Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Forthcoming Patch Announcement


Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, T_the_ferret said:

My simple question is, as someone that's totally new to any engagement to the community, what is my assurance that future work will be carried on time as per the dev's words and this game is worth the high entry price currently compared to other games set to release this year?

Simple answer: no assurance at all. This applies to all pre-orders. Yes, the seller always promise excellent products, but what will you get in the end? I pre-ordered several times - TW:Thrones of Britannia, Battlefleet Gothic: Armada 2 and was very disappointed in the end. UAD not so bad. Yes, at the moment this is overglorified shipbuilder WW2 era.  At least it's something.

I give a 50% forecast that next year we will see the some kind of company. And 20% chance that we will see all the declared nations and features before the game was abandoned.

4 hours ago, MrStan53 said:

Also, this isn't even assuming that these hulls won't reuse assets from the Cruisers Trento or Deutschland

Well noticed. I remember this feeling, when in one of the patches with TENS of new designs, I suddenly realized that most of them  copy-paste.

 

1 hour ago, Tousansons said:

Let's not forget that RTW game system is around 8 years in constant development.

Price of completed RTW 1 is two times lower than UAD, which has been stuck in alpha for YEARS.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 263
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Hello again Admirals, Since our last post regarding the upcoming big update we have made significant progress not only on finalizing the first campaign version but also on adding new and very imp

Hello all, We were ready to release, as we fixed and optimized all majors aspects, but we found a potential crash problem that could be caused if you clicked mouse button while waiting for AI fle

The patch is in closed testing procedure. If all is good, we will release on Monday. Everyone, have a great weekend!

Posted Images

What I really hope is that they fixed that bug on Yamato's superstructure where you couldn't place 5inch guns and up on all the mounts. It's been so long since I made Yamato. The only Yamato class ship I can make reliably is the A-150s and that's only because it uses 3.9inch guns.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TAKTCOM said:

Price of RTW...

If we take all games released with the same engine, it s way more than UA:D. And that s counting the 5 dollars discount for RTW 1 owners when they bought the second game.

But that wasn t my point. If RTW need 8 years to spawn carriers and soon missiles, we can assume UA:D will have a long dev process too.

Does it excuse the absence of communication and overconfidence? No, but it s an issue with game lab, not with the fact that RTW is a superior game.

 

Edited by Tousansons
Typo
Link to post
Share on other sites

What frustrates me most is the fact that this can be remedied so simply and for so little time. Take five minute each month to write a little status update for the community, 99% of people are satisfied to know that at the end of the month they'll get to know how stuff is going. 

At most from time to time get a little Q&A going so people can reasonably ask why game plans didn't pan out and how it looks for the future.

  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Werwaz said:

thanks for the update

the only thing I particularly object to is the belt weight increase since a thick belt is needed to counter the AI's regular use of 19 and 20-inch guns, unless the resistance increases are meant to offset this

crew mechanics and design saves sound nice

Russian SHBB2 should top out at about 105 to 110k tons rather than 117k in order to rein in power creep

some suggestion for the future:

  • USA could use some modernized dreadnought hulls to represent the big 5 or the Tillmans, with appropriate advanced cage masts
  • adding a spall liner to protect against HE and shrapnel from spalling/non-penetrating hits would be a nice addition
  • more dreadnought 2,3,and 4 hulls (they're all the same across all countries)

Don't nerf Alternate History Imperial Russian SBBII!!! 😠

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Werwaz said:

thanks for the update

the only thing I particularly object to is the belt weight increase since a thick belt is needed to counter the AI's regular use of 19 and 20-inch guns, unless the resistance increases are meant to offset this

crew mechanics and design saves sound nice

Russian SHBB2 should top out at about 105 to 110k tons rather than 117k in order to rein in power creep

some suggestion for the future:

  • USA could use some modernized dreadnought hulls to represent the big 5 or the Tillmans, with appropriate advanced cage masts
  • adding a spall liner to protect against HE and shrapnel from spalling/non-penetrating hits would be a nice addition
  • more dreadnought 2,3,and 4 hulls (they're all the same across all countries)

Agree with everything except nerfing new Alternate History Imperial Russian Navy SBBII hull! I've waited too much for it!

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Cptbarney said:

Hopefully, we get more places to visit. A better battle system than the RTW's one and also forts and maybe mines too.

Lol that's the opposite of what Im thinking we're going towards. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 I think we need to stop with the RTW2 comparisons.

 Rule the Waves is an old-school turn-based strategy sim played almost entirely through text.  Dreadnoughts is a real-time 3D quasi-simulator drawing inspiration from fking Kerbal Space Program.  They're not automatically competitors just because you happen to play both games - get over yourselves.  They're not even remotely the same game and occupy completely different niches in the market.

 Everyone's speculating about what the campaign will or won't be, and are seemingly deciding their opinions about it before the first playable alpha build is even out.  Yes, we've been waiting ages.  Yes, the devs have been completely silent about it.  Yes, there's still no screenshots, let alone gameplay footage.  None of these are positive points, but it doesn't automatically mean the campaign is attempting to "dethrone RTW2" as the premier naval simulator.  As detailed, they occupy different market niches and cater to a different audience.

 I don't know how many people on this board have played UA: Age of Sail (you should, it really scratches the naval itch for which Dreadnoughts has been slacking), but it's Game-Labs' previous title and is broadly similar to Dreadnoughts in many respects.  Its campaign consists of a sequence of scripted scenarios, similar to the existing UA:D Naval Academy but with persistent saves, fleet, maps, and resources between missions (in addition to a full Total War-style land warfare system).  Missions provide simplified strategic resources, such as funds, crew experience, and research points, which are used to unlock the tech tree and build better ships.

 Based on what we've already got in-game, I'd imagine the UA:D campaign will be very similar in concept, most likely with an expanded tech tree and additional resources such as fuel, manpower, etc.

Edited by Masonator
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 My absolute dream navy game is literally just the HOI4 naval strategy system, but with the ship design system and full 3D battles from Dreadnoughts.

 That shit'd be cool as hell.

Edited by Masonator
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

UA: Age of Sail is my go to for good 17th century naval battles and the campaigns in that are pretty good. This is why I have high hopes for the campaign and the future of this the game. It may be a slow process but if they put in the quality and care (and maybe mod support) in this game like their other games then this game will flourish.

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

 Rule the Waves is an old-school turn-based strategy sim played almost entirely through text. 

Herr.. No?

Have you played Rule the waves? Battles are real time with pause. Ship designer is pretty in depth. While abstracted, mechanics are realistics.  Is it "old school" and "played entirely through text" because the visuals and UI are basics?

I suggest you inform yourself a bit more about Rule the waves 1 and 2 and you'll see why there is so much comparisons (good or bad) between these two games and Ultimate admiral: Dreadnoughts.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Tousansons said:

Herr.. No?

Have you played Rule the waves? Battles are real time with pause. Ship designer is pretty in depth. While abstracted, mechanics are realistics.  Is it "old school" and "played entirely through text" because the visuals and UI are basics?

I suggest you inform yourself a bit more about Rule the waves 1 and 2 and you'll see why there is so much comparisons (good or bad) between these two games and Ultimate admiral: Dreadnoughts.

 I own both games and play them regularly, lol.

 Well, semi-regularly.  Alright, occasionally.

Edited by Masonator
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Masonator said:

 I think we need to stop with the RTW2 comparisons.

 Rule the Waves is an old-school turn-based strategy sim played almost entirely through text.  Dreadnoughts is a real-time 3D quasi-simulator drawing inspiration from fking Kerbal Space Program.  They're not automatically competitors just because you happen to play both games - get over yourselves.  They're not even remotely the same game and occupy completely different niches in the market.

 Everyone's speculating about what the campaign will or won't be, and are seemingly deciding their opinions about it before the first playable alpha build is even out.  Yes, we've been waiting ages.  Yes, the devs have been completely silent about it.  Yes, there's still no screenshots, let alone gameplay footage.  None of these are positive points, but it doesn't automatically mean the campaign is attempting to "dethrone RTW2" as the premier naval simulator.  As detailed, they occupy different market niches and cater to a different audience.

 I don't know how many people on this board have played UA: Age of Sail (you should, it really scratches the naval itch for which Dreadnoughts has been slacking), but it's Game-Labs' previous title and is broadly similar to Dreadnoughts in many respects.  Its campaign consists of a sequence of scripted scenarios, similar to the existing UA:D Naval Academy but with persistent saves, fleet, maps, and resources between missions (in addition to a full Total War-style land warfare system).  Missions provide simplified strategic resources, such as funds, crew experience, and research points, which are used to unlock the tech tree and build better ships.

 Based on what we've already got in-game, I'd imagine the UA:D campaign will be very similar in concept, most likely with an expanded tech tree and additional resources such as fuel, manpower, etc.

Both games occupy the same market, as RTS. If you have both games how can you describe yourself as two different markets? By owning both, aren't you a market, just like hundreds of thousands of others, if not millions.

If UAD campaign has change to a linear and scripted scenarios, as you have promoted, it'll be a disaster. As of today, campaign expectations are of an open world, very similar to RTW2 regional map system.

Edited by Skeksis
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Skeksis said:

As of today, campaign expectations are of an open world, very similar to RTW2 regional map system.

 As of today, these are your campaign expectations.  This isn't what I expect at all, and I strongly suspect that you'll be disappointed with the final product.  That simply isn't the type of game that GL has ever made before, and they've made absolutely no indications of a course change throughout the Dreadnoughts development cycle.  I strongly believe that the campaign(s) will be a (series of) linear storyline(s) set in a single theatre(s) and following a single officer's career, as in Age of Sail, because that's the developer's track record.

 I also don't see Dreadnoughts as a strategy game whatsoever.  It's an open-ended low-fidelity/"arcade" simulator with some action elements, and that's about it at present.  This'll most likely change with the release of the campaign, but see above - I still doubt it will be what you're looking for.  I don't know about you, but I play Ultimate Admiral and RTW for completely different reasons and in completely different moods.  It's more accurately a competitor to grand strategy games like EU4, HOI4, or Civ than UA:D, in my eyes.

 I also object to the idea of Age of Sail's campaign being "linear and scripted scenarios" - it's not, and that's not what I meant.  By "scripted scenarios", I meant there are predefined missions with goals and objectives, rather than just "sink all enemies", similar to the Naval Academy mission objectives.  While yes, it can be broadly described as "linear" in the sense that it has a story arc and forward progression, the Age of Sail campaign follows a branching path depending on your performance in each mission and their overall outcome, which has direct impacts on your fleet (losing expensive investments into ships and crews, gaining or losing territory, running out of money, gaining experience, etc).

 Basically, imagine a long, branching string of Naval Academy scenarios with a world map, XP system, tech trees, and a persistent fleet and budget.  That's the Age of Sail campaign, and what I strongly suspect the Dreadnoughts campaign will be.  If you're expecting a RTW2 killer or GTA V: Battleship Edition from the campaign, prepare for disappointment.

Edited by Masonator
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Masonator said:

 As of today, these are your campaign expectations.  This isn't what I expect at all, and I strongly suspect that you'll be disappointed with the final product.  That simply isn't the type of game that GL has ever made before, and they've made absolutely no indications of a course change throughout the Dreadnoughts development cycle.  I strongly believe that the campaign(s) will be a (series of) linear storyline(s) set in a single theatre(s) and following a single officer's career, as in Age of Sail, because that's the developer's track record.

 I also don't see Dreadnoughts as a strategy game whatsoever.  It's an open-ended low-fidelity/"arcade" simulator with some action elements, and that's about it at present.  This'll most likely change with the release of the campaign, but see above - I still doubt it will be what you're looking for.  I don't know about you, but I play Ultimate Admiral and RTW for completely different reasons and in completely different moods.  It's more accurately a competitor to grand strategy games like EU4, HOI4, or Civ than UA:D, in my eyes.

 I also object to the idea of Age of Sail's campaign being "linear and scripted scenarios" - it's not, and that's not what I meant.  By "scripted scenarios", I meant there are predefined missions with goals and objectives, rather than just "sink all enemies", similar to the Naval Academy mission objectives.  While yes, it can be broadly described as "linear" in the sense that it has a story arc and forward progression, the Age of Sail campaign follows a branching path depending on your performance in each mission and their overall outcome, which has direct impacts on your fleet (losing expensive investments into ships and crews, gaining or losing territory, running out of money, gaining experience, etc).

 Basically, imagine a long, branching string of Naval Academy scenarios with a world map, XP system, tech trees, and a persistent fleet and budget.  That's the Age of Sail campaign, and what I strongly suspect the Dreadnoughts campaign will be.  If you're expecting a RTW2 killer or GTA V: Battleship Edition from the campaign, prepare for disappointment.

During the war, your fleets will engage enemy forces stationed in the same sea region via the Battle Generator System. This system generates missions by evaluating several strategic factors, influenced by the composition of the fleet, the operational range of the ship and naval technologies. In those generated missions, which range from small convoys raids to large fleet actions, you can take part and directly control your ships against the enemy.

This is written for the campaign missions ... I don't know if I understand what you mean because I use a translator, however it seems far from your idea of pre-established missions that you fight, and that their outcome (positive or negative) unlocks or no other battles which are also pre-established, in UAD from what I understand there will be this system that generates TOTALLY RANDOM and not pre-established missions.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Masonator said:

 As of today, these are your campaign expectations.  This isn't what I expect at all, and I strongly suspect that you'll be disappointed with the final product.  That simply isn't the type of game that GL has ever made before, and they've made absolutely no indications of a course change throughout the Dreadnoughts development cycle.  I strongly believe that the campaign(s) will be a (series of) linear storyline(s) set in a single theatre(s) and following a single officer's career, as in Age of Sail, because that's the developer's track record.

 I also don't see Dreadnoughts as a strategy game whatsoever.  It's an open-ended low-fidelity/"arcade" simulator with some action elements, and that's about it at present.  This'll most likely change with the release of the campaign, but see above - I still doubt it will be what you're looking for.  I don't know about you, but I play Ultimate Admiral and RTW for completely different reasons and in completely different moods.  It's more accurately a competitor to grand strategy games like EU4, HOI4, or Civ than UA:D, in my eyes.

 I also object to the idea of Age of Sail's campaign being "linear and scripted scenarios" - it's not, and that's not what I meant.  By "scripted scenarios", I meant there are predefined missions with goals and objectives, rather than just "sink all enemies", similar to the Naval Academy mission objectives.  While yes, it can be broadly described as "linear" in the sense that it has a story arc and forward progression, the Age of Sail campaign follows a branching path depending on your performance in each mission and their overall outcome, which has direct impacts on your fleet (losing expensive investments into ships and crews, gaining or losing territory, running out of money, gaining experience, etc).

 Basically, imagine a long, branching string of Naval Academy scenarios with a world map, XP system, tech trees, and a persistent fleet and budget.  That's the Age of Sail campaign, and what I strongly suspect the Dreadnoughts campaign will be.  If you're expecting a RTW2 killer or GTA V: Battleship Edition from the campaign, prepare for disappointment.

You know you sound like a company man who's job it is to change the perception/expectations, like marketing.

To be clear, open world:

  • Deploy ships anywhere, in any region (global wide).
  • Battle generator builds battles base on that deployment.
  • Choose/select your own politics/options against nations (war) or for nations (peace).  

I.e. not a single predetermined mission.

But if you are right, then the campaign won't be unpredictable as I prefer, then I probably wouldn't play the campaign extensively. 
 

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

You know you sound like a company man who's job it is to change the perception/expectations, like marketing.

 I'm not in any way affiliated with the game.  I'm just someone who's played the other games from the devs.  I paid the same price you paid, from my own pocket.

3 minutes ago, Skeksis said:

To be clear, open world:

  • Deploy ships anywhere, in any region.
  • Battle generator builds battles base on that deployment.

I.e. not a single predetermined mission.

But if you are right, then the campaign won't be unpredictable as I prefer and I probably wouldn't play the campaign extensively.

 To be clear: I'm not arguing that this is a cool idea for a campaign, and I probably won't play it much either if it's like I anticipate. I got bored with the Age of Sail campaign, and never finished the Naval Academy scenarios.  Custom Battles and some imagination are where my fun is.

 I like the way Cold Waters did its' campaign, where there's a relatively small list of missions the game chooses from at random, and each mission has randomised enemy fleet compositions, weather and sea conditions, and locations, on a map populated with passive enemy patrols.  It achieves a pretty dynamic and spontaneous effect, and I think a similar idea would work pretty well for Dreadnoughts.

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

Basically, imagine a long, branching string of Naval Academy scenarios with a world map, XP system, tech trees, and a persistent fleet and budget.  That's the Age of Sail campaign, and what I strongly suspect the Dreadnoughts campaign will be.  If you're expecting a RTW2 killer or GTA V: Battleship Edition from the campaign, prepare for disappointment.

Datamines of v86 show there is already substantial (if unfinished) code and data supporting a RTW-style campaign with provinces, international diplomacy, random events, etc. While it's possible they will scrap this and do something else, I think more likely than not they will continue on this course.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Masonator said:

 I like the way Cold Waters did its' campaign, where there's a relatively small list of missions the game chooses from at random, and each mission has randomised enemy fleet compositions, weather and sea conditions, and locations, on a map populated with passive enemy patrols.  It achieves a pretty dynamic and spontaneous effect, and I think a similar idea would work pretty well for Dreadnoughts.

I actually like 'Naval Battle Simulator' global map. IMO it's one of the best naval world wide global maps in real time - but absolutely nothing else of that game though, it's crap.

But its global map, in how fleets/ships can travel the whole world, by plotting waypoints, then follow their course and intercepting enemies anywhere in real time, and the map scaling/zooming, it's right up in the top of the best list.

Edited by Skeksis
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Evil4Zerggin said:

Datamines of v86 show there is already substantial (if unfinished) code and data supporting a RTW-style campaign with provinces, international diplomacy, random events, etc. While it's possible they will scrap this and do something else, I think more likely than not they will continue on this course.

Oh damn, really? That's a good sign. Fingers crossed.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...