Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

>>>"Alpha-1 v.60+" General Feedback<<< [LATEST UPDATE: v61, 10/10/2019]


Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Jay Gatsby said:

Single gun turrets have the same accuracy as multiple gun turrets because the multiple gun turrets have a delayed firing mechanism for each gun to ensure that the recoil of each gun does not interfere with the other.

yes delay mechanism did remove the interference caused by multiple gun turrets but they were not introduced until after ww1 so in game it would have to be a tech upgrade

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 161
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

yeah quad turrets and stuff is still missing   i know its in the game as one of my friends who tried the unfinished and wip campaign came across it and screen grabbed it

Ultimate Admiral: Dreadnoughts has been released in its first playable version on 3/10/2019. This "Limited Edition" gives you access to the current development build. Read the news! Here you ca

Hello. My first impression: 1-Great look, awesome indeed.  2-Great options at building but as TBRSIM says, i think the weight is a little up limits. Few hull options, imagine this would

Posted Images

6 minutes ago, khang36 said:

yes delay mechanism did remove the interference caused by multiple gun turrets but they were not introduced until after ww1 so in game it would have to be a tech upgrade

Exactly this is how it should be👍

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jay Gatsby said:

Exactly this is how it should be👍

Pretty sure that's how it is. If you get triple turrets and look at the aiming modifiers it says triple turret technology -10% or whatever. Basically in the naval academy you don't have access to that tech. In the campaign you will. Seriously the campaign will be super different. Balanced tech progression rather than the random boosts you get in the missions changes a lot. You can actually play the campaign right not by using the left alt key when you click on it. It's very buggy and crashy and not polished or finished but you can totally see a difference in the combat in 1890 vs in the missions. I had a legacy BB take two torpedoes midships and die in seconds when everyone was complaining about torpedoes in the naval academy. Yeah they have serious issues with torpedoes and other things but just having balanced tech vs random upgrades in specific areas will help a lot in soothing people's concerns 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jatzi said:

Pretty sure that's how it is. If you get triple turrets and look at the aiming modifiers it says triple turret technology -10% or whatever. Basically in the naval academy you don't have access to that tech. In the campaign you will. Seriously the campaign will be super different. Balanced tech progression rather than the random boosts you get in the missions changes a lot. You can actually play the campaign right not by using the left alt key when you click on it. It's very buggy and crashy and not polished or finished but you can totally see a difference in the combat in 1890 vs in the missions. I had a legacy BB take two torpedoes midships and die in seconds when everyone was complaining about torpedoes in the naval academy. Yeah they have serious issues with torpedoes and other things but just having balanced tech vs random upgrades in specific areas will help a lot in soothing people's concerns 

Tried that, and for me it says that it can't load the world scene since there is none. Well, guess some people are just luckier than me^^

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Jatzi said:

Pretty sure that's how it is. If you get triple turrets and look at the aiming modifiers it says triple turret technology -10% or whatever. Basically in the naval academy you don't have access to that tech. In the campaign you will. Seriously the campaign will be super different. Balanced tech progression rather than the random boosts you get in the missions changes a lot. You can actually play the campaign right not by using the left alt key when you click on it. It's very buggy and crashy and not polished or finished but you can totally see a difference in the combat in 1890 vs in the missions. I had a legacy BB take two torpedoes midships and die in seconds when everyone was complaining about torpedoes in the naval academy. Yeah they have serious issues with torpedoes and other things but just having balanced tech vs random upgrades in specific areas will help a lot in soothing people's concerns 

Damn it, if only I knew this before hotfix arrived... Welp, guess now I'm gonna stare at the campaign screen with empty eyes and cry internally😢

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Jatzi said:

Pretty sure that's how it is. If you get triple turrets and look at the aiming modifiers it says triple turret technology -10% or whatever. Basically in the naval academy you don't have access to that tech. In the campaign you will. Seriously the campaign will be super different. Balanced tech progression rather than the random boosts you get in the missions changes a lot. You can actually play the campaign right not by using the left alt key when you click on it. It's very buggy and crashy and not polished or finished but you can totally see a difference in the combat in 1890 vs in the missions. I had a legacy BB take two torpedoes midships and die in seconds when everyone was complaining about torpedoes in the naval academy. Yeah they have serious issues with torpedoes and other things but just having balanced tech vs random upgrades in specific areas will help a lot in soothing people's concerns 

I don't think so, because in the "The modern battleship" mission all the technologies are unlocked and the triple turrets are still less accurate and have slower reload than the single turrets

Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like heavy and superheavy shells shouldn't do more damage than normal shells, but rather less, since the only way to increase the weigt ofg a shell of given caliber was to make the explosive container thicker, thereby decreasing explosive yield. The superheavy 16' shells the americans used on the iowas for example had a similar explosive yield to contemporary british 15'. Shell weight should mainly be a tradeoff between damage potential and AP-capability.

Link to post
Share on other sites

one thing i dont like about single guns is for some magical reason they have 50% shorter reload

this makes no sense from a historical nor mechanical perspective

generally speaking single guns were just as bad as twin barrel guns

 

c1de606585.jpg

 

as can be seen this twin turret suffers from TWICE AS LONG reload as a single turret

1.02 has a -33% decrease from 1.53

58.8 has a 50% increase from 39.2

 

i dont see why twin turrets should get punished this much in reload (its also a MK-3 turret so its a High tech turret)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Finwenolofinwe said:

I feel like heavy and superheavy shells shouldn't do more damage than normal shells, but rather less, since the only way to increase the weigt ofg a shell of given caliber was to make the explosive container thicker, thereby decreasing explosive yield. The superheavy 16' shells the americans used on the iowas for example had a similar explosive yield to contemporary british 15'. Shell weight should mainly be a tradeoff between damage potential and AP-capability.

I agree with this. Perhaps light shells should be lighter, have low yield and AP capabilities. Normal shells should have normal yield and AP, but heavy and super heavy should have low yield but high penetration. This could be offset with lyddite explosive to raise yield but reserve some penetration.

 

2 minutes ago, Christian said:

one thing i dont like about single guns is for some magical reason they have 50% shorter reload

this makes no sense from a historical nor mechanical perspective

generally speaking single guns were just as bad as twin barrel guns

as can be seen this twin turret suffers from TWICE AS LONG reload as a single turret

1.02 has a -33% decrease from 1.53

58.8 has a 50% increase from 39.2

 

i dont see why twin turrets should get punished this much in reload (its also a MK-3 turret so its a High tech turret)

 

In early pre-dreadnoughts and ironclads, didn't twin guns have to be loaded one at a time?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Finwenolofinwe said:

I feel like heavy and superheavy shells shouldn't do more damage than normal shells, but rather less, since the only way to increase the weigt ofg a shell of given caliber was to make the explosive container thicker, thereby decreasing explosive yield. The superheavy 16' shells the americans used on the iowas for example had a similar explosive yield to contemporary british 15'. Shell weight should mainly be a tradeoff between damage potential and AP-capability.

Just because you are comparing 2 different projectiles, this is not a fair comparison, in reality the British 15 inch has more explosive than the 16 inch Mk 8 super heavy but has much less penetration, in this game the design of the projectiles is standardized, the 16 inch Mk 8 super heavy has more explosive and more penetration than the lighter predecessor 16 inch Mk 5 (15.2 kg vs 18.55 kg of explosive), this is a fair comparison

main-qimg-53daf1000893fd7c03d446b5cb8d9041.jpeg.90d5b8b98b1ec6b2a0740e2b3d1f0e39.jpeg

 

The British 15 inch Mark XXIIb APC looks more like a semi-armor piercing than an armor piercing, it has too much explosive

WNBR_15-42_mk1_shells_pic.jpg.98c1c184b43a7cba4cfa0b9ccf09774b.jpg

Edited by Jay Gatsby
Link to post
Share on other sites

In the "destroy a fleet" mission" how can you find the enemy fleet in the distance faster? There is the option of sailing to the direction where the smoke is from, but the enemy has a chance to shoot tons of shots at you and you can't do anything until a ship suddenly appears. By the time your found them, your a bit too close and they can bombard you thus taking lots of damage.

 

I find the enemy able to shoot at you early is a bit of an unfair advantage as well as having more ships in their fleet. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shaun said:

I agree with this. Perhaps light shells should be lighter, have low yield and AP capabilities. Normal shells should have normal yield and AP, but heavy and super heavy should have low yield but high penetration. This could be offset with lyddite explosive to raise yield but reserve some penetration.

 

In early pre-dreadnoughts and ironclads, didn't twin guns have to be loaded one at a time?

no they were loaded both at the same time

 

in single gun turrets you had a single ammunition elevator and crew for it and the handling room and the loading part (the turret)

in a double gun turret you have 2 ammunition elevators the crew for it a handling room for both guns and a larger turret with more crew 

 

generally speaking adding another barrel is just putting another single gun with reloading and all the other gear next to the one already in there

really the only diffrence is the twin gun usually takes up more width in the turret which usually makes the turret bigger

though the general deciding factor for how big a turret is is

 

gun size and how cramped you can make the hoists and how little space you need for reloading

 

the main factor limiting reload speed is not so much crew but more the capability of the ammuniton elevators and how good the mechanical loading gear in the turret is

this is mainly due to the fact humans cant lift 12 inch shells so the more assistance the equipment gives the better

twin turrets dont have any less of that than single turrets 

b7b0fa67113c0d518e612d8059ba25ef.jpg

good diagram showcasing the layout of the hoists in a triple turret

its basically 3 guns next to eachother with the accompanying hoist a single turret would have been the exact same except just 1 gun and 1 hoist

 

a better comparison between dual and single would be

6f989f97c297baf0dd32585a3dee4043.jpg

2327404d0e36c79a4215f73f8dbd8c3a.jpg

 

as can be seen the only diffrence between the dual and single gun in this case is the size of the gun house and the amount of space and hoists given to each gun

both guns have ready service projectiles and power (its hard to see on the top one and its not listed but its there if you look at twin 5"38 blueprints) and both have 2 hoists per gun one for powder one for projectile (powder is not mentioned in the single 5 inch gun but it also has a powder hoist

https://www.okieboat.com/Copyright images/5-38 mount plan 1024.jpg

http://041864b.netsolhost.com/Gunnery/5inch/imgC7.gif

these 2 links show the crew in each gun (top is twin bottom is single)

 

its also interesting to be noted that the twin gun turret has almost twice as many people operating the guns as the single one does

they both have 3 people to aim sight the gun a checker a pointer and a trainer though they arent named the same in the diagrams they do the same jobs and should be named the same

the only 2 other similarity is they both have 1 fuze setter the twin gun has twice as many powder men projectile men hot case men and gun captains 

the guns both have a mount captain (its called spade man in the single one for some reason) but the twin mount lacks the gunners mate

pictures so you can visibly see how the crew layout is and get a better 3d perspective

http://www.armed-guard.com/bag081.jpg (single)

https://i.imgur.com/iu0VCWk.jpg (twin)

but crew count needed per gun is lower for the twin 5" gun while retaining just as high a firerate accuracy and reliability with just as many people to operate the guns themselves but the crew needed for other stations per gun decreases

 

 

this in all leads to the gearing class destroyers having a total gun crew for the 5 inch guns of 42 men (for the turrets not for hoists and all that) 

while the fletcher has a gun crew of 55 (turrets only) which leads to 1 more gun firepower yet 13 crewmen less on the gearing which saves space on the destroyer for other things

Edited by Christian
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Jay Gatsby said:

I don't think so, because in the "The modern battleship" mission all the technologies are unlocked and the triple turrets are still less accurate and have slower reload than the single turrets

But not all the tech is available. Just all the tech they're willing to give you or all the tech they've implemented in the game. It's early alpha, not all of the tech is finalized or implemented for sure. So perhaps they just haven't put the triple turret tech in. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Jatzi said:

But not all the tech is available. Just all the tech they're willing to give you or all the tech they've implemented in the game. It's early alpha, not all of the tech is finalized or implemented for sure. So perhaps they just haven't put the triple turret tech in. 

yeah quad turrets and stuff is still missing

 

i know its in the game as one of my friends who tried the unfinished and wip campaign came across it and screen grabbed it

unknown.png

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Christian said:

yeah quad turrets and stuff is still missing

 

i know its in the game as one of my friends who tried the unfinished and wip campaign came across it and screen grabbed it

unknown.png

Where did you get this picture?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Christian said:

one thing i dont like about single guns is for some magical reason they have 50% shorter reload

this makes no sense from a historical nor mechanical perspective

generally speaking single guns were just as bad as twin barrel guns

 

c1de606585.jpg

 

as can be seen this twin turret suffers from TWICE AS LONG reload as a single turret

1.02 has a -33% decrease from 1.53

58.8 has a 50% increase from 39.2

 

i dont see why twin turrets should get punished this much in reload (its also a MK-3 turret so its a High tech turret)

 

It was a technological challenge to make multi-gun turrets more effective in reload and accuracy over time. Double and Triple turrets needed more complex reload mechanisms to achieve a sufficient reload analogy to single turrets. Shell interference between close mounted guns, created extra turbulence and errors to accuracy calculation.

All these problems are gradually solved by technology and this is simulated better in campaign (where all technologies can progress in a balanced manner, according to player decisions) or late missions. In next update, we will improve gun reloads too so we achieve results closer to realism.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Nick Thomadis said:

It was a technological challenge to make multi-gun turrets more effective in reload and accuracy over time. Double and Triple turrets needed more complex reload mechanisms to achieve a sufficient reload analogy to single turrets. Shell interference between close mounted guns, created extra turbulence and errors to accuracy calculation.

All these problems are gradually solved by technology and this is simulated better in campaign (where all technologies can progress in a balanced manner, according to player decisions) or late missions. In next update, we will improve gun reloads too so we achieve results closer to realism.

Any idea when we can expect another update? Apologies, but I'm hungry for more of this beautiful game!

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Shaun said:

Any idea when we can expect another update? Apologies, but I'm hungry for more of this beautiful game!

We will be sure the following week when. We have to focus more in optimizations and solve some crash issues, in priority.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Nick Thomadis said:

It was a technological challenge to make multi-gun turrets more effective in reload and accuracy over time. Double and Triple turrets needed more complex reload mechanisms to achieve a sufficient reload analogy to single turrets. Shell interference between close mounted guns, created extra turbulence and errors to accuracy calculation.

All these problems are gradually solved by technology and this is simulated better in campaign (where all technologies can progress in a balanced manner, according to player decisions) or late missions. In next update, we will improve gun reloads too so we achieve results closer to realism.

i was mainly worried due to this

c1de606585.jpg

7068d76a2c.jpg

the first gun is a MK-3 turret

while the last gun is a MK-1 turret

yet the reload speed remains quite trash (by 1910s standards)

and both guns seem to have the exact same penalty over single guns

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Christian said:

and both guns seem to have the exact same penalty over single guns

When I said above about technologies, I meant that there are other technologies, separate from gun techs, called "Turret mechanisms" that specifically enhance this part. 

In some missions, this boost is not offered, for a reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:

When I said above about technologies, I meant that there are other technologies, separate from gun techs, called "Turret mechanisms" that specifically enhance this part. 

In some missions, this boost is not offered, for a reason.

ah ok makes sense

 

Edited by Christian
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...