Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

>>>"Alpha-2 v.63" General Feedback<<< [LATEST UPDATE: 26/10/2019]


Nick Thomadis

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, sarrumac said:

Anyone else feels like ennemy ships tend to go boom very easily this patch? I mean, Hood'ing the ennemy is VERY fun, but i feel it should be more rare. What do you think?

The 3 times I've done this it was via the belt extended at the front presumably hitting the ammo storage. Don't know if that's something having a citadel installed would have presented, or if they otherwise changed the damage model, but I have seen it, too.

One was when you face a pre-dreadnought and 2 CLs. Blowing up the capital ship within about 4 minutes gave me (and the enemy I expect) quite a shock and made the mission considerably easier, lol. Another time was with 12" HE into the face of a CL.

As I said, it seems frontal hits through the belt extended can be a major weakness. All or nothing armour schemes included armoured transverse bulkheads at bow and stern for exactly that purpose.

Mind you, the improvement in AP ammo is obvious and generally 'feels' better.

I didn't have the game before the patch, but I had been watching quite a few YT vids on it. Using AP and heavy shells generally makes AP pretty dangerous. If I am going to turn and expose broadside while doing so, I tend to time it immediately after the biggest enemy guns have fired at me. Your angle to them can mean all the difference between a "boing" noise or a loud "boom".

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really the issue is that the large guns in game are too good at tracking up close where secondaries should shine. And secondaries are way too hilariously inaccurate. Like I had a fleet of 10 DDs with 7x4" guns each and they were achieving a hit rate of about one in 1140 shots against a torpedo boat at 2 km in that destroyers vs torpedo boats mission. Like my torpedoes achieved a hit rate of one in 7.5 against the same torpedo boats. Something is entirely wonky with this, and yes I was checking on the torpedo boats logs.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I¨ve tried two different sizes of casemat guns in the new mission Super Dreadnought or Battlecruiser. With all 8in casemat guns they make short work of any small vessel that dares come too close. The main guns keep shooting at the big ships, while the casemat guns switch to nearby threats as needed. This worked remarkably well, in my opinion.

For my second try I switched to all 7in casemat guns, but these were less effective. Despite the higher rate of fire they seemed to hit less often, and didn't necessarily blow the LC or DD out of the water when they did hit.

Going to make another run, this time with all 6in secondary armamants!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 6in were adequate but nothing more. I added two turrets on deck with twin 6in barrels and they did score hits, but never enough to actually sink a LC. The two destroyers that were tagging along for the ride did a better job in that they actually mananged to torpedo one! lol

Now for a run with 5in as suggested!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The AP penetration fix has some what mixed results.
Both me and the opposing BB managed to spend all ammo and we were both left with 25 to 20% integrity.
The guns we used were 15" guns and the armor belts were 20.1" (my ship) and opponents 23". (TNT blasters)
At long range the battle was pretty much shatter party. Funel and super structure dmg. Close range were the guns said they could go thru 25".... that did not happen even when in full broadside. Not to mention that you can no longer 5x the time in a slug fest is not so fun. After 1 and half hours later we both had no ammo left (almost fell a sleep while waiting) and we were circling each other. Guns failed to pen HE did nothing, shatters, bounces, damaging same spot over and over again with minimal results.... I don't know about the shell balance here. It feels bit wonky.

Gun reload modules and current fire speeds are good +1 for that.
Please return the 5x time when in close combat. I don't really want to wait ages for a slug fest to end and i will accept any scrutiny for my wish :)
AP pen and HE pen is bit wonky and does not really support historical gun set ups.
8" CA 14" to 15" BBs and other historical gun sets are obsolete when there are bigger guns available in naval academy. To be fair i don't see it necessary nor mandatory to equip 18" guns on BC just in case the other ships armor belt is 23" and you need HE that ignores armor (AP too :D).

The CA rant is for the mission convoy escort. I tried to build Prinze Eugen (close enough) to escort the convoy and boy... 8" guns are now pointless. Pens in close range is massively suicidal against BC with 16" guns.... (remember the BC with 18" guns just in case you need to pen ships??) Not sure is this intentional but in order to have some what of fair fight when going against tougher tonnage is to have biggest guns you can find and fit.
In this patch the meta is guns.... Bring out as many guns and preferred the biggest guns you can fit with extra ammo capacity. Perhaps mission scaling is the issue here but man this ain't good at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5in guns are clearly not worth putting on a battleship. They don't hit much and when they do the results are small, even on a DD. The only thing that sank anything on this run was hits from my main guns. I think we can say that 5in and smaller are for shooting at aircraft! (Of which there are none in this game!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do agree  with Absolute0CA.
Historical values on guns would be lovely how ever i would like to extend that to also fit ship classifications.
No more CLs with 9" guns. Ship with 20.3cm guns were considered CAs for it's gun caliber.
No more BCs with 16" guns. Other thing i find slightly disturbing is that some BCs have more armor than BBs and greater speed along side with big guns and loads of big guns.....
I thought BCs were high speed lightly armored semi big gun platforms and not BB replacements.
These are some things i have been noticing when playing the naval academy. AI ships are quite random and not really following the proper parameters of said class they try to be.
Honestly the best BC i have seen is the 18" one :D I wondered how the kek it penned my 20" belt armors like hot knife thru butter :P. Surprising? yes but man that was just silly <_<

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Illya von Einzbern said:

No more BCs with 16" guns. Other thing i find slightly disturbing is that some BCs have more armor than BBs and greater speed along side with big guns and loads of big guns.....
I thought BCs were high speed lightly armored semi big gun platforms and not BB replacements.

It's OK because BC+BB= Fast battleship. That mean what difference between BB and BC  in  UA:D for the most part is relative.  You can construct  as slow, heavily armored battlecruisers but also fast, weakly protected battleships.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, ThatZenoGuy said:

A problem why secondaries are 'weak' is because somehow the areas of a battleship which historically were barely armored (bows, sterns, superstruction, areas of the hull which isn't the main belt), are indeed comically armored to the point of resisting 8 inch shellfire.

 

Nah its not the armour fam. But the fact the gunners are one drugs and can't hit the earth even if it was in front of them lol. Thats what makes secondaries useless, and big gunz seem to aimbot the smoll ships a bit too much (at close-medium ranges secondaries should start to deal very consistent damage if not outright shread the little sods).

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Illya von Einzbern said:

I do agree  with Absolute0CA.
Historical values on guns would be lovely how ever i would like to extend that to also fit ship classifications.
No more CLs with 9" guns. Ship with 20.3cm guns were considered CAs for it's gun caliber.
No more BCs with 16" guns. Other thing i find slightly disturbing is that some BCs have more armor than BBs and greater speed along side with big guns and loads of big guns.....
I thought BCs were high speed lightly armored semi big gun platforms and not BB replacements.
These are some things i have been noticing when playing the naval academy. AI ships are quite random and not really following the proper parameters of said class they try to be.
Honestly the best BC i have seen is the 18" one :D I wondered how the kek it penned my 20" belt armors like hot knife thru butter :P. Surprising? yes but man that was just silly <_<

Well CLs in the game are more appropriate to call them protected cruisers than light cruisers and historically there had been a few ships armed up to 10 inches as was the case with the Naniwa-class.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Cptbarney said:

Nah its not the armour fam. But the fact the gunners are one drugs and can't hit the earth even if it was in front of them lol. Thats what makes secondaries useless, and big gunz seem to aimbot the smoll ships a bit too much (at close-medium ranges secondaries should start to deal very consistent damage if not outright shread the little sods).

Even when you hit, they do absolutely nothing.

8 inch guns could not penetrate a BB belt, but make no mistake a hefty pounding of 8 inch guns would make a BB all but a sitting target.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Illya von Einzbern said:

I do agree  with Absolute0CA.
Historical values on guns would be lovely how ever i would like to extend that to also fit ship classifications.
No more CLs with 9" guns. Ship with 20.3cm guns were considered CAs for it's gun caliber.
No more BCs with 16" guns. Other thing i find slightly disturbing is that some BCs have more armor than BBs and greater speed along side with big guns and loads of big guns.....
I thought BCs were high speed lightly armored semi big gun platforms and not BB replacements.
These are some things i have been noticing when playing the naval academy. AI ships are quite random and not really following the proper parameters of said class they try to be.
Honestly the best BC i have seen is the 18" one :D I wondered how the kek it penned my 20" belt armors like hot knife thru butter :P. Surprising? yes but man that was just silly <_<

The whole CL/CA classification based upon their gun size first came about with the naval treaties, before that their classification was based upon how much and how well they was armoured not gun size so the game is both right and wrong, depending upon when it takes place as we roughtly cover 1900-1945 and the reclassification came about midway 1922.

BCs depending upon which year and which navy, some was actually better armoured and/or armed than their BB counterparts, doing WW1and just after the British designed BCs (not build) to field 18" guns and better armoured than BBs at the time, again the naval treaties put an end to those or we would have seen more 18"-20" armed monster upon oceans. And with the whole fast battleship concept, it did just about the same as what Dreadnought did to the classification system but by then CVs had proven themselves.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, RHDK said:

The whole CL/CA classification based upon their gun size first came about with the naval treaties, before that their classification was based upon how much and how well they was armoured not gun size so the game is both right and wrong, depending upon when it takes place as we roughtly cover 1900-1945 and the reclassification came about midway 1922.

BCs depending upon which year and which navy, some was actually better armoured and/or armed than their BB counterparts, doing WW1and just after the British designed BCs (not build) to field 18" guns and better armoured than BBs at the time, again the naval treaties put an end to those or we would have seen more 18"-20" armed monster upon oceans. And with the whole fast battleship concept, it did just about the same as what Dreadnought did to the classification system but by then CVs had proven themselves.

I don't know.
It is just silly to see BCs out classing BBs in various levels. Speed, armor, guns... what is so special in BBs then when BCs can simply match it and do better? Speed boost to give accuracy penalty to enemy ships, higher cruising speed for accuracy penalty and maintaining own accuracy boost. Armor can be equal or more than BB, guns can be equal caliber than super heavy...

I don't know. Perhaps i am just putting too much in to it.
Really dunno i might be too classicist and too dense to bend classes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Illya von Einzbern said:

I don't know.
It is just silly to see BCs out classing BBs in various levels. Speed, armor, guns... what is so special in BBs then when BCs can simply match it and do better? Speed boost to give accuracy penalty to enemy ships, higher cruising speed for accuracy penalty and maintaining own accuracy boost. Armor can be equal or more than BB, guns can be equal caliber than super heavy...

I don't know. Perhaps i am just putting too much in to it.
Really dunno i might be too classicist and too dense to bend classes.

Classes are relative to the British a BC was any Big gun capital ship over a set speed, not what it’s main armament was or how much armor it had, until the “fast battleship” classification came out it was what they used.

Ans like others have said CAs and CLs that we have seen are early era ones that are actually Armored Cruisers and Protected cruises not what we know from the treaties as Heavy cruisers and Light Cruisers.

And as for you having issue penetrating a ship with 20+ inches of armor with a 15” gun with 25” of penetration there’s a thing you’re forgetting. That penetration number in game is what it does against Iron Plate, NOT any of the more advanced armor. For example 20” of KC IV is actually 40” of Iron Plate with that 100% modifier. Should close range and switch to HE and burn them out rather than try to penetrate them in that case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...