kjg000

Just a reminder, my understanding of Tsushima is that the Russian ships were effectively floating bombs, having stored coal on deck for much of their journey. This meant that on the day coal dust was filling every nook and cranny. So perhaps not the best battle to base the values on? ( this from a player often guilty of Grand Larceny; Warship :-} )

I think setting the expected date will only prevent the tech from being allocated in the game setup phase. I also set the difficulty to 999 (AKA a big number) in all entries; # $techType_name_submarine_hull,submarine_hull,,,,,,,,,,,, submarine_hull_1,submarine_hull,,$technology_name_submarine_hull_1,1999,,999,unlock(sub_ssc_1),,sub_ssc_1,$technology_desc_submarine_hull_1,"Latest technology allows the building of SSC class submarine up to 400 tons displacement with 2 tubes, 4 torpedoes",, ... # $techType_name_submarine_hull,submarine_hull,,,,,,,,,,,, submarine_hull_1,submarine_hull,,$technology_name_submarine_hull_1,1999,,999,unlock(sub_ssc_1),,sub_ssc_1,$technology_desc_submarine_hull_1,"Latest technology allows the building of SSC class submarine up to 400 tons displacement with 2 tubes, 4 torpedoes",, ... But # $techType_name_sub_surv,sub_surv,,,,,,,,,,,, need not be edited. You will just end up with a load of useless techs. and edit the initial save file to reduce the research rate of the sub techs for all players!. "techMods":[ {"Key":"submarine_exp","Value":1.0}, --> {"Key":"submarine_exp","Value":0.000001}, {"Key":"submarine_hull","Value":1.0}, --> {"Key":"submarine_exp","Value":0.000001}, {"Key":"sub_surv","Value":1.0}, --> {"Key":"submarine_exp","Value":0.000001}, OK, so maybe 0.01 would do! A bit of a belt and braces approach, but if you only edit the dates the techs will still be researched in game and if you only change the difficulty or the (save file) research rate, then the techs can be discovered in the setup phase. However, just editing the date and difficulty will at worst delay subs until late game when they will be very weak and removes the need to edit the save file.

Not what I was asking, but kinda implies the answer. Thanks anyway.

perfectly understandable, just thought I'd ask. Get and stay well!

I use UABEAvalonia which I got from GitHub (I think ).

Sorry, with this site I just get a blank screen using Firefox and it won't even deal with any secure browsers. Any other options?

Looks like a great mod! however I have problems with using Nexus, 240+ "Legitimate Interest" partners seems excessive. Do you have any other download sites? If not that's fine, still looks like a great mod. FYI I'm also having problems with the NAR site. It won't accept any of my secure browsers and with Firefox, which they say they support, I just get a blank screen! C'est la vie.

Ah, yes. Sorry, I misunderstood your post. Thanks for the clarification. Also sorry. I haven't played for a while as I find the replay value low with fixed sequential campaigns. What I found was better in the Barbbary War DLC was that the intro was shorter and you started in the 'Fleet' screen, not a battle. No I don't think I ever mashed the spacebar, I mashed the Esc button apparently whith the same result. So I'll ammend my request, Can we get a single page 'tick and flick' / checkbox start page option please. Reasoning from my original post remains valid. Also; Dev's, Have you investigated the possibility of a package containing a Steam key at an extra price? Not an ideal solution but why let 'the perfect be the enemy of the practical'? Would I buy this? Depends on the price, depends on the direction development takes ;-}

Hey Skeksis I wouldn't describe it as a scam, but I originally bought Dreadnoughts on Xsolla and now of course, we have to play it on steam, however at least steam allows offline play. I'm also not sure Xsolla will be a firm base in the future. I understand that Valve have changed their policies which now prohibit Games Labs from offering as many Steam keys. Overall I'm not impressed with games that I have which started out as early access. I think only one that I have tried (Sprocket) has been a fully positive experiance. I feel the feedback I gave in Dreadnoughts was a complete waste of time and effort on my part, so I'm not keen to have that experiance again. Not that I'd expect GL to listen to what I suggest, but when many people ask for the same, or simmilar, things, we'd expect some kind of result or at least some feedback! GL now seem to prefer Discord as their primary forum. For my part I don't want yet another app and would rather use either this forum or Steam, although the latter would require me to register a community profile on Steam. Not sure about the emails, I don't think I registered. I do find it somewhat surreal that GL started a forum For UG:American Revolution then seem to have all but abandoned it.

So, looking at several online early reviews the game is deffinatley interesting. However, I would like to see a quick campaign start option, something along the lines of the DLC in Age of Sail (I think it was, one of the three campaigns anyway). This is especially important if you want better facilitate good feedback from your testers. I am sure that many players like the story mode start but I am equally sure many others are like me, we just want to get on with and enjoythe game. As EA testers are likely to be restarting a campaign often, and for many others, the story style start just becomes tedious and a barrier to enjoyment of the game. Full disclosure, I have no intention of buying while the game is on Xaolla or while the game is in early access, I made those mistakes with Dreadnoughts. However I am intending to buying on either steam or GoG, should it become a mature game. Also:- What are the modding plans for this game? As can be seen from many other games, including the Ultimate General/Admiral series, tacking on modding capabilities after development is well under way generally results in an inferior product. Yet modding is an excellent way of prolonging the lifespan, and thus sales, of a game. FYI I don't Discord

Hi I wonder if this type of problem is a Unity problem and nothing to do with Games Labs coding? I'm having problems with Grand Tactician: Civil War which are very similar to the problems we've had on UA:D. In particular It is often severly lagging with all system recources nearly idling except 5% of the cpu is maxed out (one logical processor, 1/2 of a core with 19.5 LP idling). Same with other Unity based games I have although the older games are less ambitious with their graphics than either GT:CW or UA:D and the problem is less pronounced.

Problematic at the very least and not practical in most cases. Say. for example, both mods change gun penertration values, how do you resolve the conflict? This is why you often can't combine mods even in profesional, well written mod managers.

Yes? A doable workarround, but not a solution to the problem. The entire rational for casements is that they do not interfere with turrets.

@Nick Thomadis YES !! This is the type of thing I feel I have been banging my head against the wall about. This goes directly to solving one of the problems that cause an otherwise brilliant game to get negative reviews, along the line of "I'd reccommend it BUT ...". The same logic should be applied accross the UI. For example Fleet losses and Research notifications. It would speed up the game and reduce these annoying start of turn intermable popups. Include a roll-over to display the details and your one big step towards revealing the true brilliance of this game.

Also, allow the player the ability to select the font size, select the delay time and make the popup textbox a dragable/resizable box with the ability to both resize the box and scroll text within the box. In 1.3.9.9 we had some ships with so many faults than many of the ship data were off the top and bottom of the screen, paying the price for a feature many don't want. If in doubt, make it an option. Heck,just make it an option anyway!