The PC Collector
-
Posts
422 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
17
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by The PC Collector
-
-
18 hours ago, Grayknight said:
it heapens when they find gamebreaking bug (i am judging from previous deleys in updates) to be honest i wouldent be suprised if those were mostly for example based on ai ship generator in new system. It will be worth a wait i mean it technicly is deleyed for 3 days as of now, so nothing major
BTW which russian developer? I am not familiar with gaming industry but it does sound familiar, tho developer about whom i am thinking is not Russian but Polish
Well, if that's the case, won't hurt to come by and say "Eh, by the way we have found a bug which is going to dely the update indefinitely". It takes literally like a minute or less.
-
6 hours ago, Terka1917 said:
The "by the end of the week" was last week, so it could come anytime; since we're already in delay and they didn't provide any idea of when this week it'll drop, it might be delayed again
Yeah, the "end of the week" starts to sound like the "Soon™️" from certain russian developer I won't name here..
-
1 hour ago, Andvarus said:
HOW????????? allways give me the same old red flags when I try to do that at the stern.
Custom, or campaign?
-
@Nick Thomadis an idea I jut had, and that could help to better try the new functions: Why don't you include an "eternal war" option? A setting which disables the AI asking for peace or having revolutions, making the campaign endless? That would be an easy and fast to code stopgap way to offer a better campaign experience.
-
3
-
-
8 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:
It works for the AI opponent, but for the player it is his own responsibility to finish his designs. Would you like Auto-Design to overwrite one of your designs because you forgot something about it? Even if you did, most players would not like it.
No, but to be fair, I'd like the option to give the design back to the AI for it to be atu built. A lot of times in custom battles I are only interested in building only one of the classes. But since I'm curious, I choose other class to look what hulls are available, or something else, and then I'm stuck with havign to finish that design aswell. I thought that function would solve that, but it doesn't. So, instead of not lettting us continue, please change it for a warning. Something like:
"Warning! You have unfinished designs! If you continue, those will be finished and overwritten by AI designs! Do you want to continue?" and then the option to go back and finish them, or to go ahead and let the ships be auto designed. -
47 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:
If you notice above the BB is red, which means it is an unfinished design.
I thought that was supposed to be fixed two patches about, and that AI was supposed to auto finish any unfinished design upon clicking "launch"
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, slightlytreasonous said:
hear me out here-
OPTIONAL.
what's the point of going all the way into 1940 if there's no fundamental changes whatsoever? You could cut off at 1920 and it's still the same game, really. Ships just get bigger, there's not much more to it.
Don't get me wrong, I love my fair share of super battleships, but it gets old after awhile. CVs could shake up the "endlessly growing battleships"
And if you don't want carriers, just let us turn them off. I know I want Jutland style fights unmarred by airpower, but I also want to see my BBs covered in oerlikons going to town, and failing to do anything productive despite that.
That's the problem, the second decent carriers hit the battlefield battleships become irrelevant. And that's not what I paid for. But if they're optional... I don't really care as long as I don'thave to have them. In fact, something similar could be done with torpedoes. I proposed introducting options to limit torpedoes, to avoid the stupid torpedo spam which makes 1910+ campaigns a bit dull.
48 minutes ago, Candle_86 said:you can place barbettes on it both fore and aft, just not in the center, you can place it on the ends, as seen below
I tink that the problem is that he wanted to build something similar to the Ise class, with a pair of mid placed superfiring turrets.
-
9 minutes ago, Koogus said:
It's definitely too early to say if carriers belong or not in this game or that the gameplay would be "boring". We don't even know if the devs will add them or not in the future and what the gameplay would even be like.
Personally I'd be fine if they both get added or not added. If the devs do say carriers are coming I hope they atleast do them farther in the future when the game starts to come together and be complete.
Hell no. As I said, there is plenty of games which you can play carriers already. Only on Steam there must be around a dozen or so. Whereas gaes where you can enjoy something close to big battleship battles is something unexplored. So, please, devs, keep your game carrier free.
-
2 hours ago, Captain Meow said:
I'm for to have aircraft carriers & planes in the game, otherwise playing in 1930-1940 without a single plane is dull/unrealistic.
I could see it implemented as you're not piloting individual plane but give orders to division of planes, like attack this or that ship, fly avoiding AA fire, retreat, scout, return to carrier - all planes would be controlled by AI. On the carrier you can set how much planes you want to send to the sky, put returned empty planes on refit or repair.
In a ship against planes all you need to do is select a firing mode for AA guns & let AI handle battling against planes while you're busy battling ships.I think in such a way the "carriers/planes in this game" is feasible.
1 hour ago, Andvarus said:Tbh I'd love to see Carriers in the game at one point, but it really needs to be done well. As mentioned by Captain Meow planes should not be directly controlled by the player, it could orrient on the current Torpedo launching System. Like fly agressive / save / normal. And to be fair a Carrier can be a formidable ship in ship to ship combat aswell. I mean the Midway-Class carriers could have easily sunk a modern light cruiser just with her guns.
But this is a thing that should be bottom priority atm.
I strongly disagree. Carriers do not belong in this game. The fit neither the gameplay nor the theme of the game.
The way the gameplay is designed, a ship whose tactic is staying away and sending planes will not only be botring to play, but also likely break the game (Like, literally breaking it: the devs admitted that there is a bug with game boundaries, battle map wise)
And even if this wasn't a problem, this game, the way it is advertised, it is supposed to be about battleships. They are supposed to be the stars of the game. And as such, carriers simply have no place on the game, as they would completely steal the focus and main role from them.
Carriers belong in Battleships-focused game, the same as Self Proppelled artillery does in a tank game. Yes, you can put them it, but will ad little to none to the game, and will only ruin what the game is supposed to achieve.
So, no. If you want Carriers, go play something else. There is plenty of games in which you can enjoy them. Games in which you can enjoy pure ship VS ship gun combat... not so many. And I'm pretty sure that THAT was precisely what brought a lot of us here. In fact, on that topic, I'm already concerned enough about submarines...-
1
-
-
15 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:
Exponential speed limit for hulls: As ships reach a maximum speed barrier depending on the hull technology, then the engine weight needed to achieve a higher speed increases exponentially. Thus it will be much harder to design unrealistically fast ships with old hulls, something that a lot of players abused to make much faster ships than the AI to overwhelm it.
I hope that the optimal maximum speed is indicated somehow. Otherwise, trying to optimise speed can become an excruciating chore.
-
5
-
-
2 minutes ago, Candle_86 said:
I dunno its kinda fun I've taken the 1890 campaign to 1951 so far, and it's hillarious hitting 8900T Germany Battleships with 20in guns
Well, keep in mind that campaign right now is not intended to last more than 10 years, at the very most, so it makes sense that the AI doesn't has coded how to scrap ships. Is not intended to be something needed, as durign war time tou use what you have. Is on peace time when you scrap obsolete things.
-
7 hours ago, Candle_86 said:
Yea but you know the AI, we start at 1860, by 1970 we will be firing Harpoons at 7000 ton battleships armed with 2 14in guns with 5 minute reloads, because the AI won't scrap anything.
Well, I suppose that in the long campaign the AI not scrapping anything will be eventually fixed. XD
-
Meh. ETA for the long campaign?
-
1 hour ago, slightlytreasonous said:
1860-1970, "monitors to super carriers"
I can already see it-Protectsd cruisers ramming through obsolete ironclads, watching my beloved super dreadnoughts be torn asunder by the dawn of missiles and jet aviation, nuclear submarines fights straight out of cold waters.. ^-^
I know, I know, it's as unfeasible as snow in hell, but let me dream...
I don't see it as unfeasible... The Ironclad part is pretty much doable, since a lot of them are already implemented in the missions, so I easily see it as a future DLC once the current content is finished... the carrier part is more difficult, as they really don't fit in the gameplay in any way.
-
Okay. About the incorrect spanish flag, I've noticed that the masts on the tower now show the correct flag. The ones in the bow and stern of the ships is still the incorrect 1982 one.
-
3
-
-
3 hours ago, Candle_86 said:
Im in the opposite, i wish we could start at 1860 with monitors and casemate ironclads moving onto early ironclade battleships before moving onto Predreadnoughts
While I hope that this wwill end being a thing, If I had to bet i'd say that if it ever comes to the game, it will do so as a DLC.
-
A couple of "What ifs":
A possible look for the Bismarck and the Gneisenau if All or nothing armours were had never been designed, and 1930s BBS would have still used classic dreadnought hulls.
Bismarck
Gneisenau
Ships have the same displacement and top speed as their real life counterparts.
-
2
-
-
6 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:
The map will be expanded to cover the whole Europe and Mediterranean, there will be alliances with many nations and the war is going to be much more complex. There is no delay actually, it is just that we will deliver a patch sooner with the big map and more nations, and afterwards the longer campaign, so players will not have to wait for a prolonged patch. Peace.
Oh, so you are actually splitting the next major update into two, and all of this was nothing but a miscommunication issue. My apologies then.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Worry_Rock said:
I don't know if there is any real way to prevent this, but in my campaign the a.i created a heavy cruiser that can go 29.6 knots in 1900. These ships are very tedious and annoying to play against and I'd like to know if I could prevent it.
Probably said heavy cruiser is absolutely lackluster in any other regard. So, you need to adapt. Is a great part of what this game is about. Pretty much as what happened in reality, you have to adapt to what other navies have in their arsenals.
-
1
-
-
55 minutes ago, Captain Meow said:
Without multiplayer even campaigns will get boring eventually.
Maybe, but at least a long campaign with multiple nations involved, would offer a good degree of replayability, as the campaigns won't be predictable, as you will need to adapt. Right now we have a content that can beat in an evening of playing...
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:
We will give another update for this, as there will be too many changes for one single update and a lot of issues can happen for players.
So, no long campaign... I'm frankly disappointed to see that what should be the absolute top priority, that's it, making the campaign reasonably functional, is being delayed in favour of things that are absolutely irrelevant without it. Because, let's be real, what would make the game worth its price tag is a good campaign. In it's current state... Even at a 75% discount price tag seems pricy.
The good thing from this is that I get another month break from the game.
Edit: Just checked the game's popularity on Steam. The game's approval, which was at an 84% on release, has been doing nothing but steadily decrease since... Currently is sitting at 77% overall, and recent is dropping by another 4 points, showing the clearly descendent tendence. Most complains are rooted in that, with the current state of the top feature, the campaign, the game is not even remotely close to be worth its price... Do you honestly think you can afford to keep delaying the much needed campaign expansion?-
1
-
-
10 hours ago, BionikSheep said:
Not sure if its a bug or intentional, but i have damaged ships spawning into battles, ships that were damaged the previous turn, and i would have thought, locked in drydock for repairs. But instead are sallying out to fight despite many other cruisers stationed at the same port that are completely undamaged, just, staying home?
There is a mission which is precisely that. Your ships get ambushed while going back to the port for repairs.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Norbert Sattler said:
Though it is still a bit annoying that you have to set down a pair of side-turrets and then remove one of them by picking it up and then deleting it "mid-air".
If you delete a put-down turrets, it will delete the pair, instead of just one.
The auto mirror option can be disabled, precisely to allow that kind of things
-
1
-
1
-
-
Okay, after doing some research, I have some historical feedback to give... Germany in the campaign currently has acgess to three Brandenburg like hulls, and only one Kaiser Friedrich III hull, towards the very end of the pre dreadnought time... Since the Brandenburg saw no further developement, and all of the remaining german pre dreadnoughts were based on the Kaiser friedrich, maybe this should be revised.
-
2
-
Player Suggestions - January/February
in General Discussions
Posted
See? This is why I said that there should be more pre dreadnought hulls that allowed side turrets, even if the smallest ones... I know that the game aims to be historic, but at the same time it is supposed to be about creating your own ships, not only reproducing the historic ones. The issue is that by the time you get hulls that finally can use wing guns, they are already pretty much obsolete. Making them a redundant tech that could pretty much be removed. Also, there should be looked upon the chance of including specific semi dreadnought hulls (all big gun, multicaliber ships) at the end of the pre-dreadnought era.