northcarolina2

1.10 Released

Earlier in the week Apple approved the 1.10 update for Atlantic Fleet making it now available for iOS, Android and Kindle.
The PDF game manual has also been updated for 1.10 and contains a full list of enhancements and fixes under the Release Notes section for those interested.

In other news:
Atlantic Fleet Lite versions should be coming out next week.
Atlantic Fleet PC/Mac version is getting close, not sure we’ll have it out for Christmas however. Screenshots coming in the next week or so.

169 Responses to “1.10 Released”

  1. MattF4U-4

    Was north carolinas damage model corrected?For example when you’d shoot something very high up on the ship like the radar and the powder would detonate

    Anyway,I’ve been enjoying it,U-Boats finally being fun to use again,and XXIs actually working in BoTA

    Reply
    • gm11

      I fired at North Carolina’s main radar. For me, the magazines don’t detonate, when I do that.

      Reply
    • Killerfish Games

      Yes, NC (and other capital ships) damage modeling was reverted in 1.09 update.

      Reply
    • Battleship Yamato

      Did the Soviets and the Italians every fight each other in naval battles in world war 2? If so it could be an idea for a sequel game. Or maybe the French and Italy.

      Reply
      • Battleship Yamato

        Is it possible to remake Pacific Fleet? I love the game but I would really like to see more ships.

        Reply
  2. gm11

    Killerfish Games, the hull of North Carolina still doesn’t have any holes rendered, even when I hit the hull. iPad Air 2, iOS 9.1. I am using detailed graphics.

    Reply
    • gm11

      Holes on the deck will still render, but damage to the hull, especially below the waterline, doesn’t render any holes.

      Reply
      • Clive

        I have an Issue with KGV and Lion where torp hits register as holes in the deck(it was not listing at all when hit)

        Reply
  3. Nuclear moose

    Hey killerfish, would you ever think of adding more ports?

    If so, here ar a few sugestions:
    Axis- Sevastopol,Bulgarian ports, and captured Greek and Yugoslavian ports

    Allies- Gulf of Mexico ports (Houston,New Orleans,Biloxi,Mobile),Murmansk, and South African ports

    Reply
  4. Sgt. Fallen44

    KillerFishGames how about italian battleships and merchant raiders on ww2 battle of the atlantic?

    Reply
  5. Harold Angelo Toribio Fernandez

    KillerFishGames How about Italian battleships & merchant raiders on WW2 that fought on Battle of the Atlantic & Mediterranean Sea?

    Reply
    • Killerfish Games

      The merchant raiders Kormoran, Pinguin and Atlantis are already in.
      No plans to add the Italian Navy at this time. If we build those ships it would likely be for a sequel title.

      Reply
      • Clive

        Atlantic Fleet 2?
        I’d pay another $20 for a more in depth campaign (convoys to Malta, supporting invasions), and full US, French, Russian, and Italian rosters (only the ones that actually served)

        Reply
    • MattF4U-4

      For those allied ports…Arkhangelsk is good,as I commonly run a carrier group up to keep German Raiders on check up there,But South Africa?,no,Gulf of Mexico?,No(Never once sent a ship in there)

      Reply
  6. Nuclear moose

    Maybe Norfolk Naval Yard? But I guess we could live without it since we already have Halifax

    Reply
  7. Nuclear moose

    Hey, did the Renown class battle crusier and Revenge class battleships still have their torpedoes when ww2 started?

    Reply
  8. Battleship Yamato

    Could there possible be a prequel game with ships and naval battles during World War 1?

    Reply
    • Killerfish Games

      It is something we’ve considered, but no plans to make such a game at this time.

      Reply
  9. Battleship Yamato

    Did the Soviets and the Italians every fight each other in naval battles in world war 2? If so it could be an idea for a sequel game. Or maybe the French and Italy. Also is it possible to remake Pacific Fleet? I love the game but I would really like to see more ships.

    Reply
    • MattF4U-4

      I wanna see a Cold War game…1947-1991,With multiple configurations for any ship class that went under modifications during the time (Essex,Midway,Iowas,etc)

      It’d be so confusing,lol

      Reply
      • DigestedSine561

        I’d like that a little but it’d be a bit off balance (SO MANY USN ships) and how would you work 1000km cruise missiles?

        Reply
        • MattF4U-4

          It’d be so damn confusing,But,we’ll see what killer fish has in store next I’d love A Cold War or PF2 game

          Reply
    • gm11

      I’d like to see a new Pacific Fleet. Perhaps it could have the A-150 and Montana as unlockable ships. It should also have many features that are already in AF, such as many ship classes, dynamic campaign, pricing structure similar to ships in AF, a few Royal Navy ships, etc.

      Cold War would be awesome, but it’s going to take a lot of work to make. So many possible nations, ship classes, and how the dynamic campaign would work (my idea was all out war). There would also be an opportunity, to bring back shore bombardments, due to the Iowas being used for that.

      Maybe having online multiplayer too…., but who knows. Killerfish will decide.

      Reply
      • DigestedSine561

        I would really like PacFlt II with all those big juicy warships – Lexington, Iowa, Atlanta, Fletcher, Akagi/Kaga, Soryū, Shōkaku, Kongō, Nagato, Yamato, Myōkō, Takao, Nagara, Fubuki, Shimakaze, 400-series… the list goes on!
        It’s not called “the Naval War” for nothing you know!

        Reply
        • MattF4U-4

          You didn’t mention the Yorktowns with the Enterprise,Something’s wrong with you!

          Reply
          • DigestedSine561

            Yorktown doesn’t look as good as the Lady Lex though… but I see that the Yorktowns and Essexs would be necessary.

          • MattF4U-4

            Plus,The Yorktowns and Essexes were the Most important carriers in the pacific,Therefore,Can’t have a pacific game without them!,lol

      • Anonymous

        Alaska class Large Cruisers would be good – Cheap and good for AA screening with good fire power (9 12 inch) against ships like takao and atone as well as offering a chance of victory against weaker battleships

        Reply
        • DigestedSine561

          Alaska would be like Deutschland – completely overpowered until it encounters an enemy battleship because even Kongō could put an end to it quickly with 8x14in main batteries.

          Reply
          • Clive

            In fact Iowa would be Yamato one on one. But witout FCS Montana fits better

          • Battleship Yamato

            If the Montana is added then the would need to add the super Yamato. Also the USS Texas would be fun

          • MattF4U-4

            Super Yamato wouldn’t be able to be sunk by Damn Montanna or any Battleships because of its armor,Be realistic damn it,Montanna Rivals Yamato,not A-150

        • DigestedSine561

          I’m not too sure on Montana, because there’s a reason it wasn’t built – the enemy fleet carriers (for example, I don’t know, Shinano) would decimate it fast. To quote Battlestations: Pacific: “Admiral Yamamoto foresaw the future of ocean warfare. Gone are the days when dreadnoughts ruled the seas!

          Reply
  10. Battleship Yamato

    I would like to see the return of sore bombardment . Also I would like to see the inclusion of French, Italian, and Soviet Warships.

    Reply
  11. MattF4U-4

    Question for everyone:What is everyone’s favorite destroyer type in game?,And Maybe your top 5?

    I personally like Tribals,8 Guns,Enough torpedoes for ASW,and even more effective with Hedgehogs,Only problem is the lack of torpedoes against heavy cruisers or Battleships,Which is why I typically operate them in 2 or do 1 Tribal and one JKN Per Group

    Anyway….,my top 5

    5:Type 1934/1934A
    4:Type 1936B
    3:Type 1936A/1936A(Mob)(Longest gun Range for guns,5.9 Inch guns,Though only 5)
    2.JKN Class(Like a smaller tribal,With less guns and More torpedoes)
    1.Tribal Class

    Reply
    • DigestedSine561

      1: JKN
      2: Type 1936B
      3: Type 1936
      4: Type 1934(A)
      5: Tribal
      I’ve not used the Tribal much, my preferred method of combat is a carrier, cruiser squad/battleship and a DesRon formed of three or four JKNs. Let the carrier do ASW.

      Reply
      • MattF4U-4

        My Usual CVBG is 1 Carrier(By May 1940 Illustrious Either gets her own group or Replaces A Courageous depending on Funding),1 BB,Preferrably KGV,and 2 Destroyers of any type

        Reply
        • DigestedSine561

          I like the *deep breath* Revenge-class battleships as they’re so cheap and with thick armour so they can even shrug off 11in rounds to cover the carriers to launch bombers.

          Reply
          • MattF4U-4

            Those things are so easy to kill XD,but they ain’t bad for the price

  12. Alex

    Nice game though! The money was totally worth it italian navy would be cool, but italian Mediterranean fleet might make BOTA games more difficult I think the Italian navy was good was ambushed a lot and put out of action they may tip the balance of most powerful ships to axis(maybe)

    Reply
  13. Alex

    Maybe next game could be pacific and atlantic fronts merged but I’d how much space it would take Just and idea or a mode in games where you can use a ship from anyfront(obviously not everything would make it) be kinda cool these are just idea’s not the best but I tried a lot of space though or a game about air raids just a thought

    Reply
  14. steveno

    Hey Killer fish how about adding the USS Mississippi in to the game it played a key role over in the Atlantic majority of WWII before being called to the Pacific for the Leyte Gulf invasion and was the last Battleship to fire upon another Battleship in history in Battle of Surigoa Strait. The USS Alabama was in the Atlantic as well never really saw any combat but it was used to try to lure out the Tirpitz which never would come out to face it. But I’d love to see the USS Mississippi in the game

    Reply
  15. Gregg Metternich

    I’ve been playing the British Campaign game. It froze at Week 0.5 October, 1943. I could not progress, nor does (multiple) hot or cold reboots solve it. After I click on “Continue”, the front screen destroyer shows, all “beginning of turn” options are available at bottom of screen, progress bar is now a series of white boxes, not blue/red. The “information” tally is accurate for progress but now, list of ships sunk is empty.

    Reply
    • Killerfish Games

      Did this happen with the 1.10 version of the game?
      Did it happen soon after updating to 1.10 with an existing save game?
      There might be some data corruption issues when updating to 1.10, so restarting a new BotA game should resolve it.

      Reply
      • Gregg Metternich

        I’ve been running the 1.10v for as long as it’s been available, about a week. The game just stopped on 12/9. Since I play it far more than I should, it transitioned to 1.10 then…this. We’re taking *many* hours of gameplay between 1.10 push and this.

        Reply
      • Gregg Metternich

        I’ve been running the 1.10v for as long as it’s been available, about a week. The game just stopped on 12/9. Since I play it far more than I should, it transitioned to 1.10 then…this. We’re talking *many* hours of gameplay between 1.10 push and this.

        Reply
      • Rayydar

        Yesterday it happened for the 3rd time – at different stages of BotA! Notabene: only the British BotA is affected. No probs with the German side.
        1) Immediately after updating to 1.10.
        An incompatibility between 1.09 and 1.10? Started a new BotA in 1.10.
        2) After many hours of playing: corrupted again! :(
        I even deleted and re-installed AF to make sure that it’s a clean version.
        3) After many hours of playing: corrupted again! :(((

        So it’s no use to play the British BotA any longer.
        Since 1.09 BotA (KM) always freezes in pursuits of merchants (after sinking the escorts) or of warships under smoke unless you waste ammo by firing in each single turn (reproduceable). Sometimes it freezes inmidst combat (not reproduceable).

        Result:
        I’m really fed up with AF. Once it was a promising game and could have become excellent with some major and minor design optimizations. But ridiculous coding mistakes and lack of testing have ruined it.

        Reply
        • Killerfish Games

          Sorry to hear that.
          We’ve had a few reports of corrupted data in BotA games, but this is the first confirmation that it is not just an “updated to version 1.10″ issue.
          Now that we know there is an ongoing issue we can attempt to address it.
          BotA Crash: this only occurs when playing the RN? Have you ever seen it with the KM?
          Pursuit Crash: still don’t understand this one. Can this be reproduced in a Single Battle? Are you saying that you are playing the KM, you sink all the escorts and it crashes on your turn, or the enemies? Need a step by step description of what is happening here.

          Reply
          • Rayydar

            Corrupted Data: I usually buy 2 G / H class DD at the very start. So how can they cause the bug sometime in 1940 / 41? Don’t remember about repairs etc.

            BotA Crash: not 100% sure which side I was playing when BotA ‘crashed’ – in fact, the result was the same kind of freezing like in the Pursuit Crash. Yep, probably the RN.

            Pursuit Crash: don’t understand why you don’t understand. Maybe it would help if you played your own game? This bug has occurred in BotA only since v1.09, when the (unrealistic) ‘sink enemy ships and withdraw’ option was introduced; it cannot be reproduced in a Single Battle. Freezes in enemy turn and could be the old fleet movement bug again – but only if you don’t fire with any of your ships for 1 – 3 turns.
            Very weird.

          • Killerfish Games

            Pursuit Crash: Enemy Can Disengage option is on or off? Can it occur in Campaigns (a user has reported cannot finish level 40 of RN Campaign due to this issue, suggesting it can).
            Does the freeze only occur after all warships are sunk and only merchants remain? Are some of the merchants damaged/sunk when it occurs?

          • Rayydar

            > Pursuit Crash: Enemy Can Disengage option is on or off?
            ON.

            >Can it occur in Campaigns?
            I don’t play the Campaigns with their annoying limitation to 3 player ships.

            > Does the freeze only occur after all warships are sunk and only merchants remain?
            As stated several times: YES. But also in pursuit of enemy warships under smoke (no merchants involved). IMO the key is: no firing, neither by the AI nor by the player.

            > Are some of the merchants damaged/sunk when it occurs?
            Usually not, unless by a random hit. I always sink warships first.

            Why don’t you just perform a Diff between v1.08 (working fine in this respect) and v1.09?
            You must have modified something relevant in v1.09, perhaps in connection with the new withdraw option.

        • Killerfish Games

          What option settings do you use for British BotA’s that fail: 30 or 20 Player ships in Fleet? Sunk Ships Recycled by enemy On or Off and Difficulty Normal or Hard?
          Do you ever release ships from service and does the issue happen only after you’re repaired any ships? Also about what date does it occur?

          Reply
          • Killerfish Games

            BoTA Crash: G,H Class DD’s are the suspect. Be very interested to know if a BotA RN game where you don’t buy any G, H Class DD’s gets corrupted. Or if folks experiencing the crash often buy G, H Class DDs.

          • DigestedSine561

            My Battle of the Atlantic has never crashed – and I’ve never bought any destroyers other than the VW, the JKN and the Tribal.

          • MattF4U-4

            Meanwhile I always have a few G,H,Maybe some I class vessels around due to their cheap price,I typically replace them with Tribals and JKNs as they’re sunk but I’ve crashes with the G/H in the fleet

    • gm11

      I encountered this exact same bug. For me, it happened, right after Pearl Harbor was attacked, and US entered the war.

      Reply
    • Killerfish Games

      We think you’ll like them. A lot of effort has gone into completely revamping the graphics.
      Hopefully this week we’ll get some screenshots out.

      Reply
  16. ALC

    Is it normal for one torpedo to sink the CV Courageous? In multiple battles one u boat launches one torpedo and sinks the courageous on one hit it rapidly sinks. Is this a bug or is it normal? I have not tried of other carriers are sunk by one torpedo.

    Reply
    • Killerfish Games

      It can be extremely variable. Courageous is an older ship and has a poor torpedo defense system. A single torpedo hit in the centre of the ship can be devastating, while a hit to the fore/aft tends to be less likely to sink her outright.

      Reply
    • MattF4U-4

      Not really a good carrier for taking any hits,I’ve sunk other carriers with one hit so it’s not a bug

      Reply
  17. Nuclear moose

    I thought of another port- Brazilian and Uruguan ports. Can we have convoy routes coming from Uruguay? They didn’t send troops to fight but they did send food

    Reply
  18. Nuclear moose

    Can you add the disability for submarines to dive if they’re dive planes or pressure hull is damaged to a certain extent?

    Reply
    • Clive

      Yes that is needed…. and DD fire vs periscope depth submarines needs to be more effective.

      Reply
  19. Lee

    This game is amazing. I played PF and that game was great, and then AF comes out, and i am truly awestruck by its graphics. but I only request 3 things: a multiplayer, PT boats, and more battleships for the German navy. I think the multiplayer would work great, giving each side (consisting of 1 player each with a set amount of of ships) a time limit to plan their move. PT boats should also work well against submarines and small vessels. Last but definitely not the least is more German battleships. Why is because the British significantly outnumber the Germans in terms of battleships, making it harder to defeat the British. Some suggestions are the Wittelsbach class SMS Zahringen, sunk in 1944, and the Deutschland class SMS Schlesian, scuttled in 1945, with the SMS Schleswig-Holstein, also scuttled in 1945.

    Reply
    • DigestedSine561

      Ah, I’m not too sure. Whilst multiplayer would be fantastic, how would you fire on motor torpedo boats? I believe that they used their agility to get close but with a turn-based game they are much easier to aim at and hit – even a 6in shell would most likely kill one. Also, the German pre-dreadnoughts have either 9.4in or 11in guns. The 9,4in are not good enough for a battleship and whilst the others have 11in they only have 4 of them – not enough. If they were nicknamed ‘five second ships’ at Jutland (see the death of Pommern) how well could they stand up to a KGV-class – hell, they’d probably die to a Dido-class AA cruiser!

      Reply
      • MattF4U-4

        Germany also has better battleships as it is,They don’t need more anyway…I sink British battleships nearly every encounter

        Reply
        • Clive Magras

          That’s because AI gunnery sucks.
          Both Scarny and Bismarck are WW2 ships, Revenge and Queen Elizabeth are WW1.

          Reply
          • IronMan

            Hi People, can someone tell me why in BotA, ( playing germans ) every battle i have, only 1 submarine or 1 ship is selected in the battle to fight merchants nonetheless i have several submarines or several battleships in the same zone.

            Example : in Labrador sea, I have 2 submarines and the Gneisenau : I push next turn and there is a battle occurring, and only 1 submarine is selected for the battle. Why aren’t the second submarine and the Gneisenau selected ? ( if this is important, the date is 3rd week of december 1939 )

            Thanks !!

          • Killerfish Games

            Submarines and surface ships attack independently, so only one ship type will be in the encounter.
            If surface ships attack and submarines are also in the zone, the submarines usually give the initiative to the surface ships (scouting bonus).
            If you have 2 submarines, both should enter combat. Can this be reproduced?

      • Lee

        You got a point, PT boats won’t work. To compensate for the British battleships maybe adding the Graf Zeppelin would work, as the H-39 was added, despite it not being finished. Of course the Historical accuracy option would not allow the player to use it. Maybe add the Italian battleships, as the British side got the USS North Carolina, despite it not being part of the British Fleet. Otherwise I don’t know how to balance the two fleets.

        Reply
        • MattF4U-4

          The “British” Fleet isn’t just British,it’s the western Allied fleet as a whole

          Reply
  20. ALC

    Well I better wait for better carriers in BOTA the courageous is so much easier to sink than escort carriers ill use illustrous when I can in boat

    Reply
      • DigestedSine561

        Implacable (R86) would no no use – she was commissioned in ’44, far too late. But Ark and Eagle (and maybe Hermes) are a big yes as I think that the best weapon for a fleet is a CVBG – carrier battle group – mine are a BB, a CV and a selection of smaller ships. I can only have 3 for the first 8 or so months of the war which is irritating – I can’t cover enough convoy traffic with three!

        Reply
    • IronMan

      Ak ok thank you Killerfish now I can spread out all my submarines in te same zone thanks !

      Reply
  21. ALC

    Ya Courageous has bad torpedo defense system I was a u boat and sank it in once torpedo on the front was l hull

    Reply
  22. ALC

    Can you ram submarines in this game? Have not tried yet, but if not can you add submarine ramming later? When a sub is next to you depth charges don’t go to the side only front and back

    Reply
    • Killerfish Games

      Yes, ramming a submarine forces it to dive (and does damage, perhaps sinking it).
      Correct, depth charges drop in a grid behind the escort.

      Reply
  23. IronMan

    Killerfish what do you think of adding cargoes and freights that are detached from merchants ships when they capsize, I mean like small tanks ( shermans ) or others freights can sink separately from the merchants ships. Good idea isn’t it ?

    Reply
  24. Clive

    Bug Report/Broken Feature:
    The forward AND rear arcs of the secondary guns are broken on Revenge and Nelson and the rear arcs are broken on Lutzow.

    Reply
  25. Clive

    I have a few cosmetic/bug issues.
    1. Superstructures explode when ships sink from flooding- looks really bad.
    2. When a superstructure is blown away any modules on it (rangefinders/etc) become indestructible. I would fix this by destroying those modules along with the superstructure.
    3. When a Magazine explodes the turret it belongs to is not destroyed. This would be very simple to add.
    4. Not a bug, but Propulsion/Steering needs to be destroyable (permanent) after all engine rooms have been hit. The ship would be scuttled after the battle if it is the only remaining ship.
    5. Also not a bug, but fires need to have their extinguishing rates based on how many fires are onboard. 1 fire would be the current rate. 2 fires would take 1.5 times. 3+ fires would take 2x.

    Reply
  26. the_patroller55

    Isn’t there going to be some land assault maps in AF?
    I liked the island hopping in Pacific Fleet…
    After AF, will there be an overhaul/modernization for PF?
    You should use the mechanics of AF back in PF.
    Or you should put more ship classes.
    I would have liked it if you could play with the Ise-class Aviation Battleships or I-400 Sen-toku subs…
    The IJN should have gotten more subs, the Ise, the Akashi and the other ships/equipment like in AF.
    And, implement AF’s 10-ship fleet in PF… there should be a Battle of the Pacific gamemode.

    But, I guess that would be too much…

    Reply
    • DigestedSine561

      They’ve already said that as the basics of PF are seven ships per side, they would have to make full sequel with more vessels, individual ships (as opposed to classes) better shore bombardment and historical missions/dynamic campaign but hey – here’s hoping, they do say they have a new game as an idea!

      Reply
  27. Battleship Yamato

    Hey I have a question. When I’m playing Bota I noticed that when I’m trying to disengage I get a notice saying enemy vessels are to close. How ever I get this notice when I am far away and retreating in the other direction. Is this a bug or if not what is the rage of the battle zone and how far away do I have to be to disengage? This problem started to appear in June 1943 when playing as the German navy.

    Reply
  28. Battleship Yamato

    Germany really needs more ships in general the split is Britain has 505 total warships while Germany only has 225 total warships. Can you please add the Graf Zeppelin and other ships possible from Italy or Japan seeing that they were allies.

    Reply
    • MattF4U-4

      It’s Atlantic fleet,Japan Is 100% excluded.

      Germany does not Reallyneed new ships,I can do just fine with 4 Battleships and 26 Submarines,I’ve won 4 BoTA Campaigns with This or something similar

      What Germany lacks in Surface ships they make up for in Submarines….
      I find it Balanced anyway,Germany’s larger Surface ships are a Better then British counterparts

      idk why everyone wants Graf Zeppelin so badly,I can Easily knock out a Carrier from 25K Yards,Wouldn’t serve much purpose for the Germans

      Now Italy,Yeah it’d be nice to see some of their Ships,Would really Be nice to use The Vittorio Class to Supplement Bismarck and Tirpitz,And Would Balance out the Problems people have with the Amiunt of Battleships between the Allies and Germany

      Reply
      • Nuclear moose

        Now, Japan actually wasn’t entirely excluded from the Atlantic Theater, the Japanese sent submarines over to occupied France on Yangai missions with supplies and blueprints of weapons for the Germans and in exchange, the Germans inspected their submarines,gave them Melox radars and sent a few officers on their submarine on the way back to japan

        Reply
        • DigestedSine561

          Id much rather have them save their efforts for a possible sequel to Pacific Fleet? Maybe? Please?

          Reply
          • Clive

            I think that would take a lot of time. I want to see the Russo Japanese war or American Civil War

  29. Battleship Yamato

    When can there be a float plane mechanic. Can it be more that just a detail of a ship

    Reply
    • the_patroller55

      About floatplanes, looking at some of the cruisers, such as the County-class, and some battleships, they have floatplanes loaded.
      What I don’t get is when you look at a ship in the dock and it says “_x Aircraft” even though it’s a non-carrier surface ship. (same for Germany)
      What does the “_x Aircraft” stand for, and why can’t warships use floatplanes even though they’re loaded on the ship model?

      Reply
      • Killerfish Games

        The floatplanes are listed as planes because as recon planes they do serve a purpose in the dynamic campaign. It’s just that there is no need for having player-controlled recon or artillery spotting in the tactical combat because the 3D camera already provides the same capability.

        Reply
  30. Battleship Yamato

    When playing Bota as the German navy around what date after Pearl Harbor dose the war end in an Allied Victory?

    Reply
  31. Battleship Yamato

    Also in regards to the USS Montana being destroyed by the Super Yamato. There is one US ship that can beat the A-150. It’s called the Tillman IV 2 it was drawn up in early 1917. This is the statistics I could find.

    Displacement: 80,000 short tons (73,000 t)
    Length: 975 feet (297 m)
    Beam: 108 feet (33 m)
    Draft: 32 feet 9 inches (9.98 m)
    Speed: 25.2 knots (46.7 km/h; 29.0 mph)
    Main Battery: (15) 18-inch (460 mm), 50-caliber guns in five triple turrets.

    Reply
    • MattF4U-4

      1 U.S Ship?

      Nope…..Carriers would work quite fine ,Size doesn’t matter ;)

      Seriously,No need for A-150 Ever in a Killerfish game,And I’m sure I could destroy it with an Iowa or Montana if it was,American 16 inch guns had roughly Equal Penetration power(When using Super Heavy loads) to Yamatos 18 inch guns,So Im Sure I could do Damage

      Plus,In all Practicality,A-150 would Serve no Purpose in a PF2(Which I hope is the next game,If not a Cold War game would be nice…Would be so epic,Maybe we updated AF Standards),That is If it was very Resembling of the Pacific war with Carriers being the Primary force(I’ll take 15 pls)

      But yeah,There plenty of U.S Warships that can Do Damage or Sink the A-150 in any Possible Way,would just be difficult

      Reply
      • Battleship Yamato

        A- 150 would destroy the Montana in any normal engagement. Due to the bigger guns and the distance. And carriers wouldn’t really work unless you use like 7 carriers from a distance. Also the difference is that you could only launch one plane at a time.

        Reply
        • MattF4U-4

          Tru,the one plane at a time Rule is a pain,but,that’s how it’s set up

          If I could do a few it’d be fairly easy,Just depends on luck

          Reply
  32. MattF4U-4

    Question for Everyone

    What Game Are You Really hoping Killerfish is making next?

    The Most Appealig to me would be A PF 2,With any new Features they plan on addiing to the next game,Along with many of AF’s Feautures(Merchant tonnage counting as an Example,For a Pacific war Dynamic Campaign)

    One thing I’d REALLY hope for if PF 2 is next Is real Battles on land Being Able to Effect the Fleet war,Like you may have to Deploy a force of ships To support a Land invasion(Shore Bombardment needed….I loved that stuff),With the Battles Including Historical Beginning and End dates If all is going well

    If it’s the Next game I think it’d need a MUCH larger fleet limit(60+ NEEDED,OVERKILL TIME BABY!!!! XD) ,Simply due to the Size of the Fleet….in all Honesty I’d probably have 15 Carriers….Hehe

    If it is the Next game I’m hoping that There will be Multiple ways of Victory Ina Dynamic Campaign,Examples being Merchant Tonnage,Warships sunk…Territories controlled,Morale,Would require some Strategic Thinking

    Now think off How many ships there Would be XD(I’d have like All 3 Yorktowns and A Bunch of Essex’s as My main force once it could be possible :P )

    Obviously I’d like to see Historical Ship upgrades As they become available(though some I’d like to leave optional) for Example Enterprise at the Beginning of the war had 1.1 Inch AA and 20MMs,with 5 Inch guns as well,By the End,Most if not all 20s were removed and she had like 40-50+ 40mms and The 5 Inch guns to Combat Kamikazes

    Oh yeah,And Kamikaze attacks Becoming Important late in the war…Yeah I want to use my Epic Crashing kills to win! XD

    Many more Things I’d love to see in a New game….Just procrastinating though

    Reply
    • Battleship Yamato

      The historical ship upgrades is a good idea. Also maybe being able to upgrade a ship with its original intended armament. For example the Montana class was originally designed to have 18 inch guns.

      Reply
    • DigestedSine561

      I’d love Pacific Fleet II! So many great classes… I could go on for a while. I would like to see upgrades though; ships like Ise and Maya were significantly modified throughout the war. And a Battle of the Pacific would just be… WANT NOW!

      Reply
    • Nuclear moose

      I want to see a WW1 game next and imagine the aircraft carriers! The first ones were wierd…

      Reply
    • MattF4U-4

      It’s literally all I play,No Battle is Programmed and There’s more stuff to consider

      Plus there’s that moment when you really want that one ship and when you can get it you’re all like *success*

      Reply
    • Clive

      Only 30 ships per side, no fuel limit, AI that sucks, no missions besides convoy defense or attack. Only 10 ship convoys, Crappy CV combat, no port defense.

      Most important is the way convoy raiding is set up. All ships in convoys is really stupid. Not controlling friendly convoys is also stupid.

      Reply
      • MattF4U-4

        Ummm,Campaign only allows 10 ships per side,AI is only dumb because you haven’t turned on Elite AI Gunnery(Which I have and Battleships score A pretty good amount of hits),The fuel limit,yeah I want to see that implemented as an Option

        And the Only mission in the BoTA was Convoy Attack and Defense,Or ASW,Or the occasional battles away from convoys,Which are all in game

        What does port defense have to do with anything?

        CV Combat is Still crappy in campaign if that’s the case

        And You can control friendly convoys

        And about the 10 ship thing,That’s just game limitations

        Reply
          • MattF4U-4

            Well that’s a fault with campaign as well then

            10 ships vs 10 ships in combat…how is that not enough?

            And sure 30 ships might not be enough but it’s better than 20

          • Clive

            I’d rather have 10 combat ship limits and realistic (20 ship) convoy sizes.

            For the BOTA campaign i’d like to be able to create fleets (up to 10 warships) and move them together, and then make all ships historically owned by the nation in combat.

          • DigestedSine561

            I be honest, I agree with both of you. Whilst 10v10 warships is plenty enough, it rarely gets that far – usually it’s only a solo destroyer or submarine – and whilst more ships in a convoy would be nice, they add nothing to the experience of a battle and mean that it would be easier to beat the campaign sinking 50,000t per turn. And will everyone stop hating on carriers, if they have a decent escort they are perfect – I can sink a submarine better than I can in a destroyer with a carrier and I can three-shot a battleship if I’m lucky. However I do agree with Clive on points; it would be nice to have battle groups that move in unison – it can take efforts to move seven ships per turn across three separate zones – and I also don’t like it when a damaged capital ship steaming for repairs takes up position in the centre of my destroyer group; it should be separated from the small ships. Actually, idea: have three or four preset formations and have them as default as I’m fed up with having destroyers sailing in a column with the lead ship off centre or having a capital ship with all her escorts grouped to one side.

  33. Don

    Af. iPad How about the merchant ships using there deck guns.when I get a u boat amongst them.its a massacre. Be much tougher if they fired at me.

    Reply
  34. Battleship Yamato

    What I would like to see as the next game would be 1.) Indian Fleet because they was some naval ingagment between Britian and Japan and Germany during WWII. 2.) A WWI naval game between Germany and Britain and the United States. Or 3.) Combining the idea of Pacific Fleet 2 and Alantic Fleet 2 the game could be just the Allied Navy vs the Axis Navy in the Pacific Alantic and the Indain ocean.

    Reply
  35. Battleship Yamato

    The mechanics I would like to see in the next game include more detailed ship destruction like a ship being broken in two. The ability to fire both the Main and Secondary armaments at the same time. For merchant ships to fire guns if they have them like with the Liberty Freighter. Also for merchant ships that have tanks like they C2 Freighter to be able to fire tank shells. There is a case like that happening during the PQ17 Arctic Convoy disaster.

    Reply
    • MattF4U-4

      Lol,yeah,One Merchant moved an M4 Tank out onto the deck to protect itself from subs at periscope depth,Wouldn’t have been very effective but that’s what they had,and the ship was helpless otherwise(wasn’t it stuck at the time as well?)

      Reply
    • MattF4U-4

      And about the Upgraded Sinking/Breaking mechanics,That’d have to be optional in settings a because of certain devices with certain limitations p(My IPad mine for example,Would cause a lot of lag)

      An AF/AF 2 and PF 2 game would be cool,but it’d be large in size I’d imagine.then again…we’ve got quite a lot in game now and it doesn’t take up too much

      Reply
      • Clive

        Actually really easy to make a ship break in half.

        You split the model at the point of torpedo impact or magazine explosion and create two models from that, then put a generic damage skin on the “broken” areas.

        Reply
          • Clive

            Easy is relative.

            Breaking a ship in half is easier relative to making a full ship model.

          • Killerfish Games

            Splitting the model is very easy because I can just cut it up in 3dsmax. The big issue is the bouyancy physics which were never designed with ship splitting in mind. And because the bouyancy model produces nice sinking mechanics we didn’t feel like breaking it. It is definitely something that would be nice to have and perhaps we will add it in the next game we do.

  36. Clive

    Just some issues I have encountered.
    1. Where’s the option for both sides being able to disengage under 25,000 yards?
    2. AI bombers can’t hit anything, especially submarines.
    3. AI can’t hit submarines at periscope depth with gunfire

    Reply
  37. Battleship Yamato

    Another possible game could be a free for all death match between all the worlds navy’s and their ships both constructed and planned.

    Reply
  38. Nuclear moose

    The reason I’m so interested with the Norwegians was how hard and how long they fought against the Germans. I bet if the British and French hadn’t pulled out they would’ve pushed the Germans out of norway

    Reply
      • MattF4U-4

        Not really,The Germans Were always making general progress except in the north,By the Time The Allied Expiditionary force pulled out the Germans had made considerable gains and showed no signs of stopping,Seeing as from the air they could continuously pound Enemy positions and On the ground they had more troops as it was

        If the British and French could’ve stayed,It would’ve taken longer,But the Germans would’ve taken control sooner or later

        Reply

Leave a Reply

  • (will not be published)