o Barão

@Nick Thomadis I need your help. First, I am going to quote what I supposed to be your own words about shells. Light shells. "Lighter shells have reduced damage and penetration properties, but they are cheaper, reload faster and are less prone to detonation. Furthermore, the lighter shells cause less gun barrel erosion, affecting the gun accuracy positively. The range of a lighter shell is, on average, shorter than a heavier shell of the same muzzle velocity. Because of the higher muzzle velocity of a light shell, its range can become larger according to other shell properties." Heavy shells. "Heavier shells cause more damage and can penetrate thicker armor at all ranges because of their better ballistics. However, they cost more, they are more prone to detonation and increase gun barrel erosion. Furthermore, their slower muzzle velocity increases the chance of calculation errors when firing at long range targets." Super heavy shells. "Shells of the maximum possible size cause immense damage and may make guns of smaller caliber almost equivalent to bigger guns in terms of firepower and ballistics. However, those shells are much heavier, riskier to become detonated and cause more gun barrel erosion, while their slower muzzle velocity increases the chance of calculation errors when firing at long range targets." Well, I have two issues here. One minor and a major one. What is written in the text is misleading for different reasons, that I will explain in details below. But the biggest problem is how muzzle velocity mechanic works in game, that it is exactly the opposite to what is in the text and still wrong at the same time. How the muzzle velocity mechanic works in UAD? In short: The higher the muzzle velocity, the bigger will be the penalty to accuracy. But the big muzzle velocity is tied to the light shells, which supposedly should have a better accuracy in game, according to the text, which it has by artificial means from other modifier. But is still wrong. But the opposite is worse. The slower muzzle velocity will give better accuracy, and the text is saying the exact opposite. Totally misleading for the players. The issue here is the muzzle mechanic and the weight of the shell, both combined are not having a real ballistic performance in game. It should be something like this. Two shells, same shape, same gun, same amount of propellant, all equal except one thing, the weight. The lighter shell will be sent at a higher muzzle velocity and with this it should more accurately hit targets at close range because: Trajectory Flattening: Higher shell velocity generally means the projectile reaches the target more quickly, resulting in a flatter trajectory. Reduced Wind Drift: Faster-moving projectiles are less affected by crosswinds, as they spend less time in the air and have less exposure to wind. Reduced Time to Target: A faster projectile reaches the target faster, which means there's less time for external factors such as wind or target movement to affect its trajectory. This can result in greater accuracy, particularly for moving targets or in dynamic shooting situations. The heavier shell will be sent at lower muzzle velocity but should it more accurately hit targets at long range because: Ballistic Coefficient: Heavier shells typically have a higher ballistic coefficient, which is a measure of how well a projectile retains its velocity and resists drag as it travels through the air. Shells with higher ballistic coefficients are generally more resistant to wind drift and other environmental factors, leading to better accuracy, especially at longer ranges. Trajectory Stability: Heavier shells tend to be more stable in flight, as they are less affected by minor disturbances such as air turbulence. This stability can contribute to greater accuracy, particularly in windy conditions or when shooting at distant targets. Now I searched everywhere for a modifier about this mechanic and I can't find anywhere. I can in theory fix this by applying a negative accuracy modifier plus a positive long range modifier and vice versa, but much better would it be for this mechanic to be working well in game, also with a text description that does not lead the players to mistakes. That is why I am asking for your help. I apologize for the long text, but this is not an easy thing to explain.

Thank you, much appreciated!! For me what you are saying is still unknown territory since I have no experience in that, but sure your information shared can a make a big difference.👍 @MDHansen In uabea it is possible to download the flags sprites. The problem is to upload them and create new files. Maybe this little information can help you somehow.

That is the point. It isn't. It can be or not, all depends on other modifiers and how you are designing your ship. Oil I Oil II Oil III

In the mod description, you will see that I always recommend blocking steam updates. I wrote the instructions in details to how to do that. I am working on a BIG update atm and I don't know when it will be ready. Probably around Friday or maybe sooner.

If you are comparing with vanilla, you will notice a big difference. There is still a penalty, but is much smaller. This change helps players to interact more with the tech tree if they wish, without the feeling they are being penalized too much. Because of your comment, I went on to take a look at a AIPersonalities file to see if there were any changes by the devs, and there are. So what you're experiencing is an old vanilla gameplay. I will update in the next version. Thanks 👍

"Improved methods to use oil as fuel for ship engines with boilers or not. The fuel consumption is further decreased and it pays off for the higher cost of the new system."

The problem is not the armor weight. It is the lack of priorities or rules to force the AI to use a minimum armor value in the different ship sections.

Armour does have no influence in the hit rate, so we can ignore that. But now let's list some of the most possible factors that you are ignoring, or you are still not aware how important they are. Gun grade is the same, ok, but what guns, what was the range, caliber length, and what shell was being used by both? What was the weather? What are your hull stats in that weather? And what were the AI hull stats in that weather? What are your hull stats? What is the enemy ship hull stats? What are your cruiser tower stats? What is the enemy tower stats? Were you sailing in a straight line at cruise speed for the most part and using most guns? The AI was doing the same or was maneuvering for the most part? Were you shooting trough smoke? You had the sun in your back? Pitch roll status from your ship and the AI? I could list other things, but you probably already got the idea what I am trying to tell you. This game is too complex, and many things about how they work are never simple. But I can assure you that the AI does not have any unfair advantage in the battlefield. However, for someone that comes from vanilla to NAR, the first impression can be a shock.😁

"...dunking on every single ship of mine." English it is not my native language and I failed to understand what "dunking" means here. Google translate is also not helping me. What I did understand it's that you are having difficulty against the AI in battles. Well that's good news for me. 😉

No. That it is for two reasons only: A:) you are not playing at normal difficulty or... B:) you are using the priority function to unlock prefer techs sooner... If you are playing at normal difficulty with the research slider always maximum without choosing any tech to be unlocked first, in theory should be impossible for the AI to get an advantage on you.

I just checked and it is working fine here.

In the "parts" file you will see the components weight to edit.

BETA v9.2 - "Silent hunter" update - N.A.R. changelog: Updated to UAD 1.5.0.9 Some modern Japanese cruisers hulls size reworked. (Can cause some issues in your current campaigns) Doubled the damage from torpedo ammo detonation. Ship types cap speed limit changed to allow a little more freedom. 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 form a main game .exe like "x:\SteamLibrary\steamapps\common\Ultimate Admiral Dreadnoughts\Ultimate Admiral Dreadnoughts.exe" Start a game from this shortcut. Game will run without update.

From "params" file: shipyard_start_increase,100,increase of shipyard per year after minimal year shipyard_max_modifier,3,shipyard size development bonus according to year (LERP max. at 1940),,,,,,, shipyard_build_amount_max_modifier,7,shipyard tonnage built time speed according to year (LERP max. at 1940),,,,,,, port_capacity_growth_modifier,1,Affects growth of port capacity,,,,,, port_capacity_max_modifier,5.5,Port max. scale according to campaign initial year (1890-1940) I am almost sure that you are also not using my battle AI and design AI improvements from that file.

I don't know. I didn't update the mod yet. Maybe. I always recommend the players to block auto updates from steam and wait the mod for being updated first. You can see the instructions in the mod description.

No it's not! It's IMPOSSIBLE. I placed a hard cap on all ship types in game to prevent the AI from designing fantasy ships so that it could have more displacement to be used in other more important stuff, like armor or to have engines with a reasonable efficiency. No matter what you do inside NAR, your CAs are limited to 36 knots! So please, with all due respect, never again do that. It is for me already very time-consuming to come here and answer to all the questions related to all the things I did inside the mod. To explain the fantasy decisions made by other players or what bullshit designs wows is doing atm is too much, and I really don't care. I always tried to help everybody, telling them what files you need to go to edit this or that. I really think if anyone is interested, it should go and change the game to fit their playstyle, but NAR is focus in making the game the more realistic as possible inside the game engine limitations. And turbo electric drives have an insane acceleration, because of the instant torque from the electric engines. Simple as that. You could argue that should be 143% or maybe 267%, who knows? That value is only there to represent the properties from an electric engine compared to the others used on ships.

Tillman designs are from 1916. If it was practical to build them is another question, but Tillman, fed up with all the requests from the navy, was asking what was the bigger ship the American shipyards could build at that time. About 7500 tons DDs at 1936, that is also not unrealistic since there was plans already at the time for large destroyers. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spähkreuzer_1938 Note: I added this ship to the German tech tree in NAR. Also big destroyers, or simple small light cruisers, the difference between them is so small anyway.

Do we have the London naval treaty? No. Do we have the Washington naval treaty? No. Are heavy cruisers limited to 10000 tons? No. Are heavy cruisers limited to 8" guns? No. No, no, no, no. So what is the issue here? By the way, maybe you didn't notice. But your 48 knots cruiser have only 11% E.E. 🤔 And other thing. I have no idea how it is possible for you to get 48 knots from a hull in NAR since I limited the maximum speed for all ships to more realistic values, unless you are doing your editing the files.

I don't think so, but you should ask that to the devs to be sure.

I am failing to understand what is your issue, but if you don't like it, write a letter to the devs. 😉

That is related to the target size, speed, light conditions, weather, sea waves and if it is turning. Just because you have long guns, that doesn't mean if it is worth it using them against that TB speeding at maximum range. The hit rate will be so low that the gunners will prefer to save the ammo. If you try against a slow BB, most likely they will be used.

The old one made by me? I should delete that. I don't recommend anyone to do shared design until the devs and I stop working on the game. Parts are being changed, new ones are being added, and so what works now, maybe will not work tomorrow.

The only change was to increase the tension much quicker against enemies from allies to see if they would join the war quicker and behave, well, like allies. You want auto resolve to sink less ships??? Strange request. Well, you can edit these values in "params" file. power_armor_exp,0,autoresolve power factor for armor,0.45,,,,,, power_speed_exp,0,autoresolve power factor for speed,0.6,,,,,, power_firepower_exp,5,autoresolve power factor for firepower,0.68,,,,,, power_ammo_exp,0,autoresolve power factor for ammo,0.1,,,,,, power_crew_exp,0,autoresolve power factor for crew,0.1,,,,,, and give a high number to speed and the rest set to "0". Maybe that will help smaller fleets to disengage if they are faster.

@rossi191 o7! "...they seem to be fixated on using as many 17 inch guns" AI have a tendency to use big guns on late BBs, specially in vanilla game. I changed the AI behavior to use middle caliber guns more often, but I can't push down more without the risk of seeing BB with 9" guns around 1910 as an example. This is a global modifier that the AI is using as a reference when building, and not an independent value per hull. "bb hulls need to have there minimum armour raised by an inch or two to help the Ai" I can't do that, because again, it is a global modifier. Historical speaking, there were dreadnoughts with 6" belt armor, and 9" (the minimum)in game is already way higher, specially around 1900. "a dreadnaughts minimum armour in game is 7 inch" 9 not 7. "the ai will already have an ok amount of armour when designing a new ship and can only increase thickness if it wants to and not make paper ships " That is not how it works. If I raised, in theory, the minimum belt armor to 15" as an example. The AI would have less displacement available to use armor in other places, and so you would see a 15" belt, and 0,0,0,0.... elsewhere more often. What I did was by telling the AI to use more but smaller capital guns, fewer torpedoes and fewer secondaries. It should help the AI to have more displacement to use in other things, like armor, but it is not possible to teach the AI to not use 0, 0,0.. armor in important parts of the ship protection. It is an engine limitation. It should happen fewer times in the mod, but you will still see it sometimes. Note that there are still modifiers that I am still learning what they do in game, so maybe I find a new thing tomorrow, but it is not an easy task to change a value, open the game and see the AI designing ships for 10 minutes to see If I notice a changed in the behavior. It is time-consuming and very frustrating. "this could be an issue that only I'm facing and the Ai has just decided that it doesn't need armour in this campaign" Yeah, basically it is random what you will get. The changes I made, it should in theory help the AI to design better ships more often, but we still can get odd ducks sometimes.

BETA v9.1 - "Silent hunter" update - N.A.R. changelog: Updated to UAD 1.5.0.8 ---IMPORTANT--- Do not update unless you want to start a new campaign. There are some changes to hulls that can break your current campaign. Hulls: Added a new hull to better represent the Austrian SMS Kronprinzessin Erzherzogin Stephanie (BB I Austrian hull) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMS_Kronprinzessin_Erzherzogin_Stephanie Semi dreadnought hull removed from the American tech tree. This was made by me months ago, and it is not needed anymore with the recent hulls added by the devs. Dreadnought V hull from the British tech tree removed. I don't remember why I added that hull, maybe was made by the devs, but it is not in line to what was being made by the British at that point. Dreadnought VI becomes Dreadnought V. Early Spanish pre dreadnoughts name scheme fixed. Early British dreadnoughts AI design logic was improved to use more main guns. Bugs fixes. Many fixes under the hood, from reading the game log. Not really important for the players. Some modern Russians CL could fit 9" guns. Barbettes Increase the bonus armor modifier from 6% to 20% to better represent the average from the round shape and hopefully make them more useful in game. ---The frustrating part--- Made more changes to see if I can force escorts to be used against subs in convoy battles more often. Where this worked very well in my campaign test in 1940, in my current 1910 campaign, not once they were used. 😒