Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

>>>Alpha-10 Feedback<<<


Recommended Posts

German H-Class BBs aft superstructure should have a slot for a second funnel... i'm pretty sure it's the only nation with which you can't have more than one funnel on superstructures. Splitting it in half and putting one in the middle "works", but that just put main guns in the extended hull sections. Plus, it makes the vessel so ugly it's almost a warcrime.

Edited by swordmania
  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 136
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Hello Admirals, First of all, we wish you a great time with your family and friends during these festive days. Today we are happy to announce our new update which offers crucial improvements on b

The cloaking device mechanic frankly shouldn't belong in a game of this complexity. It feels pretty arcadey, and as said above, it unbalances the rest of the torpedo mechanic. If it's to be include

Please remove this information.  Wargames require fog of war.

Posted Images

People, don't agree for half-measures. Please.
There should not be "superstructures with more funnel slots" or "with built in barbettes".
There should be barbettes and funnels in whatever positions we need them, and then superstructures filling in whatever space they can fit around that, encompassing those primary components.

 

16 hours ago, Nismodriver said:

I'm new to the forum but im not exactly a battleship nerd so if the game doesn't have tooltip pros , cons to the different parts of the ship, I'll be at a loss, very interested in the game. Like for example this ammo propellant is prone to flash fire but is more likely to pen, etc.

It all is there in numbers, just compare one to another.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Neverkbowsbest said:

I'm interested in knowing if secondary firing solutions are being considered. If you target secondary guns on an enemy on the port side then none of your starboard guns fire on any targets. It would be nice to see main/secondary and port/starboard target designations. I know this would be a nightmare to display all the accuracy info but would be way more realistic in regards to how real fire control would operate on a ship. Real warships would never limit themselves to only one primary and secondary target.

This has been requested from day 1 when Alpha 1 started: the ability to fire both at port and starboard hostiles at the same time. At least we have independent fire for the main and secondary guns now, but I fully agree that we should be able to make use of both sides if sandwiched by enemies. I can understand it may be somewhat difficult to implement, especially for guns in the middle/centre.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a noob basically to the level of detail this game has and let me clarify i hope this game explains how to do well if they don't know about pitch or offset or roll i think it was. I am all too familiar with world of warships but that game is a bit oversimplified and "arcady" than sim

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if this has been mentioned yet but since the last update I cannot place the biggest funnel on the japanese super battleships as the hard points on the hull have now vanished and am forced to use the aft structure as it is the only way to place a funnel now. Hope this gets fixed.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

PLEASE, guys, give us the custom battle expansion. I knowww that you guys are working on the campaign but my god, I cannot test my ship build because the enemy ship is bloody random, like WILDLY random. I want to build a BC that is a bit on the lighter side but still good at killing most cruisers and dd, the AI builds the heaviest cruiser there is in the Pacific. I want to test my superbattleship with 8 20'' guns, the enemy BBs are helpless against it. We have asked for expansion of custom battles since the beginning of development, and that's nearly a year now, and it is barely mentioned anywhere. And that is one of the biggest replay value that I, and most people in this forum, look forward to. Let us build all the ships!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, after some more attempts, i can tell confidently: sailing AI is broken. As in, bugged and doesn't work as it supposed to most of the time.
Ships constantly forgetting/ignoring orders, falling out of formation, getting stuck sailing in straight line regardless of their orders, stopping or nearly stopping and then spinning on spot with insane turn rate, sometimes seemingly doing exact opposite of what they are supposed to (ship was ordered to slightly turn left, instead they turn right and do full circle. Or ship is told to follow, it turns its stern to leader and sails away)


Interestingly, AI controlled forces  (both enemy and own ships put under AI)seem to have less problems like this, though i usually have some of their ships out of contact and they might do the same wherever they are at this time.

Edited by Cpt.Hissy
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I played yesterday, and also today. I encounterd the same gun firing bugs almost every single time. As I sad earlier, I was always full broadside and there were no obstructions near the turrets. So 1 full salvo, than only the first two turrets fired, than again full salvo, and than again only the first two turrets fired. This is very annoying. And in the campaign I don t want this bug. Why? Because every single shell is important in a battle. And waiting 50 sec for a reload and only few turrets firing is not allowed in a battle. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

If I was being charitable I would say it is a representation of sometimes having some guns not firing in a salvo. I think for late WWII BBs the average ran around 70%-90% of every salvo was a full salvo.

I may be wrong though

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to be some kind of bug.
Also when they loose "locked" state they start aiming shots again, which are not full salvoes and generally lower firerate in current implementation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1940 US Battlecruiser towers won't take dual 5 inch mounts on the square mounting points.  This is historically wrong.  All US hulls cruiser and above should mount 5 inch, dual turrets on their superstructure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the ship builder for the US you don't unlock the All or Nothing armor scheme early enough.  USS Nevada was designed with this in 1911, laid down in 1912 and launched in 1914.  I have to get to 1920 to get access to this.

By my figuring this particular tech should unlock in either 1915/16 if "date" means date of commission or 1912 if it means date it started building.  It should be available to other powers starting in 1918-22 or somewhere in there. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

There should be an accuracy penalty for having guns of multiple similar calibers firing from the same ship at once.  It was a big reason the all big gun ships were more effective.

I would suggest a simple 25% accuracy penalty if you have more than one type of gun firing on a target that is not at least 50% smaller than the main gun.  So you can use 12 and 6 inch together efficiently but not 12 inch and 9 inch without penalty.

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

There should be an accuracy penalty for having guns of multiple similar calibers firing from the same ship at once.  It was a big reason the all big gun ships were more effective.

I would suggest a simple 25% accuracy penalty if you have more than one type of gun firing on a target that is not at least 50% smaller than the main gun.  So you can use 12 and 6 inch together efficiently but not 12 inch and 9 inch without penalty.

Relatedly, it would be great if ships with wing and centreline turrets of the same calibre should have those counted as one battery for the sake of accuracy. A game called 'Dreadnoughts' should aim to accurately represent HMS Dreadnought.

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

Screen distribution for engaged battlelines was very different to cruising screens, you generally didn't put your screening units between the big guns intentionally. The circular formations were anti-submarine, and later, anti-aircraft formations.

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Durham Dave said:

Screen distribution for engaged battlelines was very different to cruising screens, you generally didn't put your screening units between the big guns intentionally. The circular formations were anti-submarine, and later, anti-aircraft formations.

Yup.  Ideally you would have a command that would let you form a cruiser line ahead or aft and so many hundred or thousand yards closer or further to/from the enemy than your battleships and they would conform to the movement of the battle line when it changes course.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are some logic issues or the model is more advanced than I thought.  Not sure.

AI ships have stopped firing at me when their shell supply is low.  I suspect shells aren't tracked to turrets and all the turrets train.  I don't think any were destroyed.  I get that they are in the yellow level for shells and are saving them in a more conservative mode.  But logically in a situation where its 3 battleships on two and mine are faster they aren't going to get to dictate the range.  Sitting there not shooting while being torn to bits seems silly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tried the mission "German wrath at the North sea" mission a few times and whilst I like the idea, there's atleast one thing that would seriously help. A fleet manager similar to battlestations pacific because organising my fleet into something useful results in it going all over the place, which gets much worse once ships get damaged as it becomes impossible to maintain any form of cohesion. Which leads to more damage and loses being caused by torpedoes as I just lose control of most of the fleet.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/4/2021 at 4:25 AM, Neverkbowsbest said:

I know this would be a nightmare to display all the accuracy info but would be way more realistic in regards to how real fire control would operate on a ship. Real warships would never limit themselves to only one primary and secondary target.

A target for main guns, another target for secondary guns being assigned is essential.

My first naval warfare game "Taskforce 1942" (Microprose, 1992, came on five 3,5 diskettes...) had that already.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cetric de Cornusiac said:

A target for main guns, another target for secondary guns being assigned is essential.

My first naval warfare game "Taskforce 1942" (Microprose, 1992, came on five 3,5 diskettes...) had that already.

You can already target separate ships between main and secondaries, they want to be able to designate more than 1 target for each, which historically rarely happened (i.e. 1 ship fighting multiple ships from different directions).

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

×
×
  • Create New...