Knobby
-
Posts
538 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Knobby
-
-
On 3/14/2024 at 12:18 AM, Suribachi said:
Just tried this myself in a custom battle as the US for 1924.
Using the Armored Cruiser IV hull, even though the barbette options are greyed out, it will allow you to select some of them once you click it. In my case, I was able to use a "Wide Barbette (Very Small)" in the middle without adjusting the beam or draught sliders to mount 8" or smaller guns there.
Adjusting the beam slider allows me to use all the barbette types up to "Dual Barbette for Medium Guns II" in the middle of the hull, again with 8" or smaller guns.
EDIT: This works for me in both vanilla and with the DIP mod on.So strange, yes I can select the greyed-out barbettes, and even though the game tells me 'NO MOUNTS', I can actually place them. I'm 100% sure that this was not the case before.
This makes it just a bit more bearable, but still my argument stands. Most cruiser lines are very boring with samey ships for a loooong time, and (flush-decked is too late in the tree) and then finally all the later hulls get rushed one after the other really fast.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, havaduck said:
Ah, ok its a new pic now, makes sense.
5 x 2 8" Broadside. Same as IJN Myoko, laid down 1924 .........
The game is not modded. Only thing I run is Re-Shade from O'Baro (sorry for butchering your name mate).
I dont know of any way to proof that. However I did send (and post, obviously) this asking whether thats a exploit and not intended or just some mild cheese. If it was modded and I was therefore wasting the devs and Nick Tomadis time, I fully expect to be called out on that. So maybe that can substitute as proof.
don't know what to say, I cannot add barbettes to any of these hulls... You can see them greyed out on my screenshot... WTH is going on?
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Knobby said:
I responded within the quote, expand it tor read my comments.
Haven't played AH, but that hull is a literal carbon-copy for many nations (which is part of my argument, that's boring) but i cannpt use barbettes on it. no clue how you are managing it.
just to illustrate: USA, 1909 and 2x superimposed large gun tech. and yet no possibility of adding any barbette on this hull...
Perhaps you are playing a modded game and forgot or did not realize forcing barbettes on all hulls is one of the modifications? Vanille for sure cannot do it...
-
18 hours ago, havaduck said:
Can you give me a nation, it dont know them all by heart but usually you can jury rig
something within the first 10 years.
Britain, US, I think Germany as well.
Thats a light cruiser 2 hull with early components (obviously I dont have mark 1 5" anymore) on a 3.400 ts displacement with a 3 " compound belt, 5 x 1 5" main battery an a supporting 3,5 " secondary battery with a torpedo complement and speed and range suitable for the first years/war.
I can't use barbettes on ANY of these hulls, including the one you show.
I usually dont build those, because its a little immersion breaking to build a what feels like a Danae in the 1890s ....... unless its for the lulz because I feel like it.
I am not a native speaker but a dreadnought style cruiser is literally a Battlecruiser. Taking Gen 1 british BC: You take a armored cruiser hull, slap battleship guns on it, give it enough armor to withstand contemporary armored cruisers guns (with they are expected to hunt) and nothing more, and then make them fast enough to hunt said cruisers. German battlecruisers were expected to stand in the battle line, hence more armor. Japan -> see british. USA > none/see british for Lexington/Alaskas are WWII. etc. It doesnt make sense to have these ships appear before dreadnought battleships. Its also why then nobody built armored cruisers anymore (broadly speaking) which coudnt stand up to battlecruiser or battleships ........ or run away from them.
No I do not mean a battlecruiser. What I mean is a cruiser that can have a uniform main battery of more than two turrets (for CA) usually by using barbettes for superimposed turrets but I'll take even a flush-decked CA without barbettes that can have more than 2 bloody turrets. Most CA hulls are literally a scaled-down pre-dreadnought hull, with a hardcoded 'superstructure' that can take nothing but towers, funnels and if you are lucky some casemate guns, and only room for a single turret fore or aft. Or, for CL i'd love to have a flushed deck hull earlier and not have to deal forever with those that are so focused on side guns.
[...]
So lets recap: You want big guns, numerous guns, speed and protection on a cruiser hull and all that early? I'd say, historically speaking, more than 2 of those are fantasy land early game.
I have no clue where you got that idea. Don't put words in my mouth. What I want is true variety in hulls. Not just the same 2-3 Ca and 1-2 CL hulls (also the same bloody hulls for 3 or more nations even) for god knows how long, that can either fit only 2 turrets and 0 barbettes, forcing me to make that same old ship 10 hello kittying times just with slightly increased displacement and techs. Forcing my hand with hardcoded superstructures or fore and aft decks. While my dreadnoughts give me much more options to play with. What I want is options. Sure, make it a trade-off so you cannot have speed AND firepower And protection, nobody is asking for that.
In short I guess I can summarize with: give me flush-decked cruisers so I can design ships in the shipdesigner, instead of coloring within the lines we have now for god knows how long in the tech tree.
I responded within the quote, expand it tor read my comments.
19 hours ago, havaduck said:Not an issue. Austro hungaria literally starts with this hull. I used starting components and litterally threw togehter this hull.
There are some compromises, but I think no one expects an ship you probalby can build at the start to be a full on battle cruiser.
Haven't played AH, but that hull is a literal carbon-copy for many nations (which is part of my argument, that's boring) but i cannpt use barbettes on it. no clue how you are managing it.
-
might not be an issue for AH but most other nations do not have this luxury, and have to deal with the same crappy pre dreadnought style cruiser hulls (that are carbon copies in most nations as well. BORING)
-
1
-
-
but that's my whole point, it takes forever to get a flush deck cruiser!
-
18 hours ago, o Barão said:
ai_difficulty_normal_income_multiplier,1,modifier of AI GDP in Normal Difficulty Mode,,,,,,,
ai_difficulty_hard_income_multiplier,1.25,modifier of AI GDP in Hard Difficulty Mode,,,,,,,
ai_difficulty_legendary_income_multiplier,1.5,modifier of AI GDP in Legendary Difficulty Mode,,,,,,,
ai_difficulty_hard_tech_multiplier,1.25,modifier of AI tech n Hard Difficulty Mode,,,,,,,
ai_difficulty_legendary_tech_multiplier,1.33,modifier of AI tech in Legendary Difficulty Mode,,,,,,,From "params" file
The AI gets a 25% tech research bonus in the hard difficulty and as @brothermunro mentioned, there are penalties by using the priorities to focus on specific techs. Add all together and that will explain why you are falling behind.
1 hour ago, brothermunro said:A lot of the research options had their research increased in 1.5, this also affects the AI mind, but will slow down tech progress overall compared to the historical unlock years
Well, I suppose that explains it. But I feel the entire tech tree and progression speed but especially progression order of certain lines needs a fresh look.
Getting 2 superimposed guns tech while still stuck on max 3 centerline guns makes no sense at all.
Big gun progression has bugged me since the very start. Getting some reasonable mark guns in anything above 13 inch pretty much requires you to have big gun on priority at least 80% if the time if not more.
The same with getting usable triple turrets. The turret mechanism line has so many barrel length techs shoved in it takes forever to get to improved triples. Oh and when you finally get semi-auto reloading you are so near the end of the tree you get the auto and auto-2 almost immediately after.
Cruiser hull, seems to take forever to slowly climb up the tonnage, staying on the same 2 or 3 hull types (just slightly larger / heavier) waaaay to long, before finally getting something resembling 'dreadnought-style' cruiser (you know, with more than 2 centerline turrets for CA and not so focused on side guns for CL). And then the more modern hulls follow so fast after that you hardly even get to use hulls before they go obsolete. (note that this is without priority)
-
1
-
1
-
-
On 3/10/2024 at 9:43 PM, o Barão said:
What is the difficulty level?
hard
-
ok, but 've always done that and always ended up very advanced...
-
yeah, like I always do
-
What's up with tech progression? In most my recent USA campaign I'm the second largest economy in the world and have always had the tech slider on 100%, yet I'm falling behind. Now I'm even very behind in tech while the even the likes of Austro-Hungary are average and Italy is very advanced...
-
On 10/15/2023 at 3:33 PM, Knobby said:
Seems like portstrike missions don't generate in latest build
So port strikes DO happen, it's just so few and takes so long as to be pointless.
When wanting to invade a province, I can have 4 fleets parked outside a port, half on sea control, half on invade (does that even matter? I have no idea!) and it may take the better part of a YEAR for a single port strike mission to spawn. Completely useless to reduce needed tonnage on naval invasions.
-
Seems like portstrike missions don't generate in latest build
-
3 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:
[Update 9]
- Fixed critical issue of the autodesign creating delays. The new side barbette freedom was not "hard checked' for fire arc blocking so the AI often put side barbettes obscuring main guns and cancelling the design in multiple tries.
- Fixed other critical issues which could create unbuildable ships.
- Other minor fixes.***Saves had to be reset. Please delete your shared designs that may be incompatible or repair them***
Please Restart Steam to get this update fast.
On 9/24/2023 at 6:03 PM, Knobby said:ok so it just took really really long. left it running and went out, came back hours later and campaign was finally loaded. previously i left it for 20m but that wasn't long enough yet
On 9/24/2023 at 2:47 PM, Knobby said:Since update 7 or 8 I have not been able to start a new campaign. The game doesn't seem to hang but stays forever at januari 1907 (started a 1910 campaign).
I even did a full reinstall and deleted the entire dreadnoughts appdata folder
with old saves being incompatible and no possibility of starting a new campaign it means the game is unplayable for me atm
this update fixed my "new campaign takes hours to initiate bug".
now it took 'just' ~15m. still way to long IMO, but at least i could see the months tick slowly up so i knew it was going somewhere.
-
3 hours ago, Knobby said:
Since update 7 or 8 I have not been able to start a new campaign. The game doesn't seem to hang but stays forever at januari 1907 (started a 1910 campaign).
I even did a full reinstall and deleted the entire dreadnoughts appdata folder
with old saves being incompatible and no possibility of starting a new campaign it means the game is unplayable for me atm
ok so it just took really really long. left it running and went out, came back hours later and campaign was finally loaded. previously i left it for 20m but that wasn't long enough yet
-
Since update 7 or 8 I have not been able to start a new campaign. The game doesn't seem to hang but stays forever at januari 1907 (started a 1910 campaign).
I even did a full reinstall and deleted the entire dreadnoughts appdata folder
with old saves being incompatible and no possibility of starting a new campaign it means the game is unplayable for me atm
-
1
-
-
19 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:
You can send us a bug report to check it out. Previously the time was too small, and player and AI could exploit the system by making refits applying techs of 10 years in one turn if they did not move a part. This was wrong. If your secondary battery changes and something else you edited, alters the weight too much, this is why you get a very high refit time.
I agree the 1 month refit was too short.
In this instance though adding the single secondary was the only change. Weight did change because automatic application of passive end-game techs. Still, the single secondary added 8 months on top of refit time which is crazy...
Edit: bug report sent
-
2
-
-
I think refit logic needs another look.
I want to refit this BC. it's my newest design that has only just finished it's initial build, so actually not that much new technology. To start of with, not changing anything, other than the designer auto applying passive techs of course, the refit is 6 months! Then when I add a single 2 inch secondary the refit time jumps to 14 months. That's 50% of the total build time from scratch! This simply cannot be as intended...
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, Zuikaku said:
This blocking mechanics needs some changes. My spanish TF has been blocked in Adriatic for 6 months by Americans (they hold Montenegro and Albania). And although I have decisively defeated them twice, I'm unable to exit the Otranto strait due to 3 light US TFs. I try to bump into them to force the battle but without success so far. Part of the problem is you can not send any subs or TFs into zone of control of enemy TFs which is just wrong!!
So I suggest:
TF can pass blocking TF in a single turn but one of following is triggered (based on TF composition and strenghth):
1. TF manages to slip through unopposed
2. A battle is generated. If TF which tries to pass is victorious, it passes through in one turn
3. Same as 2 but blocking TF gets help of nearby TFs.
yeah I suggested something similar, having th eopposite problem wheer my huge fleet is blocked from entering the adriatic by a mere 2 CL. After reading your post I'm no longer sure I want to enter that particular trap...
-
I like that taskforces can block a narrow strait, but the mechanic makes no sense. It should not outright forbid an enemy taskforce from moving into the area. Rather, it should force a non-avoidable battle. I mean, that's what blocking a passage is right? The guarding taskforce intercepts the trespassers and forces a fight. If the trespasser wins he has forged a passage. If not he is blocked.
Now we have a silly situation where a 2 CL taskforce can completely keep out a 400,000 ton fleet. Ridiculous
-
3
-
-
I just rage quit my latest french campaign.
Spend half a decade at war with china. Sink a ridiculous amount of its pocketBB swarm. Army starts an invasion on southern china. Yes finally! But wait USA joins on chinas side, brings in italy too. Now my army starts losing the war. Also USA has biggest fleet in the world, Italy no pushover either. I ally with britain and Japan to offset this. Continue to wreck the chinese, USA, Italy fleets but suddenly britain drops out of the war and army invasions (now with some attacks on italian colonies) kinda stall again.
After another wrecked fleet USA wants peace. Great! But I only get one tiny colony of the 3 I asked for. Oh well, at least I got something.
But now italy is also out of the war WITHOUT any message or rewards for me who is the clear winner. Army invasions are gone. Booo!
Anyway, war with Chinese continues. I keep killing ships, land invasion slowly ticks up to 89% and up. Next turn Japan makes peace with chinese, and BAM my war is just gone, no message. No rewards, 6 years of war and hundreds of thousands of victory points just gone up in smoke. Would have only been about 2 turns before I had southern China as well.
It wasn't even that I was fighting Japans war and they decided to stop. NO, it had been my war from the start, going for years before japan even allied me!
This just sucks so much. So many hours fighting this war and it's all for nothing. Just hello kittying down the drain.
Why would I even play a campaign if this is how shit goes?
-
2
-
-
19 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:
By the way to all, we uploaded an extra campaign AI adjustment to handle better the new economy.
***Campaign AI adjustments*** Extra update
Please restart Steam to get this update fastAI economy is just terrible.
I started a new campaign with the latest patch and i'm getting 2-4 messages every turn about admirals getting warned or replaced because of over spending. Even for nations such as Britain or USA with massive GDP. And this in the first year with nobody having ever been at war. They all have huge navies as well.
-
2 hours ago, RNV said:
Has anyone else experienced, again, the "ships returning to random ports instead of home port" issue?
how do you even set a 'home port'
-
1
-
-
On 5/9/2023 at 11:54 PM, Nick Thomadis said:
You should notice now not so often happening a very fast growth of “Range Found” bonus, reaching a high limit which happened mostly to the AI but could also happen to the player.
in my latest battle 'range found' bonus jumped from +1% straight to +1500%
-
1
-
>>>v1.5 Feedback<<<(Latest version: v1.5.1.0 R)
in General Discussions
Posted
AI shoots torps at me all the time...