|
My first convoy encounter was a mission addition that went poorly, in that I came from behind it, submerged too early, and all of my officers were tired out. I also didn't load my tubes in port before loading. Got one freighter kill I wasn't aiming for, then had to pull back to surface for air and reload. If I had set up better it would have been a rout; the only escort wasn't a destroyer. By then the convoy was way ahead of me so I turned back to my patrol zone. Unfortunately, you have restricted time acceleration until you completely leave the contact area which takes way too long. I should leave a suggestion about that. The game is interesting but it's probably safe to wait for more features. It might need more or less complexity, I couldn't say which.
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 01:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 19:23 |
|
|
Patrol Report. U-96 departed La Rochelle with a fresh crew and plenty of meat, it's hanging everywhere. We head for Portsmouth for an "Easy" mission to drop off some rear end in a top hat on shore. "Easy". We go to periscope depth, wait for darkness, and slip towards shore. Then suddenly a plane is upon us, we're strafed! The time compression halts about 2 minutes too late and we're strafed a second time. A few bombs add some more holes and we sink onto the chalky bottom.  It's neat, the whole first person thing seems like a total waste. I wish I could disable it 100% to avoid clicking on it or accidentally zooming to it. For some reason the control layout feels weird, I keep wanting to right click portraits instead of using tab. The inventory system also feels weird, let these people use poo poo when it's intelligent, I shouldn't have to tell an engineer to get his gas mask. At least they seem to fix poo poo on their own. The time compression not dropping out until I'd been strafed twice was a bit of a bummer. I just want poo poo to get done, I'd rather a context menu instead of ordering people about. I'm hopeful it'll look better, just not quite what I expected?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 02:03
|
|
|
First patch due tomorrow, https://steamcommunity.com/games/494840/announcements/detail/1651042686425596726 quote:We are planning to release a patch in the next 24 hours. Currently, we are focusing on: That's a decent start.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 02:49
|
|
|
Anyone having difficulty finding ships to sink? I've been on 3 straight patrols without seeing any ships in my patrol area (I did run across a Type VII taking on a pair of corvettes with it's deck gun. Ended about as well as you'd think it would), although I don't know enough about the Battle of the Atlantic to know if that's realistic or not.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 03:12
|
|
|
Crossposting from the Steam forums for UBOAT. I realize crew management is one of the major focuses of the game, but it feels like there is a lot of needless busy work during the "slow" periods of the patrol when nothing is happening. - IMO the issue of managing the crew's exact actions should only matter during the exciting parts such as combat, otherwise the crew should be able to fend for themselves. I really don't enjoy having to tell my officers to go to bed every few minutes, I know they do automatically go rest but wait until their stamina bar is basically empty to do so. So either let me set the threshold at which they go rest or, hell, let me set up a group of watches to cycle through when action stations aren't called. - I feel like there are too few officers and too many things to do. Yes I realize you can get a few extra officers over time, but starting out 5 officers is just too few. Half the time my radio is unmanned and so is my navigation station because I've only got one qualified radio/hydro operator and two officers who can perform watch duty/navigate and they need sleep. - I've noticed a free officer will operate the ballast controls if I order diving/surfacing, but why doesn't anyone go turn on the compressor when we've surfaced? I feel like this should be automatically done by someone without me having to tell them. I realize this might be dangerous during combat conditions due to noise, but the rest of the time its just annoying. - Having to wait for the officer to load in one forward tube before I can tell him what I wanted loaded in the other three tubes is annoying. Just let me queue up all four tubes and then ignore the officer for a while. Yes, I know he automatically loads the tubes unsupervised, but I don't get to pick which torpedoes he loads in that situation, and that is one area where I DO want to have fine control over. - Its kinda annoying that I take a crew discipline hit for "More work" just for assigning crew to officers even when those crew just sit idle (because the officer is sleeping or performing a task that doesn't require assistants). How about making the "more work" penalty only active when those attached crew are actually assisting the officer? So crew management suggestions: - I've noticed that the captain will automatically call Battle Stations in dangerous situations, so why not work this into the crew management mechanics? Make it so that during normal operations many actions are done automatically by the crew and officers will go rest earlier to reserve stamina. When battle stations is called the crew acts more like they do now, they won't leave their station unless their stamina is completely drained or told to, and things that might be dangerous in a combat situation (such as running a noisy compressor) have to be manually activated. - I don't think this one would be done, but I'd suggest eliminating the radioman as a regular controllable officer position. The radiomen and hydrophone operators were usually just petty officers. Make those positions manned by regular crew at all times. Retain the radioman proficiency for senior officers and let me put an actual officer on the hydrophone if I want an increase in efficiency. - Eliminate having to manually stock the kitchen. Why is this a thing? So I can control food consumption vs discipline boost? Just make "Varied Meals?" a yes/no toggle you can set by right clicking the cook and let the bloody cook go fetch dinner from the cabinet whenever he needs to. - Given how often I have to leave the navigator's table unmanned, something has to be done about getting lost, it feels like it happens way too fast/often (yes with the gyro-compass on). In addition, currently it seems to take multiple hours to fix your position after you've lost it for 15 minutes. At the end of my first patrol I lost my position rounding the west coast off Spain into the Bay of Biscay at Ahead 2/3rds, I immediately put my watch officer on navigation to find my position. The officer took well over a minute real-life time to do so while fast forwarding, and when he finally DID find out position, we were less than 10 miles from the coast of west France and I had to frantically order a turn to avoid smacking headfirst into the coast. I feel like it should be MUCH faster to find your position after losing it (or both) for a brief period. Its fine if getting lost for extended periods (and by this I mean a day+) increases the amount of time it takes to find your location, but it shouldn't start that long. Miscellaneous other thoughts, mostly preference stuff and historical complaints: I know this is an "Early Access" thing, but I hope in the future those bloody Sunderlands will be restricted to realistic ranges from airbases. Its kinda nuts getting attacked by one in the middle of the Atlantic far from any airbases that were operational in 1941. The Sunderland had a range of under 2000nm, and I got attacked by one over 1400nm from the tip of Cornwall, were these jerks on a one-way flight? (I guess they could've flown out of the Azores, but those weren't operational in 1941!) Also those bloody Sunderlands have Radar already in 1941 don't they? I hate this from a realism/historicity perspective, but I understand its probably just a way of implementing and testing radar equipped planes regardless of year (Same with the fact my uboat already has bold decoys). Just a bit salty about dying on my first patrol! The encounter system feels like it waits too long to load, I did the derelict uboat mission on a clear, cloudless day and as I approached to within 10 miles of it I kept manually checking ahead in first person view with binoculars or the UZO, trying to spot it. Then suddenly I hit the "encounter" which loaded in and the U-boat popped into existence only 2-3 miles away, while I was looking in its direction, filling my x8 magnification UZO. I could've spotted it way earlier if it had existed. Load encounters, or the physical models or ships or whatever, before they enter visual range. I'm chalking this up to early access: But some of the torpedo stores were external storage and should be a separate location from the normal torpedo storage, only accessible while surfaced (and preferably only in calm seas and at a stop or absolute crawl). IIRC the two forward external torpedo storage compartments also had to be removed when snorkels were installed (though by that point in the war air attack threat was so common the external stores largely went empty and unused). It feels like sometimes when an encounter starts the fast forward stays engaged. The fast forward should ALWAYS turn off when an encounter starts. Overall the game shows a lot of promise, but it definitely needs some work, but that is why its early access isn't it? Looking forward to and hoping for this thing's future, but right now, all its got me is itching to go back to Silent Hunter 3/4.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 03:23
|
|
|
If true then this one needs more time in the oven, sounds like the best move is to check back in a year or so.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 04:14
|
|
|
Its got potential, but yeah, it needs work. Thats early access for ya. Hopefully it improves over a few months. [edit] lol steams crappy poo poo won't let me submit my review right now, so I'm just gonna put it here so I don't lose it. quote:As a longtime Submarine game fan, this game has a lot of potential. But right now I think it needs more time in the oven. Galaga Galaxian fucked around with this message at 07:26 on May 1, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2019 06:34
|
|
|
A whole day with no grog posting. Dead genre!
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2019 14:40
|
|
|
I'm still looking for conversation on Advanced Tactics, ya goons. 
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2019 14:50
|
|
|
Uboat is very much traditionally Early Access, and all the criticism that has been posted so far is accurate. However, it's looking great so far and has the potential to be the WW2 sub game I've always wanted. Still very positive on it, but don't buy it yet if you're looking for something to play right now.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2019 16:03
|
|
|
Played some more UBOAT today and finished another patrol. I'm softening on it a bit, I still think a few things could do with being automated, but actually they can be in a way. With the right officer assignment they'll automatically take care of certain things (an officer given the Quartermaster role, for example, will stock the kitchen and deck gun automatically from storage). So I suspect even just one extra officer would go a long way towards making things more tolerable (I still think Radioman shouldn't be a normal officer position). Also their weird adaptive time compression (Which is in force even when not "fast forwarded" outside of encounters) causes some weirdness, the most annoying one being trying to change headings drastically is a pain (the boat basically turns in real time but time is moving fast).
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2019 05:07
|
|
|
Having played a little more I agree. It's got some wonky and unintuitive UI bits, each station on the boat isn't well explained so it's hard to know how best to utilize your crew. But the suspense of stalking an individual freighter in a convoy escorted by 4 cruisers feels real. Hearing the propellers turning above you hoping they haven't picked up your location, it's quite immersive. As others have said in this thread if you're on the fence or don't wanna deal with a less than ideal UI than wait on it. The devs seem quite responsive so I have pretty high hopes that with some time this can become a real gem similar to how Cold Waters turned out.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2019 06:49
|
|
|
If I liked Silent Hunter 3 (I did) would I like UBOAT?
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2019 14:45
|
|
|
Coiler121 posted:If I liked Silent Hunter 3 (I did) would I like UBOAT? No. As a grognard you should know that: 1. We don’t play games because they’re good; 2. Games are never good enough; 3. Newer always equal worse.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2019 15:01
|
|
|
It sounds like I might get into UBOAT at a later stage of its development. Mind you I found crew management the worst part of SHIII, too...
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2019 15:21
|
|
|
I had some unexpected things happen and my Revolution Under Siege: Gold opponent rightfully dropped it. Any scenario, any side, any takers?
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2019 02:17
|
|
|
Japan '45 is out. http://www.johntillersoftware.com/PanzerCampaigns/Japan45.html
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2019 03:03
|
|
|
Coiler121 posted:If I liked Silent Hunter 3 (I did) would I like UBOAT? It's still very early access. There are numerous bugs, limited content (you always start in May '41 commanding a Type VII in La Rochelle) and they're still ironing out big wrinkles in the gameplay. Also there's no manual targeting. I got it for $20 and I don't regret purchasing it but you'll probably get the best experience if you wait a few months.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2019 07:27
|
|
|
sum posted:It's still very early access. There are numerous bugs, limited content (you always start in May '41 commanding a Type VII in La Rochelle) and they're still ironing out big wrinkles in the gameplay. Also there's no manual targeting. I got it for $20 and I don't regret purchasing it but you'll probably get the best experience if you wait a few months. There is manual targeting though?
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2019 14:48
|
|
|
nipperi posted:There is manual targeting though? There is! I feel stupid. In my defense it's never mentioned in the tutorial.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2019 20:32
|
|
|
V for Vegas posted:Japan '45 is out. Whats the catch
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2019 00:54
|
|
|
algebra testes posted:Whats the catch It's John Tiller.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2019 06:47
|
|
|
V for Vegas posted:It's John Tiller. Is John Tiller as bad as Gary Grigsby on the "excessive detail breaks high level modeling" issue?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2019 08:02
|
|
|
Davin Valkri posted:Is John Tiller as bad as Gary Grigsby on the "excessive detail breaks high level modeling" issue? Nope! You're playing at the scale where the detail makes sense, so it doesn't break the game. And, given the scale, the amount of detail isn't even excessive. It's almost boardgame-like in its mechanical modeling.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2019 08:08
|
|
|
Yeah John Tiller is in the 'windows 3.5 had all the UI anyone could ever need' category of grog dev and he has the array of command options hidden behind menus, but the most important combat mechanics are straight from tabletop 'roll d6 and pick the result' rules.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2019 08:58
|
|
|
Also get ready to see the combat popups a billion times on your turn (so fast AI doesn't do jack), never found any way to speed those up. I even get loading sometimes between a unit firing and the results being displayed. Makes every scenario over a certain size completely unplayable, as does the lack of pathfinding for your units. Ridiculous to have to click on every drat hex a unit is going to move to, particularly in scenarios with long roads. (and before someone says it, I tried the AI formation movement too, it's loving terrible as well)
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2019 09:35
|
|
|
AceRimmer posted:Also get ready to see the combat popups a billion times on your turn (so fast AI doesn't do jack), never found any way to speed those up. In settings turn on 'On Map Results'. This gives you less information than the popup but doesn't stop the AI processing. As for movement, yeah, it's annoying. You can 'drag and drop' units to make long distance movement better, though this isn't always ideal.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2019 10:20
|
|
|
I was about to pull the trigger for Scourge of War: Gettysburg but apparently it is not on Steam. I only found SOW: Waterloo. Frustrating!
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2019 10:44
|
|
|
Is the consensus still "don't get that, get Take Command instead?"
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2019 15:47
|
|
|
Once again taking this opportunity to plug our John Tiller LP's: My Civil War Battles LP just wrapped up its third battle, and is currently on hiatus while I write-up the historical background for the next one. My Panzer Campaigns LP did its first battle as a completely introductory test to get you comfortable with the UI and the game mechanics, and is currently in the middle of a Soviet counterattack scenario. Hypnobeard's excellent First World War Campaigns LP is set during the Great War, is almost done with its third battle, and is gearing up for the main event. AceRimmer posted:Makes every scenario over a certain size completely unplayable, as does the lack of pathfinding for your units. Ridiculous to have to click on every drat hex a unit is going to move to, particularly in scenarios with long roads. (and before someone says it, I tried the AI formation movement too, it's loving terrible as well) You can select a unit, then click-and-drag from the unit's current hex, to the destination hex, and the AI will try to move to where you designated. It usually works well, and once you know that it works for one unit, you can do it for everyone else on the same path.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2019 16:19
|
|
|
Hippocrass posted:In settings turn on 'On Map Results'. This gives you less information than the popup but doesn't stop the AI processing. It's still horribly slow, particularly when it's a large stack of units that gets hit.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2019 17:18
|
|
|
AceRimmer posted:No, I do mean the little box that just has a brief casualty report, not the detailed popup. There shouldn't be a box, just the casualty numbers printed directly over the target hex. Could you try to get a screenshot? Maybe just double check "On Map Results' has a check mark next to it. Also, just to be clear, which game specifically are you talking about. I think they should be the same for this, but each different series has their little differences.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2019 23:29
|
|
|
Aurora 4x questions; Basic ethos for design is that bigger engines are more efficient, but numerous engines are hard to knock out? Jump ships that act as fleet tenders are the way to go, and I should design in system boats first, then Jump ships to carry them? Is there any mileage in Jump Grav survey given the propensity of things to run out of fuel? Do you build fuel harvesters into survey fleets?
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2019 15:56
|
|
|
Hav posted:Aurora 4x questions; Yes, with caveats. Harder to knock out completely, you still lose speed as you lose engines - that is, assuming your ship survives the engine blowout when one goes. Another tradeoff is the research points to finalize the design, a size-50 monster engine will take up your P/P specialist for quite a while. Jump engines are very large, so making a combat-capable jump ship loses a lot of tonnage that you really want to have weapons and armor and realspace engines in. You can, but it's expensive and difficult, so most people's strategy is to have tenders that can move system boats around. You do also know about jump gate builders, yes? A JP stabilized into a gate doesn't need a tender to open it, so your system boats can use them. If your things are running out of fuel all the time, try single large engines (as mentioned), moving your power/efficiency on the engine down (a 5% increase in power is more than a 5% increase in fuel use), or just researching the next generation of of engine fuel efficiency. Speaking just for myself, yeah, i have 100-200bkm survey ships that do fine. I don't send harvesters out (have you heard the good Word of the harvester station?) but I do station tankers on the edge of my stabilized jump network as portable refueling stations.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2019 16:30
|
|
|
I just bought a $32 game from Shrapnel with the 10 days to download/3 installs max DRM I'm part of the problem.And the dev would even want to go on Steam, but: quote:*The reason Approaching Infinity stays with Shrapnel is because, to break the contract, I have to buy out the remaining physical stock at near-retail price. That's an investment of thousands of dollars. e: As an aside it's a really neat and detailed knockoff of the Prospector space roguelike (with permission from the Prospector dev, even), but the price/DRM is disgusting. Private Speech fucked around with this message at 17:04 on May 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 6, 2019 16:56
|
|
|
Why the gently caress would shrapnel print that many physical copies in the first place? WHO THE gently caress IS BUYING THIS poo poo
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2019 17:00
|
|
|
Seems pretty clear they probably went way overboard on the physical copies to exploit the contract
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2019 17:11
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:Why the gently caress would shrapnel print that many physical copies in the first place? They have an incentive to print more copies than they expect to sell because unsold copies are an anchor keeping the devs from leaving.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2019 17:14
|
|
|
I like how the dev is scared of them:quote:Hi, yeah, i went with shrapnel cuz they did Space Empires 4, my favorite game of the 2000's.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2019 17:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 19:23 |
|
|
I actually feel bad for that guy. It seems like he made a well meaning but poorly informed decision and has realized the error of his ways but they've got him by the balls and now he'll never escape.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2019 17:24
|
|
