Leaderboard

Hello Admirals, There is a new update to check out and some interesting news! v1.5.1.1 https://steamcommunity.com/games/1069660/announcements/detail/4195742629914367846

Wait, the ability to refit captured ships has finally been added?

Read the news here: https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/1069660/view/4195742629914390609 Request a test key in the new beta forum (only for game owners): https://steamcommunity.com/app/1069660/discussions/5/

Or some for of rule that prevents fore/aft belt/deck armor from being thicker than fore/aft main belt/deck armor. Very often do we see the AI build for example battleships with 0" main deck armor and 12" fore or aft deck armor. Or ships with 0" (or minimum, depending on class) main belt armor and very heavy fore or aft belt armor. If there was a rule preventing the extended belts/decks from being thicker than the mains, the AI would have to armor up the important areas before wasting displacement on super thick slabs of steel elsewhere.

Uploaded optimized version including the following: - Fixed rare but also critical error of shell calculations which could cause a code exception when fighting at very large ranges. This error could cause the game to hang after some time. - Fixed potential error of formation logic, causing formation points to desync and some ships of the division to zig zag indefinitely. This issue could happen more often when placing all ships of a fleet in one "super" division of more than 10x ships, something that normally should not be allowed in the game, but is preserved to please a small portion of players that use this ability. Please note, that it is NOT efficient, therefore it is not advised to place all of your ships in one division. If your ships delay to assume a working formation it happens because you give an unrealistic command expecting all ships to instantly take a position and create a 20+ km line of 100 ships.... Please restart Steam to get this update

Hi all, I've adressed this issue in the feedback section a couple times, but I believe it may require a brief topic by its own. I'll try to keep it as short as possible. (I'll focus on the early campaign (circa 1890-1920) since it's one of the periods that I've most played. I've not had the chance to encounter any issues during late campaign just yet). The core of the problem To begin with, in reality, the national flag of Spain until 1931 was this one (it was actually the naval ensign since 1785, but from 1843 onwards it became the Army & national flag): Current naval ensign in game and what the national flag should be The current national flag the game uses for Spain is that of the Nationalists during the first months of the Spanish Civil War (1936-1939), with it being the tricolor Republican flag with the purple stripe painted red (image below). The flag in question Of course, this makes no sense at all, since the flag wasn't concieved up until 1931. This flag is also lacking any monarchist symbology (since it employs a castle crown, instead of a royal one), which further makes it incompatible with the Spanish "Constitutional Monarchy" of the time. Possible fixes and further issues Well, the solution is quite obvious: simply replace the national flag, right? The problem I'd see with doing is is that all 3 flags displayed on the ship would be the same (since both the national flag and naval ensign were the same). I believe this could be solved in 2 ways: Spain didn't really have a standard naval jack until 1945, so in my opinion no flag should be displayed at the bow of the ship. This could possibly be done with specific hull models. Implementing naval jack system (for all nations), which I believe has already been suggested and I've mentioned some time back. In case this is even considered, the Spanish naval jack is commonly known as "Torrotito" (in use since 1945), shown in the image below: Torrotito If it's not possible to either remove the bow flag or implement the naval jack system, and thus all 3 flags being the same, is a price I'm willing to pay in order for this major inaccuracy to be fixed. I'm aware other countries also have inacuracies regarding their flags, and it affects game-immersion by a big chunk (at least for me). For example, I've read about the ridiculous situation of Democratic Germany displaying both the Bundesfalgge and Reichsflagge. Anyway, that's all. This has been my first dedicated post so I hope it's been of some use and will help improve the game. Any feedback is appreciated!

Not sure if right place, but I suggest making shared designs available to player campaign as well. It only makes sense that "shared" means available to both player and AI, not just AI. Conversely, let players save ships in campaign into shared designs. It would be interesting to start facing your own designs from past campaign.

That is not related to the mod.

Many early hulls can't mount barbettes at all, but (on some of them?) if you select the tiny square barbette first, even if it's grayed out, it becomes available and "unlocks" other barbettes as well. Pretty sure you're not supposed to get barbettes for those ships at all, and it's a bug. But hey, until it's fixed it's exploitable and lets us do superfiring turrets on pre/early dreads.

Compatibility update for 1.5.1.0 Opt x1

Finally (last post I promise) it would be a nice QOL thing if there was a "retire now" option in campaign. Clicking through those last couple years worth of turns after you've defeated your enemies and seen them driven before you is pretty boring. Especially with the AI still trying to design ships it can't afford to build.

Ok, that is really unexpected. I was thinking in many other small things, but that sure is a BIG one that will make the community very happy. @Nick Thomadis great improvement!!

Yes!!!! If the AI have TBs, DDs and CLs available in the sea region, I increase the chance of being used in convoys against subs. In rare occasions your subs can spot a big convoy and in those situations there is also a chance of seeing a CA, BC or a BB. Note, at this moment I don't know if the same happens to the player.

Fair since AI always know where you are. Speak of fog of war, it would be nice to implement identify mechanics in strategic level. We dont get to see which class, only hull type. After facing the class once we begin to identify them.

Was having ships involved in submarine raids something you were trying to cause happen? This just popped up

I got another bug... Mothballed ships are no longer actually being sold. I have sold the same ship three turns in a row.

Port Strike requires you to have enough speed to outrun the transports... the more speed the more often the transports are sunk in my LIMITED experience 19kt battleships couldn't hit for me either... 26kt ones struck the port every attempt (most transports are in the 16-20kt range... gotta outrun them

You can also quickly toggle the AI control on and then off again, it will set an intercept course for you.

I continue to see bizarre ship behaviour no matter how many patches come down the pipe. Ships told to sail in column running into other and sailing past the one in front, Ships zigzagging all over the place for no apparent reason and now this one. This ship was told to retreat at the start of a battle. All damage showing is from a previous battle yet this cruiser first sailed in circles then literally spun in place doing about 10% of its set speed. Can we please get this drunken behaviour fixed? This isn't what I expect of a game that is supposed to be well out of its testing phase and fully released.

It would be lovely if the minimum armour in shiptypes had a follow on effect on the other parts or the ship rather than just the main belt. For instance if the minimum is M then the game could insist that the minimum for all other parts of the ship is M/6, so for a BB with min 9” main belt this would ensure that it also has 1.5” everywhere else. Alternatively editable minimums for the main belt, main deck, extended belts, extended decks, superstructure, conning tower etc. would also be very useful, and allow delicate fine tuning of the auto builder.

yeap, it does the 1st one, that is demented. @Nick Thomadis can we for the love of god change this?

I saw someone else had already made a topic like this too, but I figured I would make my own as I have a few wishes. Some small, which I would guess could be easily implemented, and some that I'm unsure of whether or not they're possible. But hey, it's just a wishlist; not a list of demands😉 Custom Battle Setup: The option to set battle timer. Currently the timer is 10 hours (ingame) for a custom battle, with no option to reduce it. Would it be possible to give us another drop down menu to select battle time from 1 hour up to 10 hours? The option to use multiple classes of each type of ship. Currently if we want to replicate something like the battlecruiser fight in the battle of Jutland, Germany and Britain would only get multiple ships of one class, rather than several types of different battlecruisers. Would be nice if we could select for example 2x Derfflinger and 2x Seydlitz VS 2x Queen Mary and 2x Indefatigable (or even try to replicate each individual ship) rather than just having to settle for 4x Derfflinger VS 4x Queen Mary or something. This would also make things easier when you're trying to fight a specific Shared Design ship - currently we have to remove all other similar designs to ensure we get the opponent we want. Campaign Setup: Campaigns could also benefit from more options. Select Ending Year. Currently a campaign will last until 1965. That's great if you want to play a long campaign, but what if you just want a short campaign starting in 1890 and ending at the dawn of the Dreadnought era in the early 1910's? I would think it would be easy to add this to a drop down menu (and yes I'm aware no one is forcing us to keep playing) More options for AI behaviour. Currently we can pick Historical, in which each AI nation is controlled by its respective AI personality (Germany is controlled by germanyAI, Britain by britainAI etc.) or Random where Germany might be controlled by franceAI, Britain by defaultAI, USA by jeunecoleAI, etc. Looking at the save files, there are a lot of AI personalities. It's possible to assign specific personalities to specific AI Nations by editing the save file, but it would be nice if we could do it when just generating a campaign. If possible, setting the AI personality to Default should make their Technology progression paralell that of the custom battle/shared design progression. This should make the AI more likely to build Shared Design ships throughout the campaign, as their tech level would always match. Divorce Funds from Difficulty. The current difficulty setting just gives the AI more money. It would be nice if higher difficulties gave the AI certain tech advantages at the start, and made all nations more hostile to the player. So on Legendary difficulty it should be very hard to make friends and a player would often see the AI ally with each other and go to war with the player. While on Easy difficulty the opposite would be true. Funds could have two separate drop down menus, one for the player and one for the AI. High Funds would be similar to the GDP bonus the AI currently enjoys at Legendary difficulty setting. So setting AI funds to High and player funds to Low (or standard?) would give the same experience as the current Legendary difficulty setting, but if combined with the reworked more agressive AI behaviour at Legendary difficulty proposed above, a player would be up for a real challenge. Submarines/Mines, Enabled/Disabled Self explanatory Campaign in General: More events to lower Unrest would be nice. Currently it is very hard to lower unrest unless you're at war. While I personally don't struggle with very high unrest, the AI constantly does, leading to revolutions and rebellions. I think it would also make sense if Unrest constantly decreases when a country is at peace and the economy is doing OK. When taking ships as War Reparations, could we always get the plans for them so they can be refit? Currently, if the AI we're taking ships from has deleted the design plans, there's no way to refit our prizes. And there's no way to know which ships come with design plans when selecting ships. As a workaround, could the AI be prevented from deleting plans of ships they still have in service? It would also be nice if we were shown which class each ship belongs to, by mousing over them to see details. Currently we just have to guess based on the value. The Log in the lower left corner of the campaign map shows a lot of information when a new month is being loaded, but once the month has loaded most of that info is just gone. It would be nice if we could scroll down the full log. Battles in General: Something a lot of players have asked for is a "deployment phase" at the start of a battle. I don't need to see the enemy deployment, personally, but it sure would be nice if I could manually set which ships are in a line formation, and their heading, and which are screening, scouting, etc. Currently it can become a bit of a fustercluck doing it at the start of a battle, especially if the enemy is already in firing range. Many DD's have been lost by simply not being able to get out of the way soon enough when the BB's are taking fire. The bad weather "fog effect" Note, I'm not talking about DD/CL smoke screens! In certain types of weather, the battlefield is covered in a kind of haze. Not only is this annoying to play in, as seeing your ships, their heading, torpedoes etc. becomes very difficult for a player, but it also looks bad. There are two types of cloudy weather; Cloudy and Overcast. I forget which is which, but one of them has the ugly haze, one of them has a nice steel gray ocean and a cloudy sky box. The second one looks great, and the actual in game effects of both kinds of weather are more or less the same. Can we just lose the hazy fog, please? It also hides the dramatic looking waves in Stormy Weather. Now again, to be clear, I'm fine with my Ships having reduced view range when the weather is bad, but I, the Player, would like to see what's going on! Ship Designer: Could we get a separate Length slider, and just calculate Displacement from where we set the Length, Beam, and Draught? Could certain ships get access to a third type of optional tower; a Middle Tower that fits between the Main and Rear towers? This would typically have funnel slot(s) and maybe some secondary barbettes or casemate mounts. Yes, the effect can be replicated currently by just mounting funnels and secondary barbettes on the deck between the Main and Rear towers, but that doesn't look as good... Would be nice to fill out some of the bigger Super BB hulls, which can often look a bit empty! (and some of them, like the German one, could really use some more funnel slots) That's about it for my wishlist. Yes, I left out things like Multiplayer and Multithreading support, but I feel that's probably outside of the scope of a Patch. (would love to be proven wrong though!!!)

I too have experienced this problem.

I've found another bug during battles. Apparently there's a chance for some ships to spawn as if they were surrendered, like, they don't move or react to orders, they just stay there and they don't even seem to be floating on water, but just being displayed as a prop. This has happened to me during a battle in the Black Sea, where out of my small task force of 1 CA and 2 CL, both light cruisers were bugged in this way, allowing me to only play with the CA. I've also seen this happen to the AI, with one of their DDs suffering from the same issue. The bugged ships can still be damaged and sunk, though.

campaign ending was extended to 1965 (iirc)

BETA v10.9.2 - "Shells & Ballistics rework" update - N.A.R. changelog: Updated to UAD 1.5.1.0 Opt

Almost one month passed and this question still the same, I really want to know is this on your time table? I know you have fix many bugs in this month, but this is one of the base parts of the game experiences,and I really miss the time the AI could chose targets more reasonable.

If you double click the port name of one of your ships in the fleet tab, it switches to the map centered on top of that port 😲

BETA v10.9.1 - "Shells & Ballistics rework" update - N.A.R. changelog: Updated to UAD 1.5.1.0R Shell velocity, accuracy, accuracy long modifiers and wind modifiers removed from HE and AP shells because they were causing an impact to the other shells stats. HE ««»» AP. An engine limitation. Shell weight modifiers are not affected by this change. CPC and CPBC penetration, HE damage and HE fire chance stats changed to close the gap to SAP performance. There is a linear progression now from incendiary shell all the way to APBC. SAPBC and APC range stats change taking into consideration the fact that one is lighter but have a ballistic cap and the other is heavier but have an AP cap design that adds too much drag. VERY IMPORTANT: I don't know when I am going to update the mod again, so to avoid any issues, block the auto updates from steam: Set game to update when start game. Do this in game setting(properties)-> update. Don't start game by steam or steam shortcut. Make a shortcut on desktop from the main game .exe in this location: "....\SteamLibrary\steamapps\common\Ultimate Admiral Dreadnoughts\Ultimate Admiral Dreadnoughts.exe" Start a game from this shortcut. Game will run without update. ----- Important ----- Do not report any bug to the devs if you are using this mod. They are not responsible for the changes I made to the game.

The overpen damage is the same as vanilla game. over_penetration,0.085,damage multiplier due to over-penetration But if you are seeing that, you can check the damage log or the ship damage log, take a screenshot and share with me.

WOW! A very big THANKYOU to StrikerDanger. I've just tried it with a task force that moved (all by itself I may add) under another - and it works! I am forever indebted!

The whole point of DN ships was that the main guns were the same. The AI keeps on churning out ships with multiple high caliber arrangements. I'm sure this has been raised before, but it seems as if the AI is locked into pre-DN thinking with post DN innovation. Can the AI be tweaked to make more use of this or to increase the penalty of using multiple high caliber guns on accuracy.

Strictly speaking, you're the only option for declaring war... opposing countries can make rediculous demands that you can refuse by declaring war on them, but they can't do the same against you. But to initiate hostilities, you need to push your target's "tension" as close as you can to minus 100 by whatever means available to you. The only direct option available is under the politics tab... Increase Tension... seldom does much, and all it takes is a sneeze and you're right back where you started if they weren't proactively hostile against you previously. Short of that, there's calculated responses to some of the random stuff that pops up occasionally... not knowing who a certain admiral is, blaming a country for espionage, pouring scorn on another nation's navy etc. Be patient though... it takes frikkin years of poking the bear to drive tension down to where they're gonna throw that rediculous demand at you that allows you to respond by declaring war against them... Aint no Chamberlin's Note in this war... Be careful what you wish for though... Just when you think you've engineered your own private global war, suddenly the whole frikkin planet's forming orderly queue's to come take a piece of your ass, and that causes things to go pear shaped in a hellova hurry thesedays.

This is actually a viable 4th option (in addition to 3 I listed earlier) as I would expect it to be relatively easy for devs to implement. Ship width is already something that the game calculates, after all. This would work even better if hull form and the "max optimal speed" were fuctions of the ships legth to width ratio and not only a fixed number. So you could make the ship wider to fit bigger machinery and longer to retain good hull form. The devs could even remove the width slider and decouple hull lenght from the displacement slider, and then introduce legth-to-beam -slider instead. The new displacement slider would make the ship bigger or smaller in every direction while the new legth-to-beam -slider, (or just length -slider), would add or remove hull sections when needed.

I think the game urgently needs an option to spend prestige to influence politics. Leaving task forces to burn fuel outside a minor until the invasion ticks is both gamey and unreliable. It would work a lot better to have a combination of randomized invasion missions and the ability to spend prestige to spawn an invasion mission.

What do people think about being able to "suggest" an attack by the army to coordinate the war effort more closely between military branches? It would cost naval prestige to simulate approaching the army in a way that may show a lack of capability to act/win the war by itself and it would be chancebased on whether or not the army agrees. The cost could be based on scaling factors or a flat number, but if you want it to be scaled, you could base it off the defending province's value, population or army size. The chance of success increasing could be tied to a higher navy and army power projection. It would give a new use for naval prestige which I've found usually gets piled up for the player quite heavily. The player doesn't get any say where the army attacks from, or how many men they send. Only which province is of strategic value (think oil needed for the naval war). This keeps in line with the player only really controlling the admiralty and wouldn't go against current game mechanics at all, considering the player can already coordinate with the army in terms of naval landings.

I think that in general more game actions should require prestige as a currency. Right now, most prestige can be leaked by in game events, but these are rather passive as in you never know what event you get. If things like, coordinated offensieve, more income/budget or even temporary boosting ship building capacity by requesting the government to enable more war time economy laws for instance, could be traded in for prestige that would make the game more flexible and give you more things to do.

As the Title There are no distinct national specialties in the default camouflage. How about incorporating a painting system into ship design? I call it as "Camouflage Editor" 1. Add "Camouflage Editor" button at Plan 2. The Camouflage Editor look like 3. This is how it operates in the game

I'd like to adress two issues that screwed my recent German campaign hard, despite completely dominating the seas. First off, army mechanics. It absolutely sucks that we have no way of influencing deployment or anything else, and that it's handled in such a non-responsive and arbitrary manner generally. I gradually took the Baltics and Finland off the Soviet Union. The problem: every subsequent war, those areas are guarded by like 30000 men, and then the Soviets attack with at least half a million. Now that might make sense at the start of a surprise attack, but there is no redeployment as far as I can see. Those areas should be reinforced. Forces should be distributed according to the war situation. But that's not happening. So in every war, I'm on a timer on how long it can go, before I pretty much automatically lose territories (which can completely skew war scores too. Losing almost undefended Prussia turned the war score from 250000 to maybe 5k to 250000 to 500000 in their favour). What also plays into this is army size. The thing is, our populations aren't that different - about 90 million for Germany and its territories and 140 for the soviets. I almost double their GDP, but our army-navy spending ratio is completely skewed. Germany spends WAY too much on the navy, I have stupid amounts of money, way more than I know what to do with. Something like 400 billion in the bank with 10+ coming in every month. While supporting a huge fleet. I recently built about 40 heavy cruisers simultaneously without going negative. And in every decision about finances, I favoured GDP over Navy budget, every single time. And yet, the army is severy underfunded compared to the Soviets. I mean, why? HOW? Why can I not say "look boys, I have several times your yearly budget in the piggy bank, maybe we should talk to the Government about some redistribution?" It would be very nice if there was some way to influence budget more, particularly when you have way, WAY too much. Or if the game noticed itself. The other thing - please, please please add an option to engage blocking forces in choke points. They should get the option to either fight or get out of the way. They are not doors, or walls. They're just ships, and if they're not willing to fight, they should not block anything. The current solution with the impenetrable red circle is completely infuriating. And dumb. Having a Naval invasion with almost a million tons of warships nearby fail because of a single ancient CA sitting in the way of them getting into the circle is enough to make me want to stop playing.