>>>Alpha-12 Feedback (v86 3/6/2021)<<<

[Cptbarney]

ahhhh. foinally.

"Guys, we are sorry for the silence, but we are currently very busy for providing the first campaign version for you. Regarding the question, it is a sure thing we are not going to provide any plane mechanics for the 3D battles. New hulls are constantly being added and the armor zone system is getting reworked, lots of things are going to be improved in the process, but we shall only announce them once they are ready."

From steam.

[Nick Thomadis]

Guys, we are sorry for the silence. The campaign is in works, and it is the primary thing we do now. The game is certainly not dead. The version you play is stable so what remains as top priority for us is to provide for you the upcoming Core patch which will include the first campaign version and many other features you requested. When we finish what we consider essential, then we will provide all the necessary info and, of course, we will make the patch available.

[brothermunro]

Thanks for the update - I’m dead keen to see Core Patch 1, but I also completely understand (and admire) you only releasing it ‘when it’s ready’ 👍🏻

[Werwaz]

5 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:

Guys, we are sorry for the silence. The campaign is in works, and it is the primary thing we do now. The game is certainly not dead. The version you play is stable so what remains as top priority for us is to provide for you the upcoming Core patch which will include the first campaign version and many other features you requested. When we finish what we consider essential, then we will provide all the necessary info and, of course, we will make the patch available.

Most interesting. Good to know that the game is still being worked on, would be nice if we got an option in the launcher to get some less stable prototype versions. Any approximate date when this patch will be released?

Here's some of my ideas for potential additions in the future:

• unique towers for Russian battleships
• 70-95k ton "Super Dreadnought" hull for USA based on Tillman's designs
• Hearts of Iron 4 style focus trees(different research programs, change government types, trigger wars, etc.)
• more dreadnought 2, 3, and 4 hulls (they look the same for every single nation)
• USS Montana rear tower
• Different government types that give different buffs i.e. Imperial (gives BB and CA buffs, better officers), Democratic (gives BC and CL buffs, buffs sailor morale, less time for ship construction), Communist (gives DD and TB buffs, less cost for ship construction) as well as new flags and naval jacks for each
• Civil wars when you change government types sometimes (20-40% chance)
• Custom OST (needs more epic battle music)

Edited July 15, 2021 by werwaz

[Cptbarney]

Also, a better skybox, weather effects better sounds for guns like a proper doppler effect maybe more intensive model destruction and more model death animations, also animations for rangefinders to turn with the guns as well.

Night battles so we can also place search lights in important locations, armour viewer, internal component placement as well.

[SodaBit]

I'm really hoping we get a "Save Design" function with the campaign, or at least a few historical presets to use in the campaign for both sides. It's going to be a massive pain in the a** to rebuild a solid design for every mission.

[CapnAvont1015]

One thing I would like to see is a rework of German superstructures with the barbettes. I really don't seeing the turrets hanging over the barbette. Perhaps what they can do it make it that if you put a barbette close enough to the superstructure then it connect them together. Also sorry for being gone for so long. The shadow realm called college is not fun.

[Danvanthevacuumman]

3 hours ago, Cptbarney said:

Also, a better skybox, weather effects better sounds for guns like a proper doppler effect maybe more intensive model destruction and more model death animations, also animations for rangefinders to turn with the guns as well.

Night battles so we can also place search lights in important locations, armour viewer, internal component placement as well.

Good boy

[Admiral Lütjens]

5 hours ago, Cptbarney said:

Also, a better skybox, weather effects better sounds for guns like a proper doppler effect maybe more intensive model destruction and more model death animations, also animations for rangefinders to turn with the guns as well.

Night battles so we can also place search lights in important locations, armour viewer, internal component placement as well.

yes, I want these too + rudders and propellers..., we are thinking the same thing  

Edited July 15, 2021 by Admiral Lütjens

[Steeltrap]

 

On 7/11/2021 at 9:50 PM, SonicB said:

I get your point and it's a valid one, but think I'm going to have to disagree here. Plenty of strategy and RPG games are guilty of this; a game should create replay value because its mechanics are complex, not because they are poorly explained.

It's a fine distinction, but if you will, it's between 'I didn't know that was possible' and 'I didn't know that possibility had tactical value in this context.'

Out of interest, what did you discover recently?

Gary Grigsby's "War in the East" is the poster child for this IMO. Remarkably complex, in-depth game, utterly execrable manual. Had quite a discussion about this in the Steam forum for WitE1 but the people involved just didn't understand/want to hear why the manual was borderline unfit for purpose despite the examples I was able to give them of how it would be relatively simple to change things to a much more effective approach.

They didn't learn a thing for WitE2, either, simply starting with whole slabs of the manual of WitE1 and altering it.

A shame.

 

On 7/12/2021 at 5:06 AM, Skeksis said:

Roll penalty from side placements. While I don’t exactly know what the penalty is, I know my accuracies are higher the lower I can keep it. It was a discovery (years later!).

It's also an interesting illustration of the differences in how players approach games. I'm one of the very small minority who reads/studies/soaks up as much as I can from documentation etc etc before playing a game. Thus I knew about the roll penalty before designing my first ship lol. It's also why my friends for decades have handed me rule sets well before we play anything (such as D&D 5th ed, all of us being vets of 2nd ed) so they don't have to read them lol.

I gave some feedback about how info is presented in the build screen but unsurprisingly I imagine that's been lost to the ether as it's hardly a priority. Engine efficiency being hidden at more or less the very bottom of the scrollable panel on the right of screen is an issue, same with smoke firing penalty etc. I suspect many people who complain about poor accuracy have both utterly unrealistic expectations of accuracy (games like WoWS don't exactly help, nor do quite a few voices on this forum at times) but also may have loaded all sorts of penalties on their designs without even realising it.

Cheers

[DougToss]

I haven't been on the forums in a year because, as any of the old hands have seen, nothing has changed about the development process. If anything, things have gotten worse as in addition to Anime Ship Waifus and the arcade crowd we now have open Third Reich apologists on the boards. Disgusting. 

I had hoped to find several other military and naval aficionados here, and indeed I have. The reading list I have picked up from discussing warships with some of you has greatly increased my understanding of naval warfare and architecture. Which makes it even more frustrating that - despite an engaged community of SMEs - their suggestions are not only ignored, but there is total radio silence from the devs. It's one thing to say "Oh you know we used a different source for our firing tables" or "We thought maybe this ballistic formula would work best, since it can be used for small and large calibre shells" it's another to not only ignore suggestions but to provide no information on how the system as implemented is supposed to work. 

Mechanically, not only are we about as far off from a detailed naval sim as we were over a year ago, we are equally far from a playable game. To say this is disappointing would be an understatement. Others have said it better than I, but this would be the time to engage with the community. If the Devs are banging their heads against a wall trying to get a mechanic to work, this is the chance to discuss what they are trying to do and how they are trying to do it, so that they can get feedback that may either help them resolve the issue, or go in another direction. Community feedback could have prevented the flash fire debacle - we have enough people here who can write dissertations on what happened to the Battlecruisers at Jutland and how that might be made into a workable game mechanic. 

I have held my tongue, while skimming the boards, and I apologize to those of you who I had correspondence with, or appreciated my writing about naval affairs. As a defence professional, Covid and remote working posed challenges, but for the most part it comes down to the same problems as above: 

If I am going to read a dozen books about naval gunnery, think about game mechanics, read game design documents, engineering manuals, my own professional sources and write 1000 words about it on the forums, I am happy to do it as a labour of love. 

For that to be met with total silence or shouted down by anime avatars, in my mind, means that that level of participation is not really worth it, from my end. As I said, it's unfortunate, but not unusual. It's happened to another large project that had excited interest from experts, professionals and hobbyists.  

I should also mention that in the time we have heard absolutely nothing about this game, Rule The Waves 2 has announced an expansion and provided regular, detailed notes and the devs are actively engaging with the community every step of the way.  

All that being said, I may as well provide the books I've enjoyed over the past year for those so inclined. Should conversation on the boards get better, we'll have something to talk about, and should the devs care to listen, our feedback can be informed by the sources. If nothing else sitting down and reading these books will be more enjoyable than waiting for core mechanics to be fixed.

The Rules of the Game: Jutland and British Naval Command, The Sinking of the Prince of Wales & Repulse: The End of the Battleship Era, Jutland: The Naval Staff Appreciation, Jutland 1916, The Jutland Scandal: The Truth About the First World War's Greatest Sea Battles, Fleet Tactics and Naval Operations, Royal Navy Strategy in the Far East, 1919-1939 Preparing for War against Japan, Austro-Hungarian Naval Policy, 1904-1914, Shattered Sword: The Untold Story of the Battle of Midway, Naval Firepower: Battleship Guns and Gunnery in the Dreadnought Era, Nelson to Vanguard

[BuckleUpBones]

1 hour ago, DougToss said:

I haven't been on the forums in a year

Didn’t notice.

1 hour ago, DougToss said:

but there is total radio silence from the devs

Best way to keep commercially sensitive information under wraps, wasn’t that a war thingy too!

1 hour ago, DougToss said:

Community feedback could have prevented the flash fire 

I'm sure its introduction was a surprise, nice visuals though. 

1 hour ago, DougToss said:

I have held my tongue

 Should have held it for just a little bit longer.

1 hour ago, DougToss said:

Rule The Waves 2 has announced an expansion and provided regular, detailed notes and the devs are actively engaging with the community every step of the way.  

That's logical, they're trying to make as many sales as possible before UAD campaign drops, because it’s going to be the end for them.

This is a very sad swan song, saddest so far. 😢  

Edited July 18, 2021 by BuckleUpBones

[DerRichtigeArzt]

On 7/15/2021 at 7:11 PM, SodaBit said:

I'm really hoping we get a "Save Design" function with the campaign, or at least a few historical presets to use in the campaign for both sides. It's going to be a massive pain in the a** to rebuild a solid design for every mission.

From what I understand campaign is going to work more like it does in rule the waves. No "missions" you just build a fleet and it roams the sea. 

[DougToss]

1 hour ago, BuckleUpBones said:

Best way to keep commercially sensitive information under wraps, wasn’t that a war thingy too!

Those of us who have been around and contributed are party to an NDA and the testing forum. You know, to provide feedback. 

Stay in your lane. 

1 hour ago, BuckleUpBones said:

All-in-all I doubt 'screen formations' would actually be worth it to the serious gamer, maybe suited for the lazy admiral.

This understanding of naval warfare and history is why I'm comfortable shrugging off your little tirade, by the way. 

Edited July 18, 2021 by DougToss

[BuckleUpBones]

24 minutes ago, DougToss said:

Stay in your lane.

At least I’m driving the right way.

24 minutes ago, DougToss said:

1 hour ago, BuckleUpBones said:

All-in-all I doubt 'screen formations' would actually be worth it to the serious gamer, maybe suited for the lazy admiral.

This understanding of naval warfare and history is why I'm comfortable shrugging off your little tirade, by the way. 

Oh so you don’t play the game either, because if you did you would know that formations are useless as an effective gameplay option.

 

PS, oh wait, you pull a post from alpha 9?, well it has been a year. 🤣

Edited July 18, 2021 by BuckleUpBones

[DougToss]

Which is why the mechanic needs to be fixed 😴

(It's on the roadmap for 2021)

[Masonator]

Imagine being interested enough in naval history to be posting on the Ultimate Admiral discussion boards, just to not know what a fleet screen is.

[Skeksis]

...

Edited November 9, 2021 by Skeksis

[Cptbarney]

5 hours ago, Skeksis said:

Nick commented that the campaign was been programmed recently (possibly something else than other the sneak peek in alpha 1), this was after improved pathfinding (for the world map) was been programmed earlier, it could mean we’re going get something alittle different.   

I would say at least a very advance version of what we’re expecting, but what we’re expecting, RTW2 clone, isn’t a sure thing anymore. I don’t know, U-turns aren’t unusual so maybe there’s something new coming our way. 

Well the only thing we can do is wait for CAP-1 to drop. The only problem is we don't know how close to the devs are too finishing it.

I suspect CAP-1 and 2 will make or break this game really, so they are probs aware of this and trying to go ham on this massive update, squeezing as much as they can.

makes me wonder how many builds they have done since alpha 12.

[Scorpion]

On 7/15/2021 at 12:12 PM, Nick Thomadis said:

Guys, we are sorry for the silence. The campaign is in works, and it is the primary thing we do now. The game is certainly not dead. The version you play is stable so what remains as top priority for us is to provide for you the upcoming Core patch which will include the first campaign version and many other features you requested. When we finish what we consider essential, then we will provide all the necessary info and, of course, we will make the patch available.

Guys, you gotta give us a proof of life once in a while. It doesn't have to be much, just a "hey, look at this cool texture!" or "look at this bug we squashed!" or even a "hey, look at this menu!". But you've got to drop us some little breadcrumbs once in a while that we can follow. Just something to show you're alive.

Because otherwise you'll have people saying "the game is dead!" after a few weeks of radio silence. I know I felt anxious when I heard nothing from the devs for weeks after I just bit the bullet and bought the game at last. I knew it was a risk buying in at such an early phase, but it still didn't feel good.

[Yumorahimovic]

Is it possible to have the option to remove the displacement limit to the destroyer leader/some of the heavy cruiser hull? Currently some destroyer leader displacement can go upto 4000+ tons but the game limits it to 3500t. Historically some destroyer leader such as the French Mogador has a full load of 4000t. 

[Cptbarney]

*Summons in-human patience, calm and will while waiting for news of big update*

[CapnAvont1015]

With us getting closer to the first core update I just realized we never touched on submar- I mean U-boats. We never really talked about how U-boats are going to work and affect the players fleet. Like are they a going to be bane of transport fleets? Are Destroyers and Cruisers going to destroy the class? How will Battleships and Battlecruisers defend themselves from U-boats? How will they're underwater mechanics work? So many things revolve around this class and yet we haven't talked about it. So do you guys U-boats are going to work and what mechanics you guys want to see?

[DougToss]

I figured like RTW it would be a dice roll that has modifiers applied to it as technology progresses for the sub and escorts, with bonus and penalties as each advances. I would guess that the pool of dice would be subs present in a zone, again with modifiers applied for range, speed, detection etc.

[CapnAvont1015]

3 hours ago, DougToss said:

I figured like RTW it would be a dice roll that has modifiers applied to it as technology progresses for the sub and escorts, with bonus and penalties as each advances. I would guess that the pool of dice would be subs present in a zone, again with modifiers applied for range, speed, detection etc.

I thought of that as well but wondered if it would work with this type of game.