Adm. Tom

Sorry, the last patches just seemed to have wreaked more havoc in the W&B section. So I really fail to see where this is actually improving at all when it comes to the very, very basics of game(play). And it's not that this game has been in this kind of early access status just since the day before yesterday. Try to build a torpedo boat of the 1900-1910 era now. Just putting the main tower on the bare hull immediately causes a 100% forward weight offset on most hulls. Even if you move it back to the geometrical center of the hull, which has been in perfect balance before, there's still a massive forward weight offset of around 70+%. This doesn't make any sense. If some weight is added exactly at the geometrical center of something like a seesaw it should not have any W&B impact at all, if anything maybe changes to speed rate changes, oscillation dampening, etc. - but definitely not at the weight balance of the seesaw as which we can figure the ship in this instance. Once again something broken that wasn't even in need of fixing by (a) recent patch(es). IMO things when it comes to ship editor/designer were quite OK until Alpha 12, but ever since then things have gone downhill pretty fast. For now I'm definitely holding back on committing to this game any further in terms of playing time as it just doesn't cut it right now. There are still unresolved or newly surfaced core gameplay issues such in the ship designer, formation keeping, command system, etc. while the campaign still looks more like an RNG created sequence of incoherent battles where the player has no opportunity whatsoever to actually impact the strategic course of matters.

I don't know what they've changed now - but, yes, weight and balance seem to be oddly off since the last update(s). You can now move massive 5000+ tons 20" triple turrets back and forth a long way at bow or stern of a BB and it hardly seems to affect the 'weight offset' at all any longer. Just fractions of percentage. However, add two 100 ton torpedo launchers way more back towards midships at the aft section and weight and balance all but suddenly changes massively. It seems that the devs have really lost track of their coding; updates and 'hotfixes' frequently break already working features and when they're finally restored something else is broken. I really wanted to like this game as something more realistic than the overly arcadey WoW but I'm more and more losing my faith that this will eventually evolve into something mature. So far it's definitely been a bad case of 'overpromise and underdeliver'.

Yeah, this looked good in the beginning but it hasn't progressed much so far. OK, I understand, it's an alpha version, so I don't complain much about the money spent. If you buy into something under development that's still vastly experimental you have to take into account that it might not be a smooth ride at all. Expect things being removed, changed and else over the course of time. But UAD seems to be developed largely on a trial and error basis, however, bug reports - the whole point of an early access alpha - seem to be ignored on an even grander scale and I also fail to recognize the repeatedly announced improvements, particularly when it comes to AI and the formation system. I can also understand that the current focus of the devs lies with the long overdue campaign but that shouldn't lead to total neglect in other areas. Just one example: since the 0.5 core patch the NA section is an utterly broken deterrent, and eventually a source of massive frustration, for any new player who tries to learn the game. Range for all designs is locked at maximum, which even in very basic missions makes it almost impossible to build a useable, aka 'realistic' ship. Like in 'Speed Basics 2' - truly an introductory mission of kind - where you have to design a CL of 1910's tech level that can outrun and gun down an escaping 28 kts(!) DD. The problem is just that your hull with the basic propulsion machinery and the fuel supplies for the ridiculously long but fixed range almost consumes your entire displacement before even adding any superstructure or guns. But 1910's tech level also doesn't give much access to weight-saving upgrades. So you have to build a truly and completely unrealistic glass cannon of a CL that's just able to keep up with the DD and hope you can sink it with a few lucky shots because you just lug around all that coal for thousands of miles taking away all meaningful equipment options by its sheer weight. Realism, my ***! After that I quit (re-)playing any of the NA missions because that fixed maximum range now seems to be set for any of them. Just imagine what it would feel like for a new player experiencing this, worst advertising possible. Instead we get all these gimmicky and nonsensical things like 'Gas Turbines' and 'Stealthy Ships' mentioned above that don't improve the gameplay much if at all, while core issues such as the still god awful AI and formation system flaws remain effectively unadressed. And it also doesn't instill a sense of confidence if some newly introduced features, like the saving of custom designs, get immediately broken again by the next update. This constant cycle of new features being broken over and over again, just to be set straight by one 'hotfix' after another, that in turn often break previously existing and working features, gives the impression of some poorly developed spaghetti coding that the original developers themselves have somewhat lost track of and, worst of all, don't really seem to care about any longer. Thus I won't commit myself to engage in a tryout of the campaign as it may also get easily wiped by just another change to the code without notice. I still fire up UAD every now and then for some fun type custom battle but I've definitely lost my faith in the devs' commitment to make this more than the experimental mess it actually is at the very moment. And for that seemingly poor level of engagement from the devs' side the early access price tag was also more than a bit steep. But here I can only blame myself for being a bit too naive...

^THIS!^ +1 It's pretty obvious that the weights in the game are not anywhere close to reality. Watching some YouTube creators trying to do 'historically correct' designs by displacement numbers is sometimes quite hilarious when the resulting Iowa, Bismarck or Yamato looks like a disproportioned shrunk child toy version. And after the core patch changes, which also wiped your entire mission progress, it seems now to be near impossible to build some types of cruisers for these 'Naval Academy' missions. I'm currently struggling with something as simple as the 'Speed Basics 2' mission where you are supposed to design an early WW I era light cruiser to catch and sink an enemy destroyer trying to run away at 26 knots. With just a 30 minute time limit you have to get at least close to 30 knots design speed to catch up, which for a pre-1914 CL is pretty laughable by itself. But wait until you open the ship designer: you get the small (~3,500t max.) Light Cruiser I hull and a measly 3,125k budget. Even if you max out the displacement and take the machinery to 30 knots performance level (Oil 1, Forced Boilers, Turbines) your displacement is already at 92% and you've blown your budget at 111% - "Can't build ship!" Even if you had a higher budget there would be no way to build a somewhat decently balanced 30 knots ship in terms of armament, armor, protection and ancillary equipment that resembles a 'realistic' CL design from before 1914. The only way to win this mission is probably a small 'speed dart' with forward main guns only and no protection and armor at all. I don't fully remember that it was this difficult before the core patch, but I think it wasn't. Actually most early light cruiser hulls suffer from that basic obesity. They are all at almost maximum displacement or already overweight(!) when the hull is selected in 'Custom Battle'. And depending on the chosen design year there`s no way to fix this because you are stuck with coal and heavy steam engines. Is this just oversight on the devs' side? However, something here is seriously broken and it needs to be fixed. Just my 2C Thomas