Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

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


Recommended Posts

20 hours ago, Tousansons said:

Let the dev hopefully finish the game and then we'll talk about "difficulty sliders".

I kinda think that if difficulty modes aren't ingrained into all the systems by now it's probably alittle too late, like it's going to take a major reprogramming effort to do it, every system would be effected e.g. auto-designer, enemy/allies AI behavior, battle generator, maybe even the campaign AI, all are pretty big systems.

Campaign resource limiting is the easy part or the easy way out but any band-aid approach upon those resources after the fact would look messy/unprofessional/unpolished. 

So on one hand I'm hoping but on the other we'll probably have to be realistic about it - if not implemented already. 
 

Edited by Skeksis
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 350
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

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

Admirals, The anticipated patch has been finalized and is ready for you to play! Explore the many new hulls, the Ship Design improvements and lots of interesting mechanics. The AI is also signifi

Please keep this thread relevant to the topic. Some of the latest irrelevant posts were deleted and Elrerune The Honorbound has been warned. It is very understandable to discuss about histor

Posted Images

The water intake mechanics need to be improved a bit, actually, it's good, but sometimes it can be illogical.For example, some more details can be added.For example, it would be nice if we could observe the water-taking sections vertically as well as horizontally.For example, the ship eats torpedoes from the nose, takes water, the nose part does not sink, the ship lies on its side however, if it was done as I said and for example, 2 sections of water in the direction of the port in the nose part and it would be more realistic if the nose of the ship was at a certain angle to the port direction.If you say it's not like this already, no it's not even if the ship eats from the nose, it just lies on its side, it does not lean towards the nose what I mean as illogical is the ship's water intake mechanics should be balanced a bit the ship is sinking excessively now half of it is in the water but still the water intake bar is at a quarter I don't know, I'm obsessed with too much but just wanted to offer my opinion please sorry if I bother...

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Admiral Lütjens said:

For example, the ship eats torpedoes from the nose, takes water, the nose part does not sink, the ship lies on its side

Nice point, I think this would be a great visual improvement

Whole compartment system is a little contrived. There's no side compartments, wing spaces, double bottom spaces, etc. Some ships did have boilers and engines in three central rooms, but there were lots of other arrangements!

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/19/2021 at 11:25 PM, Tousansons said:

Let the dev hopefully finish the game and then we'll talk about "difficulty sliders".

...Wait for something.

I think once the game is "finished" not much more will be added and there will be nothing more to wait for. Additional content will probably be released once in half a year.

 

4 hours ago, disc said:

Nice point, I think this would be a great visual improvement

Hmmm. I think he meant it as a mechanics/simulation improvement rather than "visual". We cant call for such improvements as visual while the games actual "visuals" do not even utilize the graphical features of DX9 let alone of the API it's engine is running on, which is DX11. Even the normals (albedo, normal, smoothness, metalness, specular) are at 2006 level. Well certain German games from 2006 had those miles ahead of what most games look like today in that regard. I dont think I even need to mention tonemapping and enviromental lighting and the resolution of sky assets. So lets correct the reference to "simulation" rather that "visuals".

I dont think there is excuse for the visuals. Especially since the game is Unity engine which is a lot easier to work with and make graphics progress than anything I have worked with in the past. 

I realize this is a bit off topic but it was necessary to mention as a misunderstanding might occur in some readers / players.

Oh and possibly needing to mention this being a huge immersion breaker for me. 

Edited by Elrerune
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Elrerune The Honorbound said:

I think once the game is "finished" not much more will be added and there will be nothing more to wait for. Additional content will probably be released once in half a year.

I'm not so far into the future. What we see of UA:D is way too early in development. There's not much to do "right now" but to wait for something to happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/20/2021 at 3:06 AM, Trailltrader said:

I've had to apologize to all my gaming friends who purchased this game.  There's no levels of "Easy" "Medium" or "Hard" there is only "Have your butt handed to you".  I've managed to finish 13 of the Naval Academy levels.  After 6 weeks I've given up on the game; a game should have at least a 50/50% chance of winning instead of 100% losing.  My friends have complained about it, I have complained about it, I've sent emails about it.

 

I am ashamed that I was conned into purchasing this game.  I am ashamed that what started out as a really nice game from watching such guys as "Stealthgamer17" and "Brothermanard" on YouTube videos I watched for a year before deciding to get this game.  I am ashamed that for growing up at Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, Keyport and Bangor Submarine bases, and listening to the men who actually fought in World War Two then comparing their real life stories to this awful game?  Delete or post if you want Mod- I'm sending it by email where I'm sure it'll be trashed anyway.

Not gonna lie I think a lot of the missions are especially easy, with only a handful being brain numbingly hard.

However what REALLY annoys me is how quickly some bad RNG can result in a total loss.

"Oh yeah my custom built 50 thousand ton warship was sunk by flash fire on the first salvo...Great"

But perhaps even worse.

"Oh yeah my custom built 50 thousand ton warship was sunk by flash fire 1 real life hour into the match...Double great!"

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Oh yeah our navy's pride was sunk by a flash fire, repeatedly" (c) Beatty
That's not a problem.
the real academy's problem is wild random with in most cases average enemy power being set well above what player is given.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Cpt.Hissy said:

"Oh yeah our navy's pride was sunk by a flash fire, repeatedly" (c) Beatty
That's not a problem.
the real academy's problem is wild random with in most cases average enemy power being set well above what player is given.

That why the custom battle generator needs a budget/tonnage limiter to balance the odds.

Each side could have it's budget or tonnage limited, either on the whole fleet, or in a ship class basis, or both.

For instance, you could set Fleet A as having maximum 1.000.000 tons and Fleet B 1.500.000

 tons, and simultaneously, Fleet B's Battleships having to displace a maximum of 60.000 tons each and Battlecruisers 45.000 tons each.

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

That why the custom battle generator needs a budget/tonnage limiter to balance the odds.

Each side could have it's budget or tonnage limited, either on the whole fleet, or in a ship class basis, or both.

For instance, you could set Fleet A as having maximum 1.000.000 tons and Fleet B 1.500.000

 tons, and simultaneously, Fleet B's Battleships having to displace a maximum of 60.000 tons each and Battlecruisers 45.000 tons each.

When I do custom battle I manage it by building my German or French battleship in 1940 and setting the Enemy ship to 1925 technology. (Which is in my opinion historically realistic considering how horrible and inferior any British or American ship was compared to German quality and technology.)

Edited by Elrerune The Honorbound
  • Like 2
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Elrerune The Honorbound said:

When I do custom battle I manage it by building my German or French battleship in 1940 and setting the Enemy ship to 1925 technology. (Which is in my opinion historically realistic considering how horrible and inferior any British or American ship was compared to German quality and technology.)

While I also enjoy seal-clubbing and ROFLstomping lower tech level ships in custom battles with my massive 18" gun armed ultra battleship from whatever nation I choose, this game is far from being a "historically accurate" or "realism simulator" game...which is why any argument of "inferior/lower quality ships and tech" holds little to no weight. When it comes to this game, what is inferior/lower quality has to do more with whether or not you pick the best available upgrade/module for your ship and less to do with something like "The German Navy had better equipment than the Royal Navy and excellent rangefinders and radar for their guns, so they should get a bonus when it comes to aiming time and accuracy." If something like that were the case and every nation had a specific buff/debuff when it came to certain things...why would anyone choose to play as any nation but Germany if they were going to be--basically--the best of the big 4 naval powers (US, UK, Japan and Germany) when it came to building the best overall ships? That would be like giving Japan buffs to their torpedoes or giving them the best torpedo launchers/tech of any nation because in WWII they had the incredibly excellent "Long Lance" oxygen-fueled torpedoes.

A prime example of the "far from historically accurate" claim is a situation I find myself in a lot: my favorite US Dreadnought is the USS Texas, and I like using a ship that resembles her. But here's the thing...I have to nearly double the displacement value of the actual ship just to get the ship long enough to mount the center turret at the middle of the ship. But, I've learned to not care too much about getting every detail right...because I (and everyone else) ultimately can't when it comes to recreating "historical ship X."

As for the latest update, I'm pleased overall with it. Yes, some of the formation/division bugs are still there but I got some new hulls and superstructures to play around with and some new academy missions to try and complete. My only wish was that they introduced some new heavy and light cruiser hulls and superstructures since the variety of cruisers is pretty lack luster imo unless you play as the Japanese.

Edited by HistoricalAccuracyMan
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, HistoricalAccuracyMan said:

this game is far from being a "historically accurate" or "realism simulator" game...

That's why I put lower tech level on Enemy ships.

 

3 hours ago, HistoricalAccuracyMan said:

which is why any argument of "inferior/lower quality ships and tech" holds little to no weight.

True I guess, same as any argument about the game being "too early in development" after 3 years in development...

 

3 hours ago, HistoricalAccuracyMan said:

"The German Navy had better equipment than the Royal Navy and excellent rangefinders and radar for their guns, so they should get a bonus when it comes to aiming time and accuracy."

They should get a bonus for everything. (hmm how did we get to the Moon again?... I wonder.)

 

3 hours ago, HistoricalAccuracyMan said:

If something like that were the case and every nation had a specific buff/debuff when it came to certain things...

That is an excellent idea. I hope the delopers implement it when they fix their game.

 

3 hours ago, HistoricalAccuracyMan said:

why would anyone choose to play as any nation but Germany if they were going to be--basically--the best of the big 4 naval powers (US, UK, Japan and Germany) when it came to building the best overall ships?

True I agree again, why would anyone want to play as anything other than Germany?

 

3 hours ago, HistoricalAccuracyMan said:

That would be like giving Japan buffs to their torpedoes or giving them the best torpedo launchers/tech of any nation because in WWII they had the incredibly excellent "Long Lance" oxygen-fueled torpedoes.

They should get buffs.

 

3 hours ago, HistoricalAccuracyMan said:

But, I've learned to not care too much about getting every detail right...because I (and everyone else) ultimately can't when it comes to recreating "historical ship X."

I can and I did. For the ships that are completed with all parts in the game. The reason if anyone cant get a ship right is: 1.) Either because all parts for it are not made. 2.) People dont know how it actually looked like. 3.) They dont have the patience to do it.

 

3 hours ago, HistoricalAccuracyMan said:

As for the latest update, I'm pleased overall with it. Yes, some of the formation/division bugs are still there but I got some new hulls and superstructures to play around with and some new academy missions to try and complete. My only wish was that they introduced some new heavy and light cruiser hulls and superstructures since the variety of cruisers is pretty lack luster imo unless you play as the Japanese.

Then I guess you have a water cooled RTX 3080 SLI and you are not interested in aircraft carriers and fixing bugs that still exist for a long time. One of my wishes is... for the developers to fix their game and make it stop running like FURMARK or get their visuals to current standards.

Edited by Elrerune The Honorbound
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, HistoricalAccuracyMan said:

Which is in my opinion historically realistic considering how horrible and inferior any British or American ship was compared to German quality and technology

No. Do your homework.

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/19/2021 at 2:06 PM, Trailltrader said:

I've had to apologize to all my gaming friends who purchased this game.  There's no levels of "Easy" "Medium" or "Hard" there is only "Have your butt handed to you".  I've managed to finish 13 of the Naval Academy levels.  After 6 weeks I've given up on the game; a game should have at least a 50/50% chance of winning instead of 100% losing.  My friends have complained about it, I have complained about it, I've sent emails about it.

 

I am ashamed that I was conned into purchasing this game.  I am ashamed that what started out as a really nice game from watching such guys as "Stealthgamer17" and "Brothermanard" on YouTube videos I watched for a year before deciding to get this game.  I am ashamed that for growing up at Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, Keyport and Bangor Submarine bases, and listening to the men who actually fought in World War Two then comparing their real life stories to this awful game?  Delete or post if you want Mod- I'm sending it by email where I'm sure it'll be trashed anyway.

Bewildering. Aside from a handful of challenging missions, the naval academy missions are not hard. I've got all but two or three completed. Prioritize accuracy & embrace the real Dreadnought design principles--it doesn't matter how many guns you've got if they don't hit hard & land reliably. Keep your pitch & roll to a minimum. Eschew secondaries, an accurate main battery is worth much more. Don't worry about extended armor; put it all into main belt & deck armor (depending on era). Don't let yourself have any smoke interference. Battering at a distance with 5-10% chance to hit is the ideal, esp if the foe cannot return fire at half that accuracy.

If you're building small ships, quantity and range of torpedoes is the only consideration. Don't brawl; send in large torpedo waves at the greatest distance you can, and stay alive. Survivability is paramount.

And overall, it's better to have two ships than one. Start with minimum displacement & design up from there. Three cheap ships are worth twice over one superbattleship of similar caliber.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Tousansons said:

No. Do your homework.

No need. History teaches me everything. I do not need to learn from those who constantly try to rewrite history.

Another way to put it is “History is Written by Victors.” and that's the version of history I definitely have no intention of doing homework on.

Edited by Elrerune The Honorbound
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Elrerune The Honorbound said:

No need. History teaches me everything. I do not need to learn from those who constantly try to rewrite history.

Another way to put it is “History is Written by Victors.” and that's the version of history I definitely have no intention of doing homework on.

The sheer existence of the Lost Cause myth should lay the "history is written by the victors" idea to rest.

Since you do seem to be a fan of WWII Germany, you should know that much of the US military's historical manuscripts on the Soviet-German war were written by Fritz Halder. This is the former general who wrote the evil Commissar Order... unsurprisingly, he is the source of many discredited "Clean Wehrmacht" myths.

In regard to German warships, Koop and Schmolke are excellent sources, and they served in the German WWII navy. They specifically point out the atrocious reliability of the high pressure steam plants adopted, as well as the extreme fragility of the modern light cruisers.

There was also the failed attempts at 15cm destroyer guns, and the idiotic Type XXI submarine fabrication system, and the foot-dragging on aircraft carriers, and the lack of usable aerial torpedoes, and the splintered cooperation with the air force that led to friendly fire....

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, disc said:

The sheer existence of the Lost Cause myth should lay the "history is written by the victors" idea to rest.

Since you do seem to be a fan of WWII Germany, you should know that much of the US military's historical manuscripts on the Soviet-German war were written by Fritz Halder. This is the former general who wrote the evil Commissar Order... unsurprisingly, he is the source of many discredited "Clean Wehrmacht" myths.

Everyone is free to believe in what they want including myths about "myths".

 

45 minutes ago, disc said:

In regard to German warships, Koop and Schmolke are excellent sources, and they served in the German WWII navy. They specifically point out the atrocious reliability of the high pressure steam plants adopted

LMAO I avoid those pseudo authors pseudo historians like the devil himself. They are on my black list for all time. I have enough books by legitimate German and Italian sources not written with the filter glasses of British or American authors.

Edited by Elrerune The Honorbound
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Elrerune The Honorbound said:

By cowardly tricks from spineless personalities without ideals.

Nah, at the end of the day she was inferior. If she was superior she would of won end of.

The thing is we recognise hood is a meme, but people keep banging on about how bismarck was a great battleship that got sunk by another meme ship, and helped by meme planes that were obsolete at that point. 

Yeah shes a nice ship, but she isn't a good as most think she was. The germany navy was a joke at the time in capable of even having both ships up and running at the time. Not too mention getting blasted by inferior ships.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Elrerune The Honorbound said:

Everyone is free to believe in what they want...

That I can agree.

I firmly believe that in France we must say pain au chocolat and not chocolatine.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Tousansons said:

No. Do your homework.

 

6 hours ago, Cptbarney said:

Shes was so superior she got clapped hard by the inferior.

1 hour ago, disc said:

The sheer existence of the Lost Cause myth should lay the "history is written by the victors" idea to rest.

Since you do seem to be a fan of WWII Germany, you should know that much of the US military's historical manuscripts on the Soviet-German war were written by Fritz Halder. This is the former general who wrote the evil Commissar Order... unsurprisingly, he is the source of many discredited "Clean Wehrmacht" myths.

In regard to German warships, Koop and Schmolke are excellent sources, and they served in the German WWII navy. They specifically point out the atrocious reliability of the high pressure steam plants adopted, as well as the extreme fragility of the modern light cruisers.

There was also the failed attempts at 15cm destroyer guns, and the idiotic Type XXI submarine fabrication system, and the foot-dragging on aircraft carriers, and the lack of usable aerial torpedoes, and the splintered cooperation with the air force that led to friendly fire....


Could be Poe's Law. It's difficult to detect sarcasm online.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont know why some people here are getting triggered by my opinions. I stated what I did, as my opinions and not as something that's up for discussion. I dont share your sentiment because we are from different background so my opinions wont change. You dont have to keep "banging" on what I said as if you were trying to derogate me. If you're intent on de-railing the thread take it to the admin, please dont use my opinion as an excuse for de-railing.

I have no intention of further conversing with people who build their opinion on prejudice, and who use non-scientific sources such as Fritz Halder. I'm not a person who builds my opinions on any myths or "myths". Generalization is not good in either direction. And why would I expect Wehrmacht to be clean?

3 hours ago, disc said:

and the splintered cooperation with the air force that led to friendly fire....

In regard about friendly fire, check about friendly fire in Desert Storm 1, about American and British casualties. It is not specific to a single German example.

2 hours ago, Cptbarney said:

The germany navy was a joke at the time in capable of even having both ships up and running at the time. Not too mention getting blasted by inferior ships.

Yeah, that "joke" conquered Europe und so weiter, and what to say about the most powerful war machine of the US army who, with all the technology, shamefully lost the war to the practically bare-handed Vietnamese. Can we call the war American machine a joke?

As I said, saying what I think and where I stand was not intended for people to use my opinion as an excuse for de-railing and getting triggered. We are all humans arent we?

Edited by Elrerune The Honorbound
Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Elrerune The Honorbound said:

I dont know why some people here are getting triggered by my opinions. I stated what I did, as my opinions and not as something that's up for discussion. I dont share your sentiment because we are from different background so my opinions wont change. You dont have to keep "banging" on what I said as if you were trying to derogate me. If you're intent on de-railing the thread take it to the admin, please dont use my opinion as an excuse for de-railing.

I have no intention of further conversing with people who build their opinion on prejudice, and who use non-scientific sources such as Fritz Halder. I'm not a person who builds my opinions on any myths or "myths". Generalization is not good in either direction. And why would I expect Wehrmacht to be clean?

In regard about friendly fire, check about friendly fire in Desert Storm 1, about American and British casualties. It is not specific to a single German example.

Yeah, that "joke" conquered Europe und so weiter, and what to say about the most powerful war machine of the US army who, with all the technology, shamefully lost the war to the practically bare-handed Vietnamese. Can we call the war American machine a joke?

I mean, the thing is none of this has anything to do with the thread at hand anyways. Also you can't really complain when you started it in the first place with an unneeded comment about how you purposely set up battles with one side having better tech than the other. Then saying germany should get buffs and random things about the moon.

Oh well, a bit of excitement i guess before they eventually announce CAP-1. 

49 minutes ago, Elrerune The Honorbound said:

As I said, saying what I think and where I stand was not intended for people to use my opinion as an excuse for de-railing and getting triggered. We are all humans arent we?

We are, but if you want to de-rail a thread be prepared for people to give you lip about it. If you don't like it, dont post it simple.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

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...