Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Wakelessrex

Members
  • Content Count

    52
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

33 Excellent

About Wakelessrex

  • Rank
    Ordinary seaman

Recent Profile Visitors

174 profile views
  1. Good points, I meant to come back to this topic with more information and my own attempt at stating out torpedos defences. However I never really got the time and had other projects. Torpedo defences did come in many different forms in fact one of the first was "torpedo nets" I was going to recommend that these actually be at least a module you can buy for ships. They are primarily a feature of dreadnought ships and of that era so they have more reason to be in the game than perhaps any other. For those who dont know the "ribbing" along the hulls of most dreadnoughts is actually the upturn
  2. Thank you for your response, this makes me cautiously optimistic. I would like to point out though that the Kongo class having been built in 1911 is a much more iconic ship of the "Dreadnought" era even with Pagoda than say the Yamato, Bismarck, or Iowa. Though I understand, as those are the most popular BB's why they were included right now. Though I will say that the Kongo class and a few others specifically are I think a very good possible addition because they are a class that will basically be purchasable early game and that can make it feasibly all the way to late game as they did
  3. As a fellow modeler I think its more about the coding to get that working in the editor than it is the models (which they already pretty much have done) But I think Darth would be more appropriate to answer that question than not, just my own experience with games tells me we're to late in the process for a change of that kind see as the system mostly works and is a success. Perhaps im wrong. Either way, more Pagodas please.
  4. I agree more variety is better, very much so. However we also have to be realistic, I very much doubt at this point in development that Darth will go back, or really could go back and completely change all the towers to be modular. It would take too much development away from creating new towers etc. For good or bad most of the major features in the game are at this point in development pretty set id say. I really hope we get both the Kongo Tower AND the specific Hull with the torpedo bulge though. Despite me thinking it unlikely at this point.
  5. Thats true, there are few late game options right now. However the kongos pagoda though having it till the end of its career in WW2 was actually not a late war addition. It was added to the class in 1931 during her first reconstruction. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kongō-class_battlecruiser#/media/File:Kongo_after_reconstruction.jpg So while people will see it as a "late game" tower it actually is also an early game tower getting more bang for your buck from the developers too.
  6. I really hope we get more Bridge types of the japanese Pagoda style, my all time favorite ship was the Kongo Class and you cant totally emulate her in game for a few reasons. Even though as a legacy ship she makes more sense than say the bismarck or Yamato for a game named after the dreadnought. Anyway really hoping for me of these style of towers please. Also some nice bulges in future hulls would be amazing ;) https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d4/Haruna_1934.jpg https://forum.game-labs.net/topic/31924-my-case-for-the-bulge-torpedos/
  7. Sure, I can do that when I get a second. Bulges could and should be very low poly geometric shapes, youre talking about models that should be a far lower drain on a system than single turrets would even be. The ones I created in very short time are fairly low poly and you could go even lower than that. We already have full models also, below the waterline that is. Just no bulges with the exception of the Yamato (which had minimal external bulge anyway) But really where there is room for saving imo is the majority of old designs that are refitted for post ww1 era. Unles
  8. The Yamato hull currently has a bulge, its the only hull type however. I already asked about bulges in the shipyard, Nick said its unlikely but perhaps after release. I dont think thats a likely addition post release. I advocate for their inclusion now. Especially as attachable as that will cut the requisite hull number down drastically.
  9. Same, I love that I can make designs but I will probably end up trying to make a lot of historical ones because I love them so much.
  10. "Reserved" For torpedo defence gameplay mechanics
  11. “My case for the bulge” The absence of torpedo bulges has the strong possibility of sinking Ultimate Admirals Dreadnoughts otherwise historically accurate experience. The main purpose of the torpedo bulge throughout both world wars was to mitigate the damage of a torpedo strike. At this they achieved mixed results but, they were a very important feature of many ships overall defense. Most of the time a torpedo bulge was just an added layer of external armour below the waterline of a ship; no bulge was adequate on its own. It was important that all bulges work in conjunction w
  12. Pretty close id say, maybe do one of the more built up rear towers? http://www.modelshipgallery.com/gallery/bb/hms/Invincible-350-ra/index.htm
  13. Pretty sure thats the least of this ships worries when it fires XD
  14. lol, im amazed it didnt roll over XD
  15. In addition Nick made it seem we wont get a more zoomed in view of ships so no 'bridge view' to really do a good Bino system. Warthunder where in simulator mode you are stuck in the bridge view comes to mind as a good examppe that would make for good 'bino' mode.
×
×
  • Create New...