T_the_ferret
-
Posts
182 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
5
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by T_the_ferret
-
-
On 1/19/2022 at 7:07 PM, T_the_ferret said:
@Nick Thomadis Could you please clarify if those are the things accepted only for next patch or overall (for later on)?
Gonna just post this again because i never got an answer
-
First and foremost, bulkheads don't change on the ship display at all depending on what bulkhead option you've chosen. It also mostly only affects how a damage "spreads". For example it won't reduce the hull damage you take from a torpedo, but that torpedo would for example flood 4 compartment on a light cruiser with minimal bulkhead while one with maximal bulkhead might only have a single compartment (the one being hit in this instance) flooded.
It also works with fire. It helps keep the fire inside a single compartment and thus makes it much faster to put out. It also reduces the chance that hits will trigger flash fire, or that fire will trigger it.
Basically it doesn't prevent outright damage but does help a lot in preventing long-term damage from fire/flooding/internal damage.
High survivability of small crafts has been an issue for as long as i can remember and i don't think is tied to bulkhead-
1
-
-
On 1/13/2022 at 8:12 PM, T_the_ferret said:
Oh... so wait the stuff taken from all the suggestions are only very small things or stuff that was already planned anyway?
@Nick Thomadis Could you please clarify if those are the things accepted only for next patch or overall (for later on)?
-
17 minutes ago, Grayknight said:
it is for the next patch.
@Nick Thomadis I belive now we need a list with accepted stuff for change later on, unleass i am to assume that if there is not on the list we should repost feedback and hope it is accepted for next month?
Anyway the most important things that are required now when it comes to gameplay are things based upon balancing (assuming implementation of the features mentioned by you:
- TBs able to tank alot of damage and survive torpedo strike, sometimes many of them. (I had enemy TB that was 200tones and was sunk with over 59 flooding shots and well over 200s penetrations and overpenetrations.
- Torpedoes being overpowered
- I really do not want to talk about spoting mechnics, but i belive it will need to be adresed
It says next "patches" and stuff that's for the next patch is marked as being in the beta. I'm mostly wondering if that's all they took from the suggestions
-
4 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:
Here is an update of what has been developed and what comes next based on your suggestions.
List of developed additions based on the previous feedback post:
- Design the ships of the AI opponent in Custom Battles
- Make friendly ships to auto-evade torpedoes
- Make friendly fire check for ships
- Ability to name all ships in the campaign
- Accuracy improvement close range / early techConfirmed new features for the next patches:
- Ship refit in campaign
- Task forces/Campaign movement (it was already planned but it was also widely requested)
- More sea roles (related to task forces)
- More events and peace time mechanics (it was already planned but it was also widely requested)
- Improved AI (Beta 1.03)
- Auto-Design improvement (Beta 1.03)
- Ships turning too fast to dodge torps or to stay in formation (Bug fixed in Beta 1.03)
- Secondary guns more effective (Beta 1.03)
- AI can switch to HE evaluating not only penetration but also the angle of target (Beta 1.03)
- Some important fixes for evasion/division controls (In process Beta 1.03)
- Ships sink more gradually (Beta 1.03)
- Flash Fires/Ammo detonations should affect ammo storage.Oh... so wait the stuff taken from all the suggestions are only very small things or stuff that was already planned anyway?
-
Nah its pretty well known that accuracy is pretty wonky at all time, whether its the lower end during 1900s battles or high end during 1940s battles
-
I'll just repost most of my suggestions from last month and a new one set in bold:
1: More early ships (1890-1910) as well as modules and options for that time period. Currently these ships offer the least amount of build possibility and creativity while also being a focus of the campaign as it starts then.
2: Gunships or more torpedo boats introduced to allow small-scale battle to still be interesting and dynamic while also offering another threat against DD and CL than just torpedoes .
3: Important research in campaign. Currently everything in campaign takes way too much time to research and thus priority or focus of research offers absolutely no benefit. What is only 3-4 months away from being researched is the only thing you'll unlock.
4: Clarify tooltips, currently many tooltips display erroneous information such as "accuracy increase" or are not clear enough such as what resistance offers. The right panel when designing is also nothing but a mess of numbers and confusing words for new players not acquainted with naval terms or the game itself.
5: Improve naval academy, currently those missions not only make for a poor introduction overall to the game, they do not explain much either and some outright use erroneous information and battle parameters, such as tooltips describing battle against outdated ships but those ships sporting 1920-1930 technology.
6: Change nation AI and AI overall to not prioritize "wall of torpedoes" so much, as it feels they are heavily weighted to use torpedoes.
7: Vastly improve light shells and propellant modules, currently light shell and some propellant module benefits are pitiful which makes almost no one use them. A sliding scale of accuracy vs range and RoF would be much better.
8: Improve small gun accuracy and damage. Currently small caliber guns (under 127) feel outright useless unless at high Mark tiers, such as Mark 4, because of the huge accuracy change between calibers. 51mm guns cannot hit the broadside of a barn while 203mm guns can (relatively) easily hit enemies at 5km. This makes small caliber guns useless and massively influences small-scale battles into slap fights at knife fight range, or torpedo spams. Smoothing accuracy from low to high caliber would help enormously.
9: Very secondary but i would love to see more options for Ironclad/Monitor battles and other such things.
10: Please please please please PLEASE I AM BEGGING YOU hire a community manager or someone able to dedicate time to the community. I cannot with any amount of words overstate how much it would improve its health and attitude as well as promote constructive discussion and help the game.
11: Stats such as resistance, flodability and stability desperately need a rework. Early ship suffer from very low points in those stats while late ship have immense amount of them to the point it is very easy to see destroyers get ridiculously high hull form for 70%+ bonus to acceleration and 100%+ bonus to turning rate or even -40% gun damage, which on destroyers are even more ridiculous. This is not going into such stats on battleships, battlecruisers and heavy cruisers where it can reach -70% gun damage, -40% torpedo damage, +120% ricochet chances and -50% flooding chances. This makes early battle way too short and by virtue of low accuracy and high damage while late battles are frustrating on virtues of torpedoes and guns doing little to no damage at all even when otherwise devastating hits are scored.
Battleships can take multiple 500mm shell penetration with no internal damage, heavy cruisers can take 24 inch torpedo salvoes sometime with no flooding nor crippling damage, and even destroyers can just shrug off the very few shells that manage to hit them
Edit: 12: Very minor but it'd be nice to be able to design transports and they would influence how cheap/costly they are to maintain and how much are needed to maintain your supply lines, as well as their defenses and guns-
7
-
-
23 minutes ago, SpardaSon21 said:
Don't forget the 90+ resistance early hulls like the new French ironclad BB's. Totally nothing unbalanced about those new hulls and all their absurd secondary firepower, either.
Yeah... that too
-
17 hours ago, SpardaSon21 said:
To be fair given the existence of the hilariously ahistorical 19" and 20" guns... that might very well be a necessity at some point. Especially since the lack of powder/shell split means the entire mass gets electro-magnetically fired out of the barrel, leading to in-game 16" shells that weigh more than the Yamato's 18.1"s (1475kg vs. 1460kg), and 12" shells that weigh more than historical 14"s (697kg vs. 680kg). Using the same equipment a 20" Mk. 3 will have a total shell weight of over two and a half metric tons at 2615kg! Did I mention velocities are also much higher than you would expect for a shell that weight? The American 12"/50 Mark 8 only got 792 mps muzzle velocity with a fresh gun and a full charge, and for shells a full 160 kg lighter than the ones in-game.
Considering that 20" mentioned above gets 22.5" of deck pen at a mere 15,000m, and an absurd 38.9" of belt pen at that distance, creating a ZoI will cost you big time since even with all armor mods to get to 120% strength you still need a 10" deck thickness to have a chance of stopping a deck hit at that range, and 17.5" of belt armor to stop that. A 12" deck will protect you out to 20km or so, but since you're going AoN for the armor strength bonuses that's going to cost you big in terms of displacement and cost, and you're going to need a 19" citadel belt if you want to have a chance of stopping shells at 12.5km.
So yes, armor is going to need to be much, much thicker than IRL.*In-game shell measurements taken using triple base/super-heavy/TNT-IV. Armor using Krupp IV/AoN. Measurements taken in Custom Battle, Year 1940, Nation USA.
It definitely does, especially since the current setup is based heavily on memes instead of actual history. The only thing keeping Bismarck and Yamato afloat at the end was their massive reserve buoyancy considering the former was Swiss Cheese until finally scuttled and the latter had a mere double hull and a single torpedo bulge. USS Skate was able to blow a hole open in Yamato with a single torpedo that flooded her entire aft magazine space with 3,000 tons of water. Funnily enough that's the same amount of water that the much smaller USS Canberra took in when she got torpedoed amidships by a Japanese aerial torpedo. I don't know about you, but I consider that impressive considering one is the world's largest battleship and the other just a CA. Meanwhile USS Pittsburgh escaped a 7 hour battle with a typhoon in sailable condition, even with a shorn-off bow and buckled second deck.
Looks surprisingly intact for something that spent 7 hours getting battered by a typhoon with no bow and its deck damaged at the start by one of its seaplanes being smashed into it, wouldn't you agree? Especially since that ship had quote-unquote "poor quality welds at the bow".
I mean, for frak's sake, every post-1930 hull we laid down used armor-grade STS in the hulls, bulkheads, and decks wherever we could afford it instead of traditional structural steel due to its increased strength, hardness, and ability to resist damage.
Main problem is early hulls have ridiculously low stability (and thus exasperate the problem of low accuracy to even more ridiculous extent) while late hulls have ridiculously high resistance (making it utterly stupid in ways where being shot by a 508mm shell does close to no internal damage)
-
7 hours ago, Captain Meow said:
When will that thread open? I have a lot on my mind I can write!
Like this one, right now: where do I quickly see any ship's speed unless expanding cards all the time?
Suggesting to show current speed in that right info window, like: Struct: 70%, Float: 100%, Speed: 16kn or in the lower window or in ship cards without expanding them.
No way to know, whenever the team is done gathering the feedback from last month i imagine
-
I'm probably gonna write about it in more detail when the january feedback thread opens but i really feel like hull statistics (stability/floatabilit/resistance) really need a rework
-
1
-
-
So which features ended up making it into the development plan @Nick Thomadis?
-
Very early on (before you can get hydro I or good towers) your heavy cruisers and dreadnoughts have little chance to dodge torpedoes because they are fired from very short range, and its even less likely if they decided to use Fast Torpedoes which are available very early as well (for some reason). Your best bet is to mount some low caliber secondaries to cripple torpedo boats that come too close, but if its a cruiser that rushes you then there isn't really any hard counter beyond the hope that you can cripple it as well before it closes the distance.
AIs are known to get insane bonuses to turn practically on a dime no matter the ship type when you fire torpedoes yourself -
Glad to hear about the update pace, i really hope you can keep to it as it would be awesome!
-
2
-
-
It is pretty common for some ships to take one torpedo and sink while others suffer 5 flash fire and are fine. Its generally a known issue
-
Hello, ever since the last steam update the game immediatly crashes upon starting, no matter what i tried. Tried running it as administrator, clearing the cache, running the beta branch, using steam's verification features, nothing works.
Edit: Managed to fix it, clearing the cache then restarting the whole computer did the trick -
No they don't get any maluses, and small guns are way too inaccurate and do way too little damage to be worth it. Secondaries are rather weak right now except for the highest caliber ones
-
Devs say this is normal, but i don't think it is. Anything that reduces your range automatically reduces your accuracy, and vice versa. So aim for stuff that increases your range
Edit: This also goes for guns, guns that have more base range (so higher caliber guns) are much more accurate than lower caliber guns or secondaries. Its insanely easier to hit a DD with a 12 inch gun than it is with a 2 inch gun -
Main thing is for some reason on the french armored cruiser the life boats count as collision model unlike on every other ship, which means you can't put the front and rear tower where they should be
-
Wait... the dreadnought, heavy cruiser and light cruiser are the same hulls? And they can all mount the most amount of firepower at most angles of all ships?
-
Some of the french battleships cannot mount some of the towers in any assigned tower slots. Also not sure if that's historically accurate but balance-wise the french battleship and ironclad can mount significantly more firepower at much wider and usable angles than other battleships of the period, making them have a distinct advantage over the other ships
-
Whats that "Ultimate General: In Development" game on the picture?
French Ironclad 3 has some very odd turret placement on its raised side emplacement. Can put a single barrel 203 but not a twin barrel 51mm? All single barrel fit while all double barrel do not-
1
-
-
1: More early ships (1890-1910) as well as modules and options for that time period. Currently these ships offer the least amount of build possibility and creativity while also being a focus of the campaign as it starts then.
2: Gunships or more torpedo boats introduced to allow small-scale battle to still be interesting and dynamic while also offering another threat against DD and CL than just torpedoes .
3: Important research in campaign. Currently everything in campaign takes way too much time to research and thus priority or focus of research offers absolutely no benefit. What is only 3-4 months away from being researched is the only thing you'll unlock.
4: Clarify tooltips, currently many tooltips display erroneous information such as "accuracy increase" or are not clear enough such as what resistance offers. The right panel when designing is also nothing but a mess of numbers and confusing words for new players not acquainted with naval terms or the game itself.
5: Improve naval academy, currently those missions not only make for a poor introduction overall to the game, they do not explain much either and some outright use erroneous information and battle parameters, such as tooltips describing battle against outdated ships but those ships sporting 1920-1930 technology.
6: Change nation AI and AI overall to not prioritize "wall of torpedoes" so much, as it feels they are heavily weighted to use torpedoes.
7: Vastly improve light shells and propellant modules, currently light shell and some propellant module benefits are pitiful which makes almost no one use them. A sliding scale of accuracy vs range and RoF would be much better.
8: Improve small gun accuracy and damage. Currently small caliber guns (under 127) feel outright useless unless at high Mark tiers, such as Mark 4, because of the huge accuracy change between calibers. 51mm guns cannot hit the broadside of a barn while 203mm guns can (relatively) easily hit enemies at 5km. This makes small caliber guns useless and massively influences small-scale battles into slap fights at knife fight range, or torpedo spams. Smoothing accuracy from low to high caliber would help enormously.
9: Very secondary but i would love to see more options for Ironclad/Monitor battles and other such things.
10: Please please please please PLEASE I AM BEGGING YOU hire a community manager or someone able to dedicate time to the community. I cannot with any amount of words overstate how much it would improve its health and attitude as well as promote constructive discussion and help the game.-
16
-
-
6 minutes ago, DougToss said:
Nick had a run of being active for about a week, a week or two ago, but… ugh. It’s frustrating for sure, especially as we’re trying to help them address the flaws by pointing them out.
I’m still bothered by the community being called “toxic” by the devs, that was a slap in the face.
We all are bothered by that, not gonna ramble on again but it'd be so easy to just smooth everything over and they just... don't. Its disheartening.
Player Suggestions - January/February
in General Discussions
Posted
Yes but i meant more is there a list of long term suggestions that have been accepted? For example more ship, ship type or changes to gameplay?