Candle_86
-
Posts
238 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Candle_86
-
-
22 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:
[Update 12]
- Fixed some minor hull issues that were reported.
- Optimization for the auto-design in some hull types.
- Optimization of the tooltip timer (it is now shorter).Please note that no other new hull is planned to be added, unless you guys advise that is needed to fill the technology gap of a nation. No save wipe out is expected either before the finalization of the patch, unless a major bug is found that needs it. We expect to release the patch next week, when we add new Naval Academy missions.
Please Restart Steam to get this update fast.
the new USA small Battleship hull could be made larger then, because it allows us to also build the later ships like Mississippi and and Connecticut, because it supports the dual 8in wing turrets, though it does lack hull casemates, but all i could really see is that
-
9 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:
I know but it was a failed, rare design and in the game anything can break because of this feature which the AI can overuse.
Alright well that makes sense, it would be awesome to build them but if it breaks the game I get it.
-
24 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:
We will try to add, for the early USA looking guns, ok, but not for so large caliber.
Ok, but FYI the US did actually mount dual 8in turrets above the main turrets for Kearsarge and Virginia, it affected the rate of fire for virginia and made both ships top heavy but it was done lol.
-
Any plans to add the ability of US MK 1 and 2 12 and 13in turrents to allow the mounting of 8in turrents above them so we can make Kearsarge and Virgina classes. the Logic seems to exist for the Brittish turrets with the 2in guns. Or Costal Battleship to mount a single 12in per barbette place aka the USS Texas 1895
-
Convert from JSON back to BIN is broken and I've deleted everything in
C:\Users\candle\AppData\LocalLow\Game Labs\Ultimate Admiral Dreadnoughts
as well as from
D:\SteamLibrary\steamapps\common\Ultimate Admiral Dreadnoughtsdid not fix it, the function does not work, it was working with update 5
-
So Modernized Dreadnought 3 for USA no longer allows the mounting of guns on the forward built in barbette, tried 9-16 none can mount to it now.
-
5 hours ago, Lima said:
Endless campaign
One thing I would like to see in the live version. During my campaigns, I hit the 1950 cap several times and each time I still had room for gameplay ahead. This is especially noticeable with starts from 1930-1940, you just don't have time to really enjoy all these modern hulls.
I suggest, upon reaching 1950, to make an alert that there is no planned content in the game further, but you can continue if you wish.
I agree it's kind of what Sid Meier's Civilization does, you go far enough it gives you a score and you can just keep playing anyway for the lols
-
4
-
-
On 4/28/2023 at 11:48 PM, SpardaSon21 said:
Yes, but considering the USA doesn't have the historical advantages in weight savings it did IRL, it needs some sort of compensation. Just compare the Revenge-class to the Colorado-class in terms of tonnage and capability and tell me there isn't a stark difference, especially since the Colorados were using the incredibly weight-inefficient turbo-electric drive system compared to the Revenges, not to mention 16"/45 guns instead of 15"/42 guns.
historically the Revenge class weighed 29,590 tons to the Colorado's 32,600, and in a fight Colorado hits harder given its advantage in guns of 16/45 vs 15/42 and the Historical fact that American's also used heavier shells than the Brits. American ships once the Standard's got going didn't really save a much weight vs the brittish, more so they dind't build them for speed. American planners decided that when the British went to 23/24knots that a 21knot battle line could still turn inside the Brittish line and it wasn't needed so they kept them short and fat, which i think is well represented here.
-
2 hours ago, RNV said:
For me the snowballing effect and the fact that land war is completely out of player control (which makes sense in the philosophy of the game) are the main reasons to have more provinces: it reduces the impact on the game of an uncontrollable variable while keeping it in the game equation.
Then there is the merely aesthetic issue of modern day borders on the map which just look funny.
consider this Earth II, i mean we don't have planes this is obviously not our world
-
5 minutes ago, Werwaz said:
Seeing as in game the old USA "Dreadnought IV" hull, will we be getting a hull of similar displacement (50-70k tons) to replace it? As it stands, the USA currently has a large size disadvantage compared to other fleets from about 1920 to 1930. Almost everyone else can field 70k ton dreadnoughts while the USA can only construct dreadnoughts up to 50k tons during that time, and the player would have to wait until modern battleships to have competitively sized ships again.
It fits the US strategy they built short fat ships upto and right after WW1 focusing on firepower and armor, not speed which right now you can fit 6x3 12in, 5x3 14in, 4x3 16in turrents, I don't seem them lacking in firepower at all. And honestly I'm thrilled these hulls are finally in game. Now I can build every class from South Carolina - Iowa, and being able to make delware-Texas is awesome. The only thing we really miss now is pre Dreadnought USA hulls.
-
finally a new hull for America, we can make something close to the Deleware's - New York's now, the hull can even do a close idea of the Wyoming class, how awesome.
-
I've asked for it before I'd like to see a start at 1870, with early turret ships
-
I do agree, I want to be fighting with dreadnaughts in 2990, after waging a 1000year war. Like another famous game said, War, War never changes.
-
One Thing I'd really like to see added is realism settings, lets say you want to play without having defects, while this can be fun for more realisim, it can also be very unfun at times. Same goes for other things, a realism slider would be great.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, Jakebob said:
It would be a neat option, but in reality those turrets didn't work well at all, which is why they weren't repeated on later classes.
Well they didn't work well on Virginia because by then the RoF of the 12in guns meant that the 8in guns interfered so you couldn't load both, on the Kearsarge class it worked fine because the 8in fired so much faster than the 12in that it actually worked.
-
50 minutes ago, Aldaris said:
It wouldn't, not anymore.
The swastika is banned as a symbol, yes, but there are qualifiers.
The swastika can be used for educational purposes, and in works of art. Games usually count as works of art. Most publishers shied away from that for a long time, because they were afraid they'd be taken to court and lose out on sales until the issue was resolved, so they changed the flags for the german version of games to avoid that risk. That seems to have largely abated though.
Yes but this allows you to play as the Nazi's in an alternate existence that doesn't show the war crimes, I'd be very surprised if the German courts approved
-
1 hour ago, Suribachi said:
For WWII Germany, it was used in almost all flags during the time of the Nazi Party for national, naval ensign, air force and general authority (like police) flags. So if they are going for accuracy based on history, the swastika will be on the flags.
However, it could be a simple thing to have a toggle in the settings to have an alternate set of flags for those that would like that option I think.They have to or Germany would block the game being sold in Germany
-
1
-
-
Yea we need Ballast tanks
-
what happened to more USA hulls, can we please get rid of Dreadnought II for the US and the promised USS Maine hull?
-
Ya why not, in truth this game exists in a world without the airplane, so why not
-
2
-
-
Something else that really bothers me is the USA Campaign has comments about parliament, the US doesn't have a Parliament, it has a congress I know its minor but its incredibly noticeable
-
4
-
-
Its a shame the new hulls where canceled, the American navy is still impossible to actually build, Dreadnaught 1 is fine, but no way to build any other 12in gun armed US Ships, Dreadnaught 2 is just a terrible idea, it comes maybe close to the US Standard Type if your playing real loose with it, but there is no way to build ships with 5 turrets on these ships, then we get Dreadnaught III which is a hull the US never even had, then Dreadnaught 4 which is finally able to put 5 guns on it, but the cage masts are so low it looks wrong. Overall I'd say the US is lacking until the modern era where it seems the only real work on them has occurred.
-
3
-
-
7 hours ago, Lima said:
I think the enemy should pay more for the complete destruction of their fleet, but this is not critical. Meanwhile the US is still doing nothing.
You can also notice the Russian-Japanese war, it's very funny. For the first few months nothing happened, then Russia transferred all fleet to the Black Sea, Japan regularly come to them and loses battles.
I think it's good that AI can find a way to fight, but I don't understand why a stronger Russian fleet isn't coming to Japan.
Because the Russians would have to take the Kamchatka, and in this universe they don't make that mistake
-
One thing I'd like to know is are there any plans to allow mine detection on Heavy Cruisers, Battle Cruisers and Battleships. If you go to any American Battleship museme even the Texas they where all outfited to carry paravanes in WW2 for the detection of mines. Is there any plans to give us this feature in the game. Sure you wouldn't use a battleship as a mine hunter normally but the option existed because they'd get in close for shore bombardment
>>>Beta v1.4 Feedback<<< [Final version released]
in General Discussions
Posted
Thank you, now the American Navy is awesome