TAKTCOM
-
Posts
274 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by TAKTCOM
-
-
10 hours ago, brothermunro said:
One issue with the current implementation of flaws is that there is a workaround:
Build 3x as many ships as you need
Scrap any ships with flaws
It doesn't work in 1890-1895
I built 3 battleships, 6 armored cruisers, 4 light cruisers and 20 torpedo boats. 32 ships in total. 5 ships of them were without defects. One cruiser of each type and three torpedo boats. 5/33.
Later, I made two improvements to improve the quality of shipbuilding and built 20 new torpedo boats. 5 of them were without flaws. 5/20
2 hours ago, Vanhal said:JFC there are tons of bugs, design flaws and bad features from older versions still in the game, feedback gets ignored and instead devs implement more and more mechanics that not only (surprise surprise) are bugged too, but are outright antifun.
Reminds me - Perfect is the enemy of good.
P.S.
Russiandiplomacy in 1890 is rather wrong.On the example of Russia, Russia-Great Britain relations +10, even though they have been enemies for decades. Just google Great Game. This is comparable to the USSR and the USA during the Cold War 1945-1985.
Russian-Japanese relations - 85 is just wow. In reality, Russian cruisers are use Japanese naval bases, like Nagasaki, until 1894-1895. Russian-Japanese relations began to degrade from 1896, after Nicholas II came to power.
Russia-France +15 is better, but still wrong. The French desperately wanted an alliance with the Russians, as the Franco-Prussian War had shown that the French themselves were not capable of defeating the Germans.
Russian-German relations +5 look just...strange. Traditional relations between Russia and Germany at the end of the 19th century are friends-rivals. Russia has been full of German emigrants (as in the USA, lol) since the time of Peter the Great (1682-1725) and had many cultural, political and economic ties with Germany. On the other hand, the Germans always wanted to become bosses and finally defeat the French, who dreamed of revenge for the Franco-Prussian war. The Russians did not want German dominance in Europe and played the role of mediator, which was very beneficial for the Russian Empire. But, again, everything changed with the ascension to the throne of Nicholas 2 in 1896.
Everything else is Ru diplomacy not so obviously wrong. I mean, just look at the relationship between Great Britain and France. + 35 in 1890? Seriously? They are actually the first and second sea world power, and look at each other as enemies and rivals.
-
2
-
-
29 minutes ago, beepboop6 said:
Is it normal...task forces of like 80 ships immediately?
Yeah. The last few patches
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, PhoenixLP44 said:
Also if I remember correctly they are based in Kyiv which is certainly a bit of a problem.
As far as I remember, this issue was raised at the beginning of the conflict. Their office, if I remember correctly, is in Cyprus, or something like that.
-
2
-
-
46 minutes ago, o Barão said:
The high maintenance cost it seems is related to the fleet status. However, I can't explain why one is 3.2M and the other one 4.4M. The crew is almost the same. Penalty cost for being in battle?
I suppose it's because of the different home ports.
-
10 hours ago, o Barão said:
Can you compare both ship designs in these two parameters?
The operational range.
Sure.
And
I even made a refit with minimum operational range
Literally, minus 500 tons of coal does not change anything in the overall picture. Which is quite historical, as for me.
You know, if it was CL 10,000 plus tons, I would understand. But this is literally a 4,500 ton small cruiser. It just doesn't make any sense.
-
What the hell with the upkeep cost? 3*4.5 ton CL = 2*18.5 ton dreadnoughts?
-
1
-
-
13 hours ago, JeeWeeJ said:
I don't know if this has been mentioned before (if so, couldn't find it and my apologies) but in my recent 1890 game with Austria-Hungary I noticed that the first new BB hull you get...is the dreadnought hull?
Yep. Austria-Hungary also receives the first destroyer hull in 1911. Just don't play them, AH are extremely bad with hulls for now. They have received 1-2 hulls since the open beta test, I guess. This is probably the worst indicator among all the factions.
-
10 hours ago, The PC Collector said:
A quick look at my ship design screen tells me that you broke pre dreds again. All of mine are over 1000t overweight now.
Not just pre-dreds
-
On 8/4/2022 at 10:21 AM, Vinrellren said:
Edit 2: Oh the FPS went to trash, 3 FPS in battle. I admit I have an "old" i5-9600KF.
THIS
12 hours ago, SodaBit said:There's also the issue of the formation the AI had to manage during the battle. It looked a bit like this:
With 96 ships to command, things got very messy very quickly. A lot of smaller vessels were sunk early in the battle by long range hits because they were ramming in to the BB's, and a near miss on the battle-line would hit the fleet screens instead, causing horrific damage. Commanding such a formation would be a private Hell for anyone on this forum. Fighting it was pretty easy on the other hand, just fire into the confused mass of ships, and you're bound to hit something.And THIS.
But I will also add my part: destroying such a huge fleet means that the war is actually over and the AI will beg for peace every turn. You can actually win the war with the The British Empire (Rule the Waves, lol) in one turn/month.
So... A huge fleet means that your computer can't handle it, just like AI can't control it, while the player gets a "one battle" war.
-
3
-
-
40 minutes ago, admiralsnackbar said:
I noticed that when a turn is 'stuck' in building or designing ships or w/e, if I hit escape and select 'go to main menu' then hit 'no' on the confirmation [returning me to the game] the turn usually finishes. Has anyone else noticed/tried this?
Sure. I, however, did not write about it.
-
9 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:
Repaired problems of the auto-design which could cause too long campaign turns when building ships.
Thanks, I see an improvement.
Could you be so kind and do something with the tension mechanics? After the relationship becomes 50, it becomes very difficult to change it in the reverse side, whether it is - 50->0 or + 50->0
Parking of the entire fleet with positive relationships not give a negative attitude.
On 7/27/2022 at 5:51 PM, mk4m said:Historical many protected and armoured cruisers have main guns in casemates.
We have been talking about this since 2019, I believe.
-
1
-
-
CLs right now just bad. They do not stand up to competition with DD as scouts, screen and torpedo platforms. Too big, too slow.
They are also noncompetitive in comparison with CA in the matter of artillery. Typical stability CL hull 1890-1919 is ~30, which means a penalty of about 25% to accuracy. Worse, the double turrets for CL are ~1917, which means that lack of raw firepower.
Light cruisers before 1920, i.e. the first half of the game, are terrible and you should not expect anything good from using CLs. They're kind of OK by 1930, but why use them if you have destroyer leaders anyway...
I don't understand why restrictions on the size of guns are needed, in real history there were no problems installing 10-inch guns on 3k cruisers, or even a 320mm gun on a 4.2k cruiser. It's not that we have any Washington Naval Treaty or something.
-
1
-
-
55 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:
It appears to me that the last ship found some other ships obstructing and did not proceed to ram them...
Ah, that's how it is. I'll turn it off, thanks for the advice. Ships crash into each other anyway, so "Avoid Ships" not particularly useful.
45 minutes ago, The PC Collector said:Devs have admitted that AH is uncomplete... However when they get all their pre-dreadnought hulls they should be quite fun to play.
Sure. I am personally fascinated by Austro-Hungarian armored cruisers. Let's hope it happens sooner rather than later.
-
1
-
-
12 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:
While I highly approve
QuoteNow any old design can be deleted at the player's will
I can't say the same about
QuoteSlight formation and ship evasion improvements.
Three ships in one squadron are just sailing in different directions. Two in the same direction, the third goes its own way.
Pure moment of
On 7/21/2022 at 3:27 AM, The PC Collector said:That's likely due to the era in which you're playing.
No, it depends on the specific ships hulls. And since we are talking about Austria-Hungary, this faction has a very poor hulls selection. Other factions have it differently, I used the hulls of French cruisers and battleships of the pre-dreadnought era until the early 1930s. I might have used them further, but the mk4 guns are too big for old decks.
Austria-Hungary is terrible at the moment, just don't play it. In reality, their ships were of very good quality (just look at this beauty), but they have nothing in the game at the moment.
On 7/21/2022 at 3:43 AM, The PC Collector said:Also, quick feedback: Triple turrets are still too heavy. The main selling point of the triple turrets was that you could make 9 gun bbs with significantly less weight than 8 barrel ones using twins...
Not only. Also a place. For five double turrets, you need a lot more long hull than for three triple turrets.
On 7/21/2022 at 9:37 AM, The PC Collector said:The problem isn't that I can't fight the doomstacks. Is that they make the AI run out of ships stupidly fast.
Also, the AI doesn't know what to do with 100500 of ships and just gets them into a blob, so missing one ship I hit another.
-
2
-
-
Does anyone use 6 inch guns as secondary? I successfully used 3-5-inch, as well as 7-8-inch, but the attempt to use 6'' it completely failed. For a fight with dozens of targets, 6-inch weapons from 3 BB could not cause damage even in the amount of 10k, while the 13-inch dealt more than 50k damage, which is ridiculous in comparison.
57 minutes ago, The PC Collector said:So, according to the devs, this is normal?
This is archetypal for 1.08.
-
1
-
1
-
-
32 minutes ago, neph said:
This is a naval warfare simulator, not an rts. No ship would fire at a target they cannot see/detect via radar and have no hope of hitting. Such capacities for distributed rangefinding are simply not present in the depicted era—that's a solidly 1980s+ capability.
This is the same "naval warfare simulator" as the Total War medieval warfare simulator. UA:D is a mix of RTS (tactical battles) and TBS (global map).
-
2
-
-
itolan1752, +1
Italy 1890-1928
What's going on with Crew Pool?
Why does Germany with 4 provinces have a better economy than Italy with 11 provinces (provided that in all events I choose + GDP and keep the capacity of transport ships at 200% for the last 30 years)? Why does France with 3 provinces have an economy on par with all other countries taken together?
Questions, questions, so many questions...
German and Austrian pre-dreadnought cruisers use battleship hull copy-paste, which makes them frankly terrible cruisers. They are systematically underarmed. ~10 kiloton cruiser armed with 4x9 inch guns and a handful of 4 inch guns is not particularly impressive.
The German also have two types of battleship hulls and the Austrian have one type of battleship hulls. All this makes the early game for Germany and Austria quite dull.
I agree with the others:
- I want the ability to remove old ship designs and turn refits into building new ships;
- I don't like too big battles, it's long, lag and painfully dull;
- I want old technology. For example, Citadel 3 weighs more than Turtle Back. Which obviously means I can't use it like I used to on my cruisers;
- Research is too slow and there are too many of them. From 1892 to 1914, kept research at 100% and as a result received several modern hulls of all types, Krupp 2 armor, 11 and 12 inch MK3 guns, gear turbines and third-fourth generation FCS.
However, I am stuck with coal, two gun turrets, Mk2 secondary's, ~400mm torpedoes, Citadel 1 and boilers + funnel that have terrible efficiency above 25 knots. The worst thing is that my faction is the most advanced. I have never used three Free Priority points at the same time, rarely two at the same time - usually for two or three months, after which I returned to using one point, or even without it.
- AI willingly use 20 year old designs, which turns the fight with them into a turkey hunt.
-
1
-
-
28 minutes ago, o Barão said:
Is the Austrian CA hull in 1890?
Yeah. Start new company.
28 minutes ago, o Barão said:I don't have those initial pitch and roll values.
28 minutes ago, o Barão said:Also, it seems you are using heavy main guns for a 4k ton hull. 2x 8 inch guns? The new system allows the player to do that, but the penalty will be too much.
No heavy main guns, still great penalty.
32 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:This type of hull is indeed very unstable, but these hulls for small CA were historically very unstable too, they would carry too big guns for them to handle.
So, that's how it was meant to be. Well, thanks for your answer, I guess.
-
1 hour ago, Nick Thomadis said:
The hull is empty. By adding main guns on the ship, towers on the center, funnels, and by adjusting the citadel to be offset correctly you minimize pitch/roll.
Nice theory. And now reality.
An empty hull had a penalty of 49.9 + 91.1 = 141 After installing enough modules, this became 61.6 + 73.8 = 135.4
Yes, almost the same. You still get your -33 % accuracy penalty.-
3
-
-
This hull in 1890 looks hopeless.
I just put four inch cannons in the casemates and already have terrible penalties, like - 33% to accuracy and such😕
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, SonicB said:
Are you sure about that?
Admittedly the Sverdlovs were post-war cruisers (1952) but still within the Stalinist period in terms of ideology.Of course, if we are talking about the period before the Second World War. And since the latest start date for a gaming company is 1940, I see no point in discussing post-war changes. And they, of course, were and are still happening. Suffice it to say that now one of the Russian cruisers is called Peter the Great, which would almost certainly be a taboo for the Soviets, because he was a tsar and emperor, which is very bad from the communist point of view.
To be honest, I don't recall announcing are government system change, so maybe we're just stuck with end 19th century empires. This will make the question of ship names obviously simple. I honestly don't think it matters that much.
-
1 hour ago, SonicB said:
Similarly, a post-revolutionary Russian ship could be named Alexander Nevsky
Nay, this is against Soviet naval traditions. Before the Second World War, Soviet ships were usually named after famous heroes of the revolution, not necessarily Russians heroes. Revolutionary events were also popular, such as the Paris Commune, the Communist International, or the October Revolution itself. Less popular, but more familiar to the world, was the manner of naming ships according to the regions of the country. For example, cruiser Red Caucasus or battleship Soviet Union.
-
1
-
-
15 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:
MAJOR NEW FEATURES
- Customization of Beam / Draught:
Thanks, this is a big step in ship design.
-
I'm kind of confused - is this a new bug or an old one?
Client: beta
Mode: custom
Hulls: all
Countries: all
Years: 1918-1919
>>> Beta 1.09 Feedback (Released)<<<
in General Discussions
Posted
Oh my God, here we go again. Another Cyprus, except with Russians instead of the British.
Also, I've had one (1) battle in a few years of war, missions just don't show up. The Russians are running around in circles, but that's all. Our economies are slowly dying, meanwhile.