Werwaz

A good way to start a campaign Now with 1 million damage!

there still seems to be a bit of a problem with the "building ships" screen freezing about 3 years into the campaign

new drydocks look good that being said the construction flaws desperately need to be rebalanced and the AI needs to not be a coward. besides that everything looks good

And you thought that was bad... Keep in mind that these were both built as part of the same class, and yet one is 25 percent bigger than the other. A lot more than just drunk shipyard workers would have had to wrong for this to happen... I think that construction flaws should be limited to legendary difficulty, or scaled back so that they are ±2% as opposed to the current ±20%. I'm pretty sure that if there was a flaw that serious in real life, the navy would have had the ship scrapped and rebuilt.

In my current playthrough, my ships have way too many defects for using more advanced techs, causing me to just scrap any defective ship that isn't a BB or BC. I think that the effects of defects should be drastically reduced, or at least give the the player the option to remove all of the hull and weapon defects with a single "fix defects" refit. EDIT: I also noticed that the battle generator seems to not be working for USA.

A surprise to be sure, but a welcome one

a battle that even puts Trafalgar to shame. my ships did over 1 million combined damage, and sank about 3/4 of the whole German fleet at this one battle alone.

when will it hit 2k?

I mostly agree with this, but I would also have a max tonnage along with a max number to prevent battleship doomstacks. I think such a limit would make the most sense at about 5X the largest battleship's displacement. I think it would tie into a proper logistics system pretty well if they ever implemented that.

The first point makes sense. However, the logic begins to fall apart from there. My capital ships are indeed better protected than their AI counterparts, however that is only one of many notable advantages of player designs to AI designs, notably better module selection, better weight offset margins, better optimized guns, better gun layout, better engine efficiency, etc. I hardly have seen a ship capable of soloing entire fleets, notably because the only ships capable of carrying 20+ inch belts and 10+ inch decks with any decent firepower and speed (notably USA, UK, and France super BBs) all have below average resistances, and can die to HE and torp spam (favorite tactics if the AI). Option A actually doesn't sound that bad, considering that the entirety of UAD is fantasy, since most super BBs in game are 1.5 to 2 times the displacement of Yamato, 70k ton 1920s dreadnoughts exist, and pre dreadnoughts can be built to rival most early dreadnoughts in displacement. As for the "fantasy BS designs", battleships are supposed to be hard to sink. if they are put down after taking only a few hits like most AI clown cars, that design is bad. Simply put, I would rather see the AI build more challenging ships rather than have myself handicapped because the Artificial Stupidity can't design at least a mediocre ship.

I was playing a custom battle, and the AI decided that 10 inches of belt armor was enough to protect 19.4 inch guns... I think the Artificial Stupidity of an AI is more the problem than armor being too light.

There's plenty of good in this, but some of it I think is detrimental to my enjoyment of the game. The Good: all of the bug fixes rebalanced costs for radios, sonars and radars (radios were basically dead weight) hulls are properly balanced (no more 25% aft weight offset) "select a ship of the required type" bug is fixed (thank you very much!) The Bad: huge armor nerf- totally unnecessary, since armor was heavy enough, and now most heavily armored all-or-nothing builds are no longer possible, so much so that most ships built to historical specs are now overweight, and super battleships can not be properly armored against their own guns. If the reason for this nerf is in fact the AI, I think it would be a lot better if the AI used more armor on their ships rather than force the players to use AI levels of armor. Too often in that past I would just smash AI ships because they didn't have enough armor, and the fight was a lot more challenging when I would pit two of my own ships against each other because they were far better protected than any AI clown car. If it was for realism, most recreations of real ships are overweight, and it is not too far off to assume that ships within the super battleship bracket within UAD (100k+ tons), which had only one real-life concept, notably H44, would have most likely been using 20+ inch main armor belts and 10+ inch main decks, which is not utterly impossible, and now these ships can be easily penned by normal size battleships, which defeats the whole point of building super BBs. As for smaller ships being armored too heavily, they already have armor caps, and their armor can be defeated by the guns of a bigger ship, as well as battleship HE. In essence, the armor nerf fixed a problem that wasn't there, nobody had asked to be fixed as far as I know, and created a few more problems in its place.

It is time to bring this thread back from the dead... with some memes Against all the evil that they can conjure... all the wickedness that they can produce... we will send unto them only you. SLIP AND FAIL UNTIL IT IS DONE. (DOOM music intensifies) I feel like I have seen this somewhere before... "I didn't lose, I merely failed to win!" -General McClellan, Oversimplified Civil War Part 1

That is sort of the idea, since a competently managed navy shouldn't see these things happen. Those events should only really happen if you are either doing warcrimes or you are losing a war badly.

I was winning so hard, the AI resorted to yeeting all of their turrets at my ship. I think their aim was a little off though...

MOAR DAKKA all of those guns do indeed superfire

It seems that it has been quite some time since anyone has posted to this thread, so Ill add this one for y'all to enjoy USS Hyperion rams HIRMS Petr Velikiy between A and B turrets. Picture is taken from quarterdeck of Petr Velikiy shortly before contact.

I don't think we would have adjustable citadels, custom guns, or basically any other 1.06 feature along with most of the more niche hulls and towers like the Von der Tann, many of the pre-dreadnoughts, and the Fuso without community input. Big long list of things that I will give my opinion on in order: Guns, accuracy and pen were all reworked to a satisfactory level in 1.08. AI will always be strange and easily clubbed by players due to the complexities of designing a ship and managing a navy. That being said, the clown cars the AI produces today are markedly better than the hideous monstrosities it used to make when I started playing back in Alpha-8, and additional improvements are welcome. torp notifications aren't exactly needed since you can just change course as soon as you spot a torpedo. Performance optimizations are definitely needed to reduce wait time for booting up a new campaign. I generally agree that 5X, 10X, and 30X should always be enabled. Formations are quite useful if you know how to use them properly and not as a substitute for competent command. My rules of thumb are to generally have no more than 4 manual battle lines of no more than 4 ships, and all of the other ships would be set to screen or scout for those formations, unless they are serving to draw fire from enemy vessels. you can generally avoid the doomstack issue by sticking to late era campaign starts (after 1910), and not going for any other difficulty than normal, since the other difficulties just give the AI more money, and therefore more doomstacks. besides, I like smashing AI doomstacks like this one from a while back: this one was my 2BB, 2BC, 4CA, 6BB, 1BC, 6CL, and 4DD versus the enemy's 6BB, 1BC, 13CA, 2CL, and 1DD. as for no new content... while is is definitely important for the devs to fix existing systems, they still need to add new content if they want to sell more copies of the game, and survive as a company. Most of the people who watch youtubers like Stealth17 or BrotherMunro that don't already have the game are more likely to buy the game if they show off shiny new content like a cool new ship or a shiny new campaign feature. Simply put, fixes are not very marketable to a new audience. If Game Labs can't sell new copies, then the game dies, no new fixes will be issued, and I don't think anyone here want's that to happen. Out of that giant list at the top of the thread, I would be perfectly happy if they only did one of those things over 10 updates, as long as there is something new to do. It wasn't too terribly long ago when this game would only be updated every 3 months, and these forums would be almost dead in between updates. To sum everything up, I think the best plan going forward would be to add some new features, but to also fix existing ones as well in order to draw in new players and keep existing players. If you absolutely don't want any new content, you can just keep playing 1.05 I suppose. as for the "agree" button to end wars, either they haven't fixed it yet or they are planning on adding negotiated peaces, since the current peace system is currently representing an unconditional surrender. Enemy ships just shooting at me is not enough when I can play the same tactic over and over, even with inferior ships, and still beat the AI almost all of the time. Its so bad that I even beat the AI when I was using its designs and the AI was using my designs, which are far better designed than any AI clown car. I often that I have to battle the AI on a 1 to 2 ratio in order to get a fun and challenging battle.

here are a few things that I think could be improved or added in the next few updates: rework spotting. I think that the current spotting system is fine for over-the-horizon spotting, but there should be a certain "spot everything" area around the ship which would cover everything visible to the eye from the top of the ship's mast. this area would change based on the height of the ship's mast and the weather conditions. rework campaign AI. rework battle AI. It is still too easy to dupe and herd with destroyers, and it has trouble picking out the most dangerous target out of an enemy fleet, resulting in me using a few destroyers to draw fire from enemy capital ships and using my own capitals to annihilate them with impunity at close range. throwing it more money in the campaign is only a temporary solution. improve diplomacy mechanics. besides being able to create tension with other countries, we should also be able to become friends with other countries outside of random events. Perhaps one could hold joint exercises, do technology sharing, trade deals, etc. to boost relations with other countries. as part of this, different government type would be added with different buffs and debuffs to a country: Monarchy: +20% Crew XP, +10% naval prestige gain from winning battle Democracy: +10%GDP growth, +10% build speed, +10% research speed, -10% Unrest, -10% Tension gain Communist: +20% build speed, -10% research speed, no general strikes. add officer corps. along with enlisted crew, a player would get a certain number of captains each turn depending on how much they spend on crew training. captains would be assigned to a ship by the player. captains would have attributes that could buff or debuff their ship, and they would gain experience along with their crew, which would give them additional attributes. a captain would be lost if their ship was sunk and they did not abandon ship beforehand, or if they are killed by a hit to the conning tower. losing captains would negatively affect one's naval prestige and unrest. some examples would include, but would not be limited to: Aggressive: +10% to RoF and forwards speed, +5% flash fire chance, +10% engine damage chance, disables retreat/withdraw Engineer: +25% damage control Capital ship expert: +10% resistance, +10% floatability, only applies when commanding BB or BC, incompatible with small ship expert or cruiser expert. Small ship expert: +10% funnel capacity, +10% smoke screen duration, only applies when commanding DD or TB, incompatible with capital ship expert or cruiser expert. Cruiser expert: +10% spotting range, +10% torpedo detection range, only applies when commanding CA or CL, incompatible with capital ship expert or small ship expert. Cautious: -10% to RoF and forwards speed, -5% flash fire chance, -10% engine damage chance, +10% view range Ship sniper: -10% RoF, +20% Long range accuracy Torpedo marksman: -20% dud chance, +10% torpedo accuracy Experienced: +10% crew XP gain add more countries to campaign: I think that it would make more sense to add Spain, Russia and Eastern USA first, then add China, Japan, and Western USA later. rebalance hulls: with the new citadel change, the hulls carry a large aft weight offset since the balance point is currently halfway on the length of the ship, and not the center of mass. rebalance shells: some people here on the forums think that HE is too strong against certain targets. new hulls: I would probably like the see a US standard, a Tillman battleship, some more pre-dreadnoughts, and more unique cruiser and destroyer hulls added to the game add national modifiers in campaign: each nation would have 2-3 active modifiers that change the way that nation performs. they can change depending on the economic and political atmosphere of the world. some examples would include, but are not limited to: Isolationism: -25% naval budget, -50% tension gain, no alliances allowed. removed if there is an active war or arms race. activates if country is not in any alliances. USA and China would probably start with this most of the time. Economic Boom: +5% transport construction, +10% research speed, activates when over 10% GDP growth. Economic Recession: -5% transport construction, -10% research speed, activates when under 0% GDP growth. Empire: +25% naval budget, +50% tension gain, activated when a country holds overseas provinces. Britain, France, Spain, Italy, and Japan would probably start with this most of the time. Jeune Ecole: +15% construction speed for CL, DD and TB, -15% construction speed for BB, BC, and CA, activates when 2/3 of active fleet is composed of CL, DD, and TB. Kantai Kessen: +15% construction speed for BB, BC, and CA, -15% construction speed for CL, DD, and TB, activates when 1/3 of active fleet is composed of BB ,BC and CA. Open Revolt: -75% naval budget, -75% crew training, -75% construction speed, ships may defect to other countries, activates with 75 unrest or more. General Strike: -100% construction speed, -100% crew training, -100% research speed, lasts 2 months, can activate with 80 unrest or more. Civil War: -100% construction speed, -100% crew training, -100% research speed, some ships will become hostile, activates at 100 unrest Arms Race: +75% naval budget, +75% crew training, +75% construction speed, +75% research, +75% tension gain, -25% GDP growth, can activate when relations with another country are below -75

I still notice the AI heavily leans on a 3X2 gun layout that is usually outclassed by ships with more numerous guns.

AI Clown car being dispatched by 19"/62 guns

About what time could we expect the full release of 1.06?

While I certainly agree with the longer reloads and aim time, we definitely have a problem when a 20" mk3 gun from 1940 has worse accuracy than a 12" mk.1 gun from 1890.

You do gotta remember they were bought by Stillfront (Basically Swedish EA) of all companies a year back. https://www.stillfront.com/en/stillfronts-strategy-for-growth/

A list of suggested improvements: rebalance guns fix the campaign fix resistance Starting off with the guns, I'm not so sure that aiming and shell ballistics are that well optimized... late era heavy guns are basically unusable with how utterly shit their accuracy is right now some accuracy curves from 1940 tech guns out to 10 km as of now: 9"- 100, 65, 20, 8.5, 4.1 12"- 100, 100, 52, 24, 12 15"- 100, 42, 17, 9.4, 5.7- 16"- 61, 24, 10, 5.4, 3.4 18"- 29, 12, 5.4, 3.1, 2.1 20"- 13, 5.9, 3.9, 2.9, 1.9, 1.3 Y'all starting to see the problem? generally, a bigger gun with more range is supposed to be more accurate, and not the other way around. Whilst they shouldn't be one shotting ships at 50km like in patch 1, their accuracy should still be exponentially higher than that of smaller guns, and not the other way around. we have a very big problem if a 12" gun is exponentially more accurate than a 20" gun. As for the campaign, its gonna be a hard pass for now until the peacetime mechanics are mostly bug free. At the moment, tension starts affecting relations way too soon, causing basically endless war with about a year of peace in between. they should kick in at about -75 instead of -1. War missions still appear even after a peace treaty is signed. peacetime budgets are also a bit too low in my opinion. I also think that the resistance stat needs to be reworked so that hulls in the same category have similar (+-5) resistance values, since some hulls like the American and British super BBs have abnormally low resistance that makes them non competitive compared the hulls like the Austrian super dreadnought and the German super battleship. On the other hand, the "Fast Battleship" battlecruiser hulls have too much resistance for a battlecruiser. My solution would be as follows: (+-5 variation for each group) Super BBs: 105 resistance Modern BBs: 95 resistance Modernized Dreadnoughts: 95 resistance Large Battlecruisers (hulls like Fast Battleship, Super Battlecruiser, Modern Battlecruiser, etc.): 80 resistance Small Battlecruisers (all of the Large Cruiser hulls): 70 resistance