Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Ultimate Admiral: Dreadnoughts - Steam Release Plan Update


Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, Bluishdoor76 said:

Same here, ik I've been quite inactive for some time but I thought I was special T_T

loies, i pinged you! 'w'

Im hoping, they make some changes to the armour model and gunnery system, as those need changing. Im assuming they will unvail this when the campaign is released however.

I hope anyways lol. Stema release will be interesting when they arrive.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 151
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Admirals, We would like to share with you the plans on the Steam release for UA: Dreadnoughts. Game launch The game will launch in Steam Early Access after Steam Summer Sale. Valve does not re

Well considering the fact it's our job to provide feedback, i dont see how thats crying about it. Especially when most of that feedback has been massively in-depth as well. And no it won't be thr

I do... Designing ships is fun, but its the campaign that actually puts meaning to that... You can't just retry that battle with different design, you are stuck with what you thought will work 3 years

8 minutes ago, IronKaputt said:

Join the club. Only 18" and no quads makes Kaputt a dull boy 👿

No california, brooklyn and alaska hulls too...no 20inch gunz as well ;w; or quad secondaries.

i hope they add moar, but i have no clue how frequently the updates will be.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Cptbarney said:

No california, brooklyn and alaska hulls too...no 20inch gunz as well ;w; or quad secondaries.

i hope they add moar, but i have no clue how frequently the updates will be.

Why not octuple instead?

?imw=637&imh=358&ima=fit&impolicy=Letter

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, HusariuS said:

Why not octuple instead?

?imw=637&imh=358&ima=fit&impolicy=Letter

Yes pls, octuple 20inch guns for barneh. That would be hilarious doe, i think this game should try to cater to the more hardcore realism crowd, but also have stuff for those who want to mess around or make less serious scenarios and ships.

I can make a Super Georgia 3 den. Imagine octuple secondaries lol.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Cptbarney said:

No california, brooklyn and alaska hulls too...no 20inch gunz as well ;w; or quad secondaries.

Not many hulls with superimposed secondaries option (or am I missing something?)

Vertical quads for 6" and less secondaries. With proper autoloader.

45 minutes ago, Cptbarney said:

Yes pls, octuple 20inch guns for barneh.

"Dig your own channel" bombardment mission 😎

Modders be crazy 🤣

1540247937186681709.jpg

Edited by IronKaputt
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/20/2020 at 4:36 AM, Nick Thomadis said:

Just for info, technologies will not be researched linearly. They can fail, delay or may speed up according to global tech conditions. Funds can speed up technology research but will not guarantee a specific time on when new technology will become available.

Does this mean players will never have a tech advantage over the enemy?

Just realized, this is the way academy missions is setup, “Decreased technology gap between AI and player ships”, quoted from mission hotfixes.

Is this “gap” a campaign ‘difficulty’ level that can be set by the players? or is it set/fixed by you guys? 

Edited by Skeksis
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm honestly ok with campaign being delayed by half a year, but it being a sole focus without paying attention to core mechanics is a problem... There are still some easy enough re-balancing that can be done (around armor and bulkheads weight for example) and some more considerable issues with damage models.

Again, not saying they need to be fixed straight away, but some plan for that would be good... Did devs ever acknowledge there is a problem there?

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Skeksis said:

The very thing that could 'alleviate' campaign delay is custom battles saves. Somehow saves can't be done without the campaign? 

And just maybe, releasing academy missions on steam is actually a fundraiser.

One thing is for sure with the release, is that they will get a 'fresh' round of feedback, could be what Dev's are looking for!!!

I can't believe that we need to wait other 5-6 months for custom battles saves, this is ridiculous.

How come we can't have custom battles saves until the Campaign is released ? 

Edited by Donluca95
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Cptbarney said:

The armour hitbox model won't be hard to remodel at all, they just split it into further sections and then code those new sections to have certain limits with armour and also code and model any interior plates liek citadels, spaced armour, inner belts etc.

 

19 hours ago, Cptbarney said:

We need an armour viewer so that we can select parts of the hull and either add armour strips to the model and/or make precise changes to certain specific sections of the model.

You basically repeated my point about the rework, but consider it a trivial addition. I don't think that'll be possible without a complete rework because I have a nagging suspicion that the physical model of the armor is baked in and cannot be changed. Someone more educated in Unity might come by and did through the files, but I doubt that'll happen until after the Steam release.

19 hours ago, Cptbarney said:

designers don't touch any code whatsoever and programmer don't touch any artsy software whatsoever (unless their coding it of course)

We seem to have different definitions of what a designer is. I think you are assuming that they're just artists, or that changes to game mechanics only require a programmer. The role of a game designer is a really nebulous thing that differs from dev team to dev team, but usually they're the ones dealing with how to design the game on a high-level concept, meaning mechanics, missions, campaign structure, balance, etc.

 

In any case, we will have to agree to disagree. The devs decided to focus on the campaign for now. Once they decide to get around to fixing the ship designer and combat system, we'll figure (or not), we'll find out how difficult it'll be.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Oof 5-6 months for first version of the campaign and only 2 nations at that. That's not nice to see. I thought you guys were working on it and wanted to release the steam version with the campaign?

I'm getting Naval Action flash backs here. The update progress on that game pretty much stalled. Can I expect the same here? Either rate guess I'll shelf U:A for a year.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately it has been obvious that a campaign was unlikely in 2020 since before the pandemic IMO.  There was just too much not done and not being done in terms of features that they could introduce as stepping stones that they could direct campaign code to or copy/paste into the campaign code.

Being able to design more than one ship for custom battle is one.

Scripting the Naval Academy missions so you always play as the same nation, face the same nation(obviously changes with the scenario), the same opposing ships in the same configurations(ai autobuild can be for custom scenarios and again designs can change depending on the scenario), and the range setting of your design could let you have some choice on if you started closer in or farther away as favors the build you go with but time to complete the mission increases/decreases with how you set the bar(less range=less time and more range=more time) would be another small stepping stone because you'd need to do this for the campaign too to ensure you always fight the same nation and the SMS Scharnhorst doesn't suddenly become the HMS Nelson going from one fight to the next.

Custom Battle design save does confuse me as to why we don't already have it or will not be getting it soon.  We already have this for Naval Academy so I'm honestly not sure why the code cannot be used again for Custom Scenarios either by calling the same code or worst case scenario copy/paste but build a new call function around it.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, monbvol said:

Custom Battle design save does confuse me as to why we don't already have it or will not be getting it soon.  We already have this for Naval Academy so I'm honestly not sure why the code cannot be used again for Custom Scenarios either by calling the same code or worst case scenario copy/paste but build a new call function around it.

This is my same question. I really hope some of the devs will clearify this as soon as possible. Because as i said before it seem ridiculous.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Donluca95 said:

This is my same question. I really hope some of the devs will clearify this as soon as possible. Because as i said before it seem ridiculous.

ye, i also noticed that when you press unlock for ship hulls for nations that are missing bigger hulls or certain hulls you can basically build a british yammy or italian montana, but it becomes clear that theres a lack of unique items allowing each nation to make their distinct ship in-general.

im curious why they can't if they are doing it on unity solely and using c# it shouldn't be a problem i think.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I couldn't be more disappointed. We expected the campaign with Alpha 7. Instead, Alpha 7 gave us.. nothing. So we assumed it would be the next patch.

I'm a teacher; summer is gaming time. With this new timeline, I expect to not be playing this game, or checking this forum, again for a year. If ever.

😥

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Gunnery, Protection and Mobility are not anywhere near done. I cannot believe people are saying that values "simply" need to be tweaked, adjusted, whatever. 

They are fundamentally not working, and this has been pointed out for months here. Look at what @RAMJB @akd @Steeltrap and others have been saying for ages, backed up with hundreds of historical sources, including mathematical models for getting some of these systems right.

What is the point of a campaign where ships behave nowhere near their historical counterparts? In this game as it stands, you would be insane to not build giant 20" BBs or DDs that carry hundreds of torpedos. That's not ready for primetime, and I'm shocked that many people want to proceed with these core faults unresolved. 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

man I have been watching these comments and I'm a bit sad by some of these reactions, first off when I bought this game no where did i see it say this isnt a video game this a 100% realisitc ship simulator, and if you dont agree with our level of accuracy you can berate us to try and make the simulator you want. Second this is a video game it is never going to be 100% accurate and if i had seen that i wouldnt have paid for it, i bought it because its a game and it's supposed to be fun. And when did "feedback" turn into if you dont make the game I want then I demand you completely remake it, its sad selfish and arrogant. I may not know about historical accuracy but from being in the tech industry a long time i do know how many hours and how much hard work these guys are putting into it, and they might simply be doing the best they can with what they have. To suggest a complete redesign of their whole game is mind blowing. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, shieldy44 said:

man I have been watching these comments and I'm a bit sad by some of these reactions, first off when I bought this game no where did i see it say this isnt a video game this a 100% realisitc ship simulator, and if you dont agree with our level of accuracy you can berate us to try and make the simulator you want. Second this is a video game it is never going to be 100% accurate and if i had seen that i wouldnt have paid for it, i bought it because its a game and it's supposed to be fun. And when did "feedback" turn into if you dont make the game I want then I demand you completely remake it, its sad selfish and arrogant. I may not know about historical accuracy but from being in the tech industry a long time i do know how many hours and how much hard work these guys are putting into it, and they might simply be doing the best they can with what they have. To suggest a complete redesign of their whole game is mind blowing. 

Yeah, i get your point, although somethings do need to be changed or added on for example, we need an internal armour system (for better citadel layouts and also means its not just stuck to values anymore, meaning peeps also get a visual representation of what their ships innards look like i guess), an armour viewer like in wows, the ability to adjust armour values in more precise places (like icebreakers for example and spliting the bow and arse of the ship (lol) into maybe two or three sections or something) and also to configure armour belts with a bit moar freedom.

AP Penetration in terms of damaged bulkheads not penetrating through the top into lower compartments (unless deck armour is more complex) and causing damage further in the ship without needing to broadside her (almost always a BB), dunno about bulkheads or flooding however, im not sure how effective those systems were in real life.

I suppose crew should help with a few of those problems, but we defo need those armour and AP changes. Plus gunnery not taking a ships velocity into account more than just a ships speed (meaning ship speed + gud armour + fat guns = really hard or impossible to hit ship).

Too be honest, im not sure how well unity does with realistic calculations so if this is the best they can litterally do with physics and gunnery, then ill shut muh mouth and scream about the designer instead lol.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking here and I am quite dismayed. I mean I think 5-6 months was a reasonable amount if time given the circumstances and progress. I mean we still don't even have a foundation in which to build a skyscraper quite yet. As of right now I assume we are very close to realizing that foundation with what has been done thus far. I for one am happy we at least have a date now instead of us bothering the devs over when we will see a release or an update on progress. We now have said update on progress and instantly everyone has grabbed their pitchforks. While ive only been playing off and on as of late, i do quite look forward to what is to come at this point and am satisfied with progress thus far. I mean we all paid for a Alpha game still in heavy development with old deadlines still being the benchmark. So I for one am satisfied knowing we have the resemblance of a timeline with goals and as of right now a playable game in itself.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ThatOneBounced said:

as of right now a playable game in itself.

That's the point of contention.

Are there armour, gunnery and propulsion systems done satisfactorily? 

Quite a few would say no. These are not small things that can be hot fixed by tweaking values, these are pretty serious problems. They are not insurmountable, but I think they are absolutely worth considering. Again, that doesn't mean they can't be done, it just means that as they are now, with speeds, hit rates, and armour models far removed from any reality, there is serious work to be done under the hood to get ready for primetime. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Steam release means that UAD is moving from alpha to beta, moving from ‘game mechanics’ to ’content’ testing. They’ve settle on the status-quo (of mechanics). That’s probably means no more major changes either, like no damage model re-work, it’s not mention in Ink roadmap and what’s not mention is not going to happen (well anyway not until their next boardroom meeting).

In my experience with alpha/EA games or anything in beta branches is, what you see is what you’re going to get (but sometimes releases have cherries on top), I think everyone is going to have to get used to that, especially with a small team.

As for doubling the campaign date, Dev’s would not have made this decision on a whim, Ink wants us to be supportive as he has pre-thanked us in his last statement. 

Edited by Skeksis
Link to post
Share on other sites

But that's exactly what I mean. I don't think the mechanics are ready to be "locked-in". In fact, I think they need real work and consideration. 

I'm happy if the extra time is put to good use, but I hope that use means real work done on core mechanics. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • admin locked, unlocked, locked and unlocked this topic
  • admin unpinned this topic

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...