Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Recommended Posts

53 minutes ago, Cptbarney said:

Guess we will have to wait till monday it seems.

Yes, or even more. But the fact that they just can't type few sentences about what is going on is very frustrating.

 

  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 272
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Hello Admirals, We would like to share the latest information about the upcoming “Core Patch 1: Mission Mechanics Test” which will include the first playable version of the Campaign, in a very li

I understand games development can be fickle or run into problems unexpectedly. However, even a few screenshots wouldn't hurt now and then. I know i'm repeating myself, but i seriously dislike th

Ok, I have been a silent reader now since 2019, when I first bought the game. Seriously devs, what the hello kitty is going on. Where the hell is the patch/infos about it or the general state of the g

Posted Images

On 8/16/2021 at 10:18 PM, Nick Thomadis said:

13x NEW HULLS

  • The Italian “Littorio-class Battleship” can now be recreated in a hull base between 45,000 and 75,000 tons for Italy after 1936.
  • New Italian “Super Battleship” available after 1936 with a displacement between 76,500 and 92,500 tons.
  • New Italian “Modern Battlecruiser II” available after 1935 with a displacement between 39,500 and 54,500 tons.
  • New Italian “Large Cruiser II” available after 1929 with a displacement between 32,500 and 42,500 tons.
  • New Italian “Heavy Cruiser ΙΙ” available after 1934 with a displacement between 16,500 and 19,500 tons.
  • New Italian “Modern Light Cruiser II” available after 1930 with a displacement between 8,000 and 11,000 tons.
  • New Italian “Compact Light Cruiser” available after 1930 with a displacement between 6,700 and 8,000 tons.
  • New Italian “Hybrid Destroyer” available after 1936 with a displacement between 3,500 and 4,500 tons.
  • New Chinese “Super Battleship” available after 1936 with a displacement between 74,500 and 82,500 tons.
  • New Spanish “Super Battleship” available after 1936 with a displacement between 75,500 and 87,500 tons.
  • New British “Super Battleship” available after 1936 with a displacement between 80,500 and 92,500 tons.
  • New Austro-Hungarian “Super Battleship” available after 1936 with a displacement between 89,500 and 101,500 tons.
  • New Small Dreadnought available between 1906 and 1918 for Germany and Austro-Hungary with a displacement spanning from 18,000 to 20,500 tons.

Germany CA hulls are disadvantaged from 1900 to 1912. British get a flat deck hull to build from, 'Armored Cruiser V' at 1900, it's an open deck that can have variable placeholders, whereas Germany only gets the 'Armored Cruiser II' at 1894, and this is a superstructured hull, all options are placeholders, very limiting.  

The British side is advantaged (with CAs) in both 1900 and 1910 campaign starts. No mention here of any new Germany CA hulls. 1912 is when  Germany gets its comparison, 'Armored Cruiser V', after 1910 campaign start, after building the 1910 fleet, the German side would be handicapped. Germany side would have to rebuild all CAs after 24 months, and wait for there build time, crippling it even more, until at least 1914.

Quote
  • New Conning Tower armor: Now the Conning Tower armor is properly depended according to the weight of the main tower. Previously it was only a crude multiplier of weight and thus it was very light in large warships causing excessive free tonnage.

 

  • Belt Armor weight has been increased by about 10% (it could become rather light in the late technology era).

Without the "free" tonnage and the 10%, which is alot and tonnage we have used up in the past/currently, will ships be under-designed for some Academy Missions? maybe making some missions unplayable. Would every mission have to be re-tested, re-balanced?

Edited by Skeksis
Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Skeksis said:

Without the "free" tonnage we have used in the past, will ships be under-designed for some Academy Missions? maybe making some missions unplayable. Will every mission have to be re-tested, re-balanced?

Since it affects both sides, the effect will be reduced (though probably still affecting the player more since the AI tends to under-armor their ships). For conning tower armor in particular, if it gets too heavy I'll probably just stop armoring them at all, much like secondaries which had their armor weight drastically increased in v86.

If peak Resistance gets any higher we might see late-game battleships without any armor at all other than turret (to prevent flash fires) and the minimum belt.

Edited by Evil4Zerggin
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I have been a silent reader now since 2019, when I first bought the game. Seriously devs, what the hello kitty is going on. Where the hell is the patch/infos about it or the general state of the game. People are getting REALLY tired of your shit.

  • Like 13
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not really sure what we even do at this point. Posting here kinda feels like screaming into the void, with the only response being other players, just as worried and confused. This patch better be worth it, because holy **** we can't keep doing this **** every time

5lx4mn.jpg

  • Like 11
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Skeksis said:

Germany CA hulls are disadvantaged from 1900 to 1912...

It's better not to think about it. Otherwise, you will drown in the negative. For example, the problem you mentioned is not a problem of Germany. This is a problem for the entire CA class.  

There are seven pre-dreadnoughts hulls CA in all game.  And none of these hulls support casemate guns larger than five inches. This means that not one of the CA ever built in German Empire cannot be built in UAD Alpha 12.Because each of them have a whole bunch of 150mm guns in casemates.Some of them have even 210mm.

The same is true for the rest of the countries. 6 ''cannons was standard for pre-dreadnoughts CA, which means that 90% the designs of that time are simply unavailable for players. And to solve this problem, you just need to add one, not two, not five, just one hull which supports 6'' guns in casemates for all nations. Of course, this will not help France, who built completely unique and original CA and need at least two new hulls, and better four

In the same time we have in game something like thirty-four hulls of late battleships like Yamato, Iowa and others. 

Apparently, the game starts in 1945 and ends in 1890, so this is absolutely logical - sure, first you make the foundation, then the walls, and only at the end the roof. I mean, what's the point make are lot late game content if the early one is a bunch of copy-paste placeholders? 

B06clk7.jpeg

Edited by TAKTCOM
WAR FOR IMPROVEMENT
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 9/5/2021 at 7:38 PM, TAKTCOM said:

The same is true for the rest of the countries. 6 ''cannons was standard for pre-dreadnoughts CA, which means that 90% the designs of that time are simply unavailable for players. And to solve this problem, you just need to add one, not two, not five, just one hull which supports 6'' guns in casemates for all nations. Of course, this will not help France, who built completely unique and original CA and need at least two new hulls, and better four

On one hand other nations aren't important since we not going to play them, and if Dev's stay true to form, not for awhile either!

On the other, glaring disparity would effect the campaign footprint, including perception henceforth (even though the grey matter should be telling us not too until v1.0). 

On 9/5/2021 at 7:38 PM, TAKTCOM said:

Apparently, the game starts in 1945 and ends in 1890, so this is absolutely logical - sure, first you make the foundation, then the walls, and only at the end the roof.

A certain point of view, another (engineering principal) is to design the roof first, the floors next, then the foundation last, i.e. from the top down, not from the bottom up. But it's really is from every one own view point in the end.

Edited by Skeksis
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm excited for this patch. But I wonder if there will be a tutorial for the campaign or...

One thing I wish they'd add is a number input for the tonnage, because with the new way of having the tonnage slider in increments of one, it's sometimes a pain to get the exact tonnage you want. Being able to type "60,000" for example into the tonnage would be awesome.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh, it'll be in a month at best and will consist of some more copypasted hulls, some bugs "fixed" but not really, and perhaps that same campaign prototype that rumors say was in the very first alpha

but, i will be happy to be wrong.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

At this point my expectations are so low that a bug ridden barely playable campaign before 2022 will be a welcome surprise.  A fully playable campaign but still in desperate need of balance fixes, hull designs, and more than just open ocean to fight on before 2025 will be a welcome surprise.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, monbvol said:

At this point my expectations are so low that a bug ridden barely playable campaign before 2022 will be a welcome surprise.  A fully playable campaign but still in desperate need of balance fixes, hull designs, and more than just open ocean to fight on before 2025 will be a welcome surprise.

Will they even BOTHER developing it for that long?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's pretty telling that 90% of changes this game has had over time has been mere number shifts, and not actual mechanical alterations.

Like...Why do Citadels not exist yet? RTW1 and 2 have it...Mostly!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/21/2021 at 7:59 AM, Nick Thomadis said:

Hello admirals,

Despite the difficulties of 2020, which have affected everyone’s life as well as the game’s development, we continued to provide several updates and significantly improved the game. We deeply hope that Ultimate Admiral: Dreadnoughts has already become a game that you enjoy and thank you for your ongoing and precious feedback that we so much appreciate.

We want to assure you that we acknowledge all your concerns and suggestions and today we would like to inform you about what are our definite plans for the next patches that are going to be delivered within 2021.

We will continue to monitor your feedback and hotfix anything necessary that you report. The next major updates are organized as follows:

  • Core patch 1 - Core of campaign including Custom Battle saves 
  • Core patch 2 - Crew and officers
  • Core patch 3 - R&D and Tech Progression 
  • Core patch 4 - New nations and map expansion

The first short campaign version of the game will be playable for two nations (British Empire, German Empire) and will expand with content in every next core patch.

Patches 1-3 will be made based on a campaign map covering the North Sea and will feature the conflict between Great Britain and Germany. New ships, new game features will be offered as the game shapes up around this first playable campaign. 

The Steam Early Access version of the game will become available upon the finalization and polish of Core Patch 3.

In Core Patch 4 and onwards we shall progressively add new playable nations and expand the map until we fully cover the campaign with everything needed.

We cannot promise a specific date of arrival for those next major updates but we confirm as above their flow of delivery within 2021. Furthermore, we confirm the allocation of another dedicated programmer who will focus solely on needed improvements for the ship design system.

Thank you all for reading. We will get back to you with specific information about the next big update of Ultimate Admiral: Dreadnoughts!

The Game-Labs Team
 

what happened with this?

we haven't even got patch 1 yet

and its september

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Commander-Alexander-Reed said:

Will they even BOTHER developing it for that long?

I've seen longer development cycles.  Either way it will be a most welcome surprise if it happens.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/5/2021 at 4:52 AM, Skeksis said:

Germany CA hulls are disadvantaged from 1900 to 1912. British get a flat deck hull to build from, 'Armored Cruiser V' at 1900, it's an open deck that can have variable placeholders, whereas Germany only gets the 'Armored Cruiser II' at 1894, and this is a superstructured hull, all options are placeholders, very limiting.  

The British side is advantaged (with CAs) in both 1900 and 1910 campaign starts. No mention here of any new Germany CA hulls. 1912 is when  Germany gets its comparison, 'Armored Cruiser V', after 1910 campaign start, after building the 1910 fleet, the German side would be handicapped. Germany side would have to rebuild all CAs after 24 months, and wait for there build time, crippling it even more, until at least 1914.

+++++

Without the "free" tonnage and the 10%, which is alot and tonnage we have used up in the past/currently, will ships be under-designed for some Academy Missions? maybe making some missions unplayable. Would every mission have to be re-tested, re-balanced?

Hulls are going to be imbalanced anyway with the fixed approach taken with certain nations having inherent advantages simply based on available hulls, I'm going to assume its going to be more number and % tweaking in the future to "balance" the nations because thats how technology, naval design and warfare worked(/s). The fixed towers would likely also be a similar issue. It seems to lean towards new = best, big = better when it comes to towers, components (smoke stacks).
+++++
On the 10% increase, this has also been demonstrated in the past that random numbers are pulled out for "balance purposes". A baseline of what these numbers were based on is not given nor any justifications (e.g. random historic paper so that the community could atleast comment or feedback on the proposed changes) on why such changes. There are numerous sources on the internet on characteristics of naval armour used, couldnt one of these be cited or extrapolated to provide the baseline reference number? Disclosing the numbers would also make it easier for the community to help tweak and refine the armour resistance down the line.

Although at this point we may just as well be beating a dead horse.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...