roachbeef

I would like to see the ability to not research the passive technologies or just not apply them. Not all technology bonuses are worth it, and currently, you have no choice but to keep having certain technologies level up.

I really hope that we can choose not to research certain technologies. Like that final torpedo protection tech. The weight increases are, while not fatal, extremely annoying in that I am suddenly unable to rebuild ships that I had previously been able to because the increased weight forces downgrades in other areas. Likewise, the cost increases and weight increases for various technologies should be decreased. I am fine with both the pros and cons plateauing out rapidly. Maybe change the research so that you can distribute research slots a la HOI4? Or maybe have research points, with costs increasing the earlier you get them before their "intended" year (a bit like HOI4) and costs decreasing dramatically once everybody else has it.

Can confirm this. The tech tree needs fixing.

Massive lag/freezing can occur when editing values in the shipyard. The lag and freezes will disappear upon creating a new design or copying the design to a new slot. Starts @1:40 of the video (

This is the worst possible choice and the laziest design decision possible, and to be brutally honest, I don't know why anybody with experience playing good video games would even contemplate this idea (looking at you, Bethesda & FO3). What needs to happen is for the developers to actually balance the AI's research progress or to have a technological osmosis happen (both ways) in a gradual manner, not to have copy-paste enemies that all look and fight the same way. One side getting new tech and then it magically appearing in everybody's hands is outright ridiculous, boring to play, and immersion-breaking. Why would the Japanese have bothered with Long Lance torpedoes, the British with radar, or the Americans with high-pressure boilers if they had known it did not provide them an edge? Listening to such a suggestion will harm the game.

Here's the thing: with a design bank, plus the AI adding variation but within set constraints and modular templates, devs can give us a ship designer that does not constain us to oblivion. Actual freedom to experiment with the limits of what is possible. Right now, none of that is possible because of arbitrary limits on flexibility and freedom made to coddle and handhold the AI. You can't, however, mod a fundamentally flawed ship designer. You know, the core of the game. The minimum viable product. As long as the devs keep using the AI's high degree of freedom as an excuse, replayability is hampered by it greatly and so is the player's imagination. The devs seem to care far more about the AI's freedom than the players' freedom. Not sure if they are writing an academic paper or a naval game. Does anyone honestly think the AI can handle differing belt heights, transverse bulkheads, actually modeled torpedo belts, magazind armor, engine subdivision, and the like? Because those and more added variables would reset a lot of the lauded progress in the AI. There is the potential to make something great here, but it seems that the devs are either being misled or are deliberately ignoring this critical functionality of the game.

Hope the turret armor issue gets fixed before the weekend. Spending the whole weekend fighting flash fires and destroyed turrets is not my idea of fun.

It's too late. Go on ... without me ... 💀 Remember me as you play the patch o7

I still maintain that it is better to have the AI build from a bank of user and dev made designs (perhaps track their win rates) and remove their ability to design for themselves. That will solve all of the issues overnight with the unrealistic and limited ship designer, but some people are too enamored by sunk cost.

Could be Poe's Law. It's difficult to detect sarcasm online.

Can confirm the issue with British supercruiser design: Before adding secondary: After adding secondary:

Yeah, but that is not a defense of the game at all. The fix would be to have a button to wait to observe shell splash until firing the next salvo. It's implemented in War on the Sea, so maybe this game should just copy that (minus the bugs).

While the proposed changes are a good idea, I do not think they will happen. The devs have a sunk cost that they are reluctant to throw away because they have already delayed the game's Steam release. They're likely pressured for time and will have to release a product that retains the original core mechanics, for better or for worse.

KGV was held back. Prince of Wales fought Bismarck

They are being used as an excuse to prevent players from having more freedom in creating more historically accurate ships. No direct editing of armor schemes, huge limitation in barbette points (not even talking about placing barbettes at bow or stern—just want more barbette points), no more exotic armor schemes (like some RN cruisers). Leaving aside whether that excuse is believable, I would rather have a more in-depth ship designer and hardcoded AI designs (or which just use player submissions) rather than have to deal with the current system. It is not like the AI designs halfway decent ships in the current system anyways. Quite the opposite—they build ships no sane navy would have chosen at any point in time (although the designers themselves and some of the officers had a loose definition of sanity). Maybe the AI should not be given that freedom in the first place if the devs have no confidence in giving them options?