Tankaxe

Ah I was just against that super BBs we're impractical in RTW. But your point is made the AI desperately needs a template system

Micro got how it works in one except for this bit. Not sure about Micro but to other people I hang out in the RTW community the battleship game is essentially over by 1925. No that's not because of carriers but instead that the AI doesn't have super BB templates to counter player ones. Indeed even playing as a non-USA/UK nation such as France, Germany and Russia can consistently come out of fleet actions outnumbered 3 to 1 by the infamous royal navy and win with a battle line of three super BBs. Quality is quantity and RTW has alot more nastier events for non-penetrating hits than what UA:D does and yet player built 70k ton battleship still come out on top against four 40k AI BBs. It's such an issue that the devs have acknowledged to give the AI more super BB templates in the next expansion. I would also add that colonial protection is down to your cruisers not battleships. The Germans didn't exactly split their battle line for colonial obligations in world war 1 did they? Anyways main point is super battleships most certainly have a place and trying to shoo them out is only going to bring RTWs late game problem to UA:D

Now your just putting words into his mouth I don't see how Henry is advocating deletion of the AI, nearly everyone here is talking about changing the AI to operate on a separate ruleset from the player. When were told on why we don't have X feature, such as modular ship designer, and the response is because AI obviously people would get upset about the AI. If the AI can't be taught to design ships then isn't it better to just give it templates with customized parameters? Keep in mind we're still getting new testers who feel scammed when the advertised modular ship designer is not reflective at all in game.

Ah AI this single topic just feels like it has more control of the project than us tester do lol. From ship design to combat the AI is somehow the prime reason that causes changes that become very controversial here from scrapping the original designer and dictating what ships the player should build. Anyways I still support a sort of template system for the AI to use. RTW had a similar mechanic and they didn't have as many issues with AI designs as UA:D has. Of course, they had a problem with late game AI ships being capped by treaty battleship while the player can build their super BBs but lo and behold the modders came in to add their own design and now the AI can still remain competitive with their own super BBs. Though to be realistic and the large number of resources spent on the current designer I doubt such a drastic change would be possible.

Trust me everyone is just as confused as you are on why guns with the same caliber aren't unified into one aiming system.

Also important to keep in mind that since the topic of Jutland was bought up that a major fleet action with Jutland like numbers is unbearable without a minimap. RTW gives you plenty of controls to keep large scale fleet battles from being too overwhelming but in UA:D the lack of a zoom out or minimap can easily have your formations spread apart without the player knowing until its too late.

The US in general needs a standard hull to fill out its rather sparse 1914-20s selection. All we got is bigger South Carolina.

Every update I always load up the same fleet battle to highlight the new stuff we are needed to test and to test out the general gameplay. Three battleships Two light cruisers and four to six destroyers in the 1916-1925 range. In nearly every single update their is one constant variable that always happens. The AI will as always be the first to spot my fleet and will have roughly two to four minutes freely engaging my battleships. Finally when I do spot the AIs battle ships (who have already turned to port and forming a lead advantage leaving me to force a turn to follow) the Romulan warbirds decloak (destroyers) and launch a full spread of torpedoes causing me micro manage every ship in its path because the Ai is godawful and we still don't have an easy way to tell ships to get the hell out of the way from the torpedoes. Its ridiculous that entire fleets can engage yours while your lame and blind spotter cant even spot the battleships until they feel like it. Its also ridiculous that destroyers and torpedo boats can decloak at close range to launch torpedoes as your incompetent screening AI struggles to get themselves into position. These battles aren't fun if the campaign works anything like rule the waves destroyers and torpedo boats will be the single most annoying ship class in the game that can by magic torpedo your battleline and you cant do shit because some spotting RNG calculator says the smoke renders entire flotillas invisible. Spotting should be a fixed measurement the only thing that matters is how far a ship can see. The Spotting Signature mechanic needs to be eliminated their is no reason mounting 16" guns will magically give a ship a higher profile than a 14" armed one. Each ship class will have their own fixed signature that changes on displacement and if one unspotted ship fires at another it will immediately be revealed. As for accuracy the biggest upside of big guns is that you can fire accurately outside of torpedo range. But as many people will see that doesn't matter because the effective ranges of accurate fire is also in the range of torpedoes and with the World of Warships spotting mechanics the AI can happily position it self to launch torpedoes and you'll see it at the last possible minute. When we're going to get the campaign fleet battles should be large and spectacular events but with the spotting mechanics, incompetent AI I do not see myself enjoying them.

Yep and now imagine the frustration in campaign when the flighty AI runs from every fight because of how speed they stacked on their ships.

Their is literally nothing the AI can do against a properly player built 21kt ship. It sacrifices too much armor just to go fast. Besides campaign is gonna look really awkward if all other nations are sailing at ridiculous speeds for the eras.

That reminds me who back in the early days got a glimpse at the campaign like I did back in day from an old exploit lol. Buggy, unfinished and in alpha of alphas but it was briefly fun before it crashed.

We've all seen it by now but for some reason the AI just keeps prioritizing speed over everything else. Things like a 26kt BB in 1911-14 is pretty eyebrow raising especially when you find that 9" of armor is the only thing protecting it. Makes sense for battlecruisers but something keeps forcing the AI that their battleships must go this fast as well. My solution is simple is that any design will have a speed limit per year so the AI doesn't waste so much weight on speed. The pre-dread era doesn't have any issues so they will be skipped. Early Dread era (1906-1909) will be hard capped at 21kts Dreadnought era (1911-1918) will be hard capped at 24kts but preferred speed at 21kts inter war era (1920-1925) hard cap at 26.5kts but a preferred speed at 23kts late era (1930-1940) hard cap at 30 knots but HEAVILY preferred speed of 27kts

Curious maybe the designer should have a mechanic on the more turrets the more weight spent on a ships citadels as you have more to protect. Though that would require a armor overhaul.

I've been thinking and I'm really concerned about Stillfronts portfolio and the vocal amount of players who like to do meme builds. The only reason the builds are possible is because the designer is a work on progress and I can totally Stillfront bludgeoning the game in that direction.

I think you are over-estimating the overlap between the audiences of UA:D and World of Warships. They don't really compete one is more marketed as a grand strategy game and the other is more of a tactical MMO game. If anything they might nudge UA:D into the direction WOWS direction and that is going to make no one happy. While their targeted audience is 30+ males I don't think anyone here is going to be impressed if we're going to be forced to buy virtual currency and timers. We already have boat loads of the stuff as crappy mobile games.

Well since we need to wait three patches for R&D to unlock I'm guessing it's gonna be static in the designer until we get tech progression

I'm calling for all player in regards to AI ship design. More specifically the 1908-1920s era. This isn't really a clown car thread but an analysis on what the AI over or underinvested in their ships. for an example in my 1912 custom battle the AI battleship design had a 28 knot top speed. Not a battlecruiser, battleship (though BCs tend to run around with 6" max armor even when IRL GB and GR emphasized more armor). The worst part is it cant even reach that speed. It hasn't invested in the funnel efficiency so it would be impossible to reach these speeds. With a 9" armored belt and a respectable armament of 10 13" guns it proved no match to my 12 13" gunned and 13.5" belt battleship with the standard speed of 21kts of the era. Anyone else have any of these experiences? post below.

Formation AI is lack luster and they are more efficient than the player at throwing DDs into a mass of ships with a wave of torps. (Again by cloaking and decloaking via smoke and a ridiculous small spotting chance). But yes trying to have a decent fleet formation going is impossible and it makes me worried for campaign when we will have to manage large battlefleets.

But if the AI repeatedly shown to not have the competence on building a ship then something needs to change. Imagine in campaign the AI builds a decently armored battleship with 14" guns and a 25kt speed then it decides a 29kt 6 16" battleship protected by a 7" belt that even your oldest battleship can pop. The AI is still all over the place but I admit its better now but a template system to prevent complete foolish design choice should be considered a valid alternative.

Screening AI needs to be revamp along with usage smokes. For now it seems the first instinct of the AIs screening destroyers is to activate cloaking devices and bum rush the players fleet and run in circles throwing walls and walls of torpedoes. I know their are valid complaints in regards to the anemic torpedo damage to justify reloads once any sort of torpedo protection is mounted. But imagine if the torpedoes had the lethality that we expected and now imagine each and everyone of those accurate torpedo salvos are a kill shot. I honestly recommend that smokes should be removed until a better and realistic solution is developed or the AI forced to only use them when covering their capital units and not in any offensive actions which I find an acceptable stopgap.

It seems destroyers has once again swung in the other direction of absurd durability... again. For some reason HE shells are not detonating against destroyers and instead just reads me a bunch of over-pens. I understand the issue of DDs being too fragile but their ability to activate romulan cloaking devices (smokes) and are only spotted when they are in torpedo range means this fragility was justifiable. To demonstrate here is the damage log against an enemy destroyer. 10 HE hits on a destroyer from 6" and 14" gunfire should've left nothing but scraps of metal. I urge the developers to please deal with destroyers to be at an acceptable level in campaign they will be spammed as they were IRL. Preferably to finally give them single shot torpedo tubes and a look at destroyer damage models.

I respectfully disagree, I certainly am not saying that the devs should throw a Richelieu hull to everyone who unlocks the tech for it. Certainly nations should develop their own styles of ship design that makes them unique but it shouldn't lock other out of it. The player is the naval secretary, the one who has the final say on how naval development should go forward on their respective country. Sure the French should have their bonus's such as quad guns and all-forward armament that's up to the player to take advantage of it. But if they want a French style 12 15" Montana then it should be possible if they chose to instead of saying "whelp should've gone someone else." Ideally each nation should have their own hulls or styles for every possible design they want. I would hope so in the campaign that each nation would be experienced differently based on their geopolitical situation, colonial commitments, economy and national traits that the player has to plan around in regards to ship design. That alone would add a ton of replayability as the player is pushed around on each nations limitations that forces them to adapt without locking designs from each other.

Armor scheme currently are just a bunch of modifiers that reduce module damage and increase armor quality. So it's still a bad idea to use AoN with zero extended belt and deck.

First I would like to preface that I understand that the previous modular design the devs developed were found to be to complex for the player and difficult for the AI to make a design out of. I also further understand that hard points are necessary because the AI will struggle building a decent ship without them. Yet despite all of these consideration I find my self dissatisfied with the current status of the ship designer. I find myself making less of a ship completely born from as an original design to just "Montana with 18" guns!" or "Hood with 16" guns!" One of major gripes of this are the super structure designs being based mostly on existing ships while also not making ships original also come with severe limitations in regards to size, usability and aesthetic. The top of the line tower that comes with a barbette can't fit your 16" guns? You can go ahead and try the smaller tower that doesn't come with the barbette to fit it while losing out the accuracy and spotting bonus simply because the shape of the top of the line tower is unworkable. Try combining the best US top tower with out the equivalent rear tower that doesn't come out as a blocky mess. I understand that testers here like the idea of building ships that were built historically and agree that tools should be available for player to do so. But for players who may want to build a French style US all forward battleship are prevented because only the French can use that hull have nothing to for them. Hulls completely dictate on what the player can or cannot do from the predread hulls where the only thing you change are the gun batteries and towers. To the mid/late game hulls that if you not going meme ship starts looking samey because of hardpoints. The biggest limiting factor is the hardpoints system and as I prefaced its there specifically because the AI wont be able to handle ship designing without them. But they also massively restrict the player and forcing designs that look quite ugly look at. For an example trying to build on the super battleship hull as the US and putting the tower as back as possible to fit two turrets in the front will force me to put my rear turrets to the freaking stern of the ship creating a very displeasing empty space between the rear tower and the gun. Doesn't help that it is also the only place to fit a barbette at is shoved so far to the back. Finally some of the ships just hurt to look at and I can't look at them and go "yeah this totally seems like a design that would be considered historically" of course their are exceptions but the AI ain't winning any beauty contests. We are the leader of our countries navies the player shouldn't be forced into a linear experience and the restriction of the ship designer prevents that. Anyways that's the end of my thoughts on the ship designer and again I completely understand that the way it is now are from discovered limitations with the AI and other factors. Thus I would like to open the thread to discuss about the ship designer but with the caveat we try to keep the topic 'realistic' designer ideas and not "I can make a BC with with a 40 torpedo broadside and 40kt top speed lololol"

I would like to have the spotting system reworked I find it ridiculous that having an extra turret can magically make your ship easier to spot allowing enemy ships to open fire on your ships with no returning fire because of this artificial mechanic. Doesn't help that light forces arn't spotted until they basically become spotted all at once in torpedo range.