for Germany in 1910s? We already have Von der Tann type battlecruiser hull, but still it needs more WW1-era German Battlecruiser hulls to be added into the game. Reminder, Derfflinger-class battlecruiser hull for Germany would take in 1912-1919
-
6 hours ago, o Barão said:
You are comparing a multiplayer game to a single player game. I agree that there were many changes to NA that made many players angry. And truth be told, they were right in many situations. Farming woods for many hours and forcing the player to be part of a guild just to have a chance to build the ship they wanted, and suddenly a new patch is released and change all the meta? Many things to dislike.
However, in single player game is not the same thing. First, let's not forget that we are still in EA. Every mechanic can be changed or improved, and I hope to see this happening until the game is released. Now the big difference is the fact you are playing a single player game with a campaign that can be played in a week or less. We have changes to the mechanics? So what? They are the same for you and the AI. You are not wasting hundreds of hours sailing from an island to another to farm woods in open sea afraid of being ganked. You are not afraid a new patch will drop and completely ruin hours of gameplay. Just go to the dockyard and spend a few minutes to design a new ship. Different realities. One thing doesn't apply to the other game.
BINGO!! This is the key argument IMO.
So let's digest what it means:
- My ships are much superior in comparison to the AI.
- One key aspect to the superiority in my designs is how well armored my capital ships.
- My ships are so well armored that a few of them can sink entire enemy fleets without any chance of counter-play.
- I don't care if the armor values are unrealistic, it works great, so in conclusion I am right in what I am doing.
So with this in mind, I offer you 2 options.
option A:
- All AI capital ships will only sail with maximum Bulkheads
- All AI capital ships will only sail with a minimum 20-inches armor belt and 20-inches deck armor.
- Doesn't matter if the values are complete fantasy bullshit. If it works for me, will work for the AI.
Quality over quantity, right?
And now you are sailing in fantasy BS ships, fighting battles against fantasy BS ships so hard to sink, with players flooding the forums complaining about how hard it is to sink those damn fantasy BS designs.
Or we can have the other option...
option B:
- Implement and rework mechanics to balance the designs from both the player and AI with historical numbers.
- Still allows the player or the AI to go crazy with armor values, but not without a huge penalty.
- Force the player to have choices in the designing process, making it more interesting instead of just using everything A quality grade, with completely unrealistic values to what was possible to ever be build IRL.
So what will be your choice?
- To have the AI to build fantasy bullshit ships the same way we do?
- To bring a common sense to what was possible to be build to realistic values?
Do I really have to choose one of these two options?
-
20 hours ago, IsmaelMolina2021 said:
The 1 inch or other smaller guns like a half inch gun from M2 Browning machine gun, 12.7mm guns, 20mm guns, 25mm guns and 37mm guns hasn't added to the game yet, but it is the one where we have been missing to replicate anti-aircraft type weapons and the other guns that the navies have been used from the late 19th century and all way to WW1 period
@Nick Thomadis, when I was talking about the smaller guns other than 40mm guns and 1.1 inch guns, there are some gun models that the navies have been used in between late 19th century and WW1 period, like it has two digit decimal figures instead of just one digit decimal figures
-
Speaking of doom stacks that AI always doing that in campaign mode, do you think this is only suitable for the PCs who has highest performance and highest space? (I prefer the custom PC ones with high end ones, not normal ones. Just asking about this situation)
-
2
-
-
27 minutes ago, Fangoriously said:
Early on in this beta i had doubts it could be made releasable at all, but it certainly came a long way, and with all the updates it was clear that constant and tireless development was taking place. 25+ updates, what a beta test!
When i posted this in the suggestion thread
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_naval_guns_by_caliber
and said navel guns, especially the smaller ones, did not come in uniform 1in increments, I doubted they would try to tackle such a system, a true citadel system too, but its all in pretty good shape now.
My only remaining nag is the colossal structural hitpoint damage from tower and funnel penetration, hits to these should damage system performance, less so structural integrity. The more armor you put on them the worse it gets, that just sets off the fuse instead of over penetrating.
The 1 inch or other smaller guns like a half inch gun from M2 Browning machine gun, 12.7mm guns, 20mm guns, 25mm guns and 37mm guns hasn't added to the game yet, but it is the one where we have been missing to replicate anti-aircraft type weapons and the other guns that the navies have been used from the late 19th century and all way to WW1 period
-
1
-
-
You're welcome. After the version 1.06 update goes live, is that the version 1.07 gonna to be the next beta patch?
-
1 hour ago, AdmiralKirk said:
I would also really appreciate making it possible to build refits as opposed to just the original design. I don’t understand why I’m not allowed to do that.
And this may be a deliberate choice but I also don’t like that I can’t combine a repair with a refit for an overall time savings—IIRC real navies definitely did that.
Really looking forward to 1.06, this update is amazing! 😄
I'm looking forward to 1.06 as well, this is the best update!
-
1
-
-
22 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:
The Patch is going to be released tomorrow, with potentially some hotfixes based on your continuous feedback. Thank you all!
Good. I'll be waiting for this update to become available
-
12 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:
*UPDATE FINAL* (5/7/2022)
- Improved Auto-Design speed/memory usage. (Campaign turns will pass faster, in general the auto-design will be faster and equally effective).
- Lessened greatly some penetration randomization factors which could create unfavorable shell hit results.
- Added temporary extra mechanic for Game Over: When all non-allied major nations are totally defeated, then the game ends. (Previously it would continue forever with small chance to break alliance). In the next update we will add more mechanics to prolong the campaign further.
- Crew Pool Reserve cost will become minimized when it reaches a certain ratio vs the amount of crew used in ships. In this way, any excessive crew not used, will act as a cost-effective reserve.
- Increased Port Capacity Growth.
- Crew damage from HE penetrations and Fire lessened.THIS IS THE FINAL BETA UPDATE (WE WILL RELEASE THE LIVE BUILD IN A FEW HOURS - WE CAN FIX ANYTHING ELSE YOU FIND CRITICAL IN A HOTFIX)
This is it, the live 1.06 update is coming! I'm proud of you, Nick
-
1 hour ago, Nick Thomadis said:
*UPDATE 20* (30/6/2022)
- Fixed critical campaign bug which caused wars to be declared multiple times.
- Fixed other bugs which prevented peace treaties to be achieved.
- Various improvements on the campaign AI.
- Battle AI improvement to keep a more effective distance.
- Improved GDP mechanics to affect better the province growth. The growth of each province is saved so that if it changes hands, it will generate the respective income (Due to the new mechanics, if you attempt to load old saves, the growth will be zero for the whole game, so the saves must be reset).
- Fixed bug which prevented you to select your port if an enemy task force was very near to it.
- Fixed other minor bugs related with task force movement.
- Improved tension mechanics so that tension will not be caused if you have good relations with a nation, unless you amass a very large fleet.
- Improved further the instability mechanics for the ship design, based on your feedback.
- Fixed some minor problems reported for the new hulls.
- Fixed issues of ballistics to evaluate angle of hit better, affecting mainly the deck hits which previously could often cause full penetrations or overpenetrations at a small angle of hit.
- Fixed buggy tooltip offset for monitors with uncommon resolution settings.
- Fixed problems that increased a lot the building time of ships.PLEASE RESTART STEAM TO RECEIVE THE UPDATE (Saves had to be reset)
Good job!!
-
58 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:
You can already build a ship similar to Helgoland with Dreadnought II of Germany.
Thank you
-
3 hours ago, Skeksis said:
This has been a long and arduous journey of a patch, clad to hear closure is near.
A whole month
-
3
-
-
3 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:
We hope for this week.
Yep and I could feel the month June is coming to an end and the month July is about to begin
-
3 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:
*UPDATE 19 * (28/6/2022)
- Fixed various bugs of the campaign that were reported recently by you (and thank you).
- Fixed an old and serious bug of the campaign which caused maintenance costs to be higher than they should, and were repaired only when you selected each ship for each turn (needs testing).
- Fixed an old bug that sometimes could produce false-positive errors on ships when you opened them in the design interface (needs testing).
- Fixed various problems caused by the citadel in weight and instability calculations. Now ships with a short citadel should not have so huge pitch/roll and generally the whole system should work as it should.
- Improved further the Auto-Design system. Ships that are auto-designed should be the most efficient ever and they should also be auto-designed faster.
- Fixed collider errors which caused undesirable too strict collision, preventing guns on barbettes to be closed one above the other, plus causing other issues.
- Various other minor fixes as per your feedback.3x NEW HULLS
- “French Experimental Battleship” available from 1899 to 1916 with a displacement between 17,700 and 22.500 tons. This hull can recreate the Danton-class Battleship.
- “French Experimental Dreadnought” available from 1905 to 1916 with a displacement between 19,750 and 24.500 tons.
- “French Large Armored Cruiser” available from 1907 to 1921 with a displacement between 14,800 and 16.500 tons.
PLEASE RESTART STEAM TO RECEIVE THE UPDATE. (Saves had to be reset again, old saves will not work, please do not use or if you use, do not report anything to us...
)
This build is considered the first release candidate as all the planned content is added. We will continue to provide fixes as per your feedback and when all is well, we are going to release.Good job!
Also @Nick Thomadis, when the Helgoland-type battleship hull for Germany would come out?
)
>>>Beta v1.4 Feedback<<< [Final version released]
in General Discussions
Posted
@Nick Thomadis I would like to add ship hull and parts of the HMS Vanguard for Britain in 1946 as my request to be added in the game. As such, I would like to have new components and the ship hulls and parts that appeared in WW2 period for both built and never built and the early years of the Cold War period into the game in the future that it goes after the version 1.4 if I would like to extend the technological time period in the custom battles like 1960s and the campaign's end time date would be 1970s, such as Allen M. Sumner Class, Gearing Class, Mitscher Class, Forrest Sherman Class, Baltimore Class, Oregon City Class, Des Moines Class, Cleveland Class, Brooklyn Class, Fargo Class, Worcester Class, Montana Class, Alaska Class and so much more