SodaBit

Unfortunately, DD's in this game are actually a kinda crap option when it comes to dealing with enemy submarines. Which, I know, is the exact opposite of how it should be. So, until this is rebalanced, I suggest using CL's for ASW escorts. It sounds like it should be an even worse option, but thanks to the auto-battler creating a result based purely on ship stats, the CL's in this game are actually more effective ASW platforms. 1947 DD with full ASW suite: 1,818.25 ASW points. 1947 CL with full ASW suite: 8,624.33 ASW points. Given that the 1947 DD has an ASW rating about ~4.9 times that of the 1927 DD, it stands to reason that a 1947 CL would have an ASW rating that is also about ~4.9 times that of a 1927 CL, which would be about 1760. So, a single CL would be worth almost 5 DD's when it comes to ASW. I'm not really an expert on the specifics of ASW during the 1920-40's, but I'm pretty sure an Omaha wouldn't be that much more effective than a Clemson when it comes to dealing with contemporary subs, nor would a Cleveland be that much more effective than a Fletcher in the same scenario.

Gunnery still needs a bit of work imo. 1948 convoy raid here, 2 German CL's vs a British CA and DD. CA is aiming for the 2nd CL in formation, Regensburg, but hasn't hit her yet though. Much to the bemusement of Sperber, the formation's leader, who has been hit by 22 7in. shells from the Brits and counting. This is the most accurate British cruiser I've encountered over the past decade, and the only reason for it is because it is hitting a target it's not even aiming for.

I remember seeing that several British ships had taken mine damage, and I'd assumed this group was among those who had been damaged. If they were badly damaged enough, I should have been able to run down at least some of them. The DD's were rather old units iirc, they only had a top speed of about 32 knots, and wouldn't have been able to run even at full HP. Looking back at it, I think this has more to do with AI ships going full speed despite being damaged enough that they should lose at least half their speed, rather than the AI not being aggressive enough.

So about the AI being more aggressive. I think that might not actually be the case, as I went into a battle against 1 8,000 ton CL and 3 DD's with a single 10,000 ton CL at my disposal. This fight could be called roughly even, but rather than fight it out and find out, the enemy decided to run. And not just normal running, they are absolutely booking it trying to avoid poor old Mainz. So much so, that an old bug I haven't seen in a very long time cropped back up. The AI is so committed to declining a fair fight, I literally have to chase them to the edges of the world. Also: There's something a bit off with this results screen.

I've got some feedback here regarding the political information screen, although I'm pretty sure this has already been mentioned in the thread recently. The "Technology" rating for countries might be in need of a rework. Here's the current political screen in my campaign, circa January, 1943. As you can see, there's quite the spread of technological advancement among these powers. Not pictured are Germany, Japan, and the United States, all listed at "Very Advanced," just like Russia... Whose fleet just got massacred in the Baltic. This unit of 4 "Very Advanced" BB's, 1 BC, 4 CA's, and 3 CL's, managed almost no damage against my force of 4 BB's of the same "Very Advanced" tech level, and 4 BC's. I will admit that my advantage in BC's would have probably won me this battle to begin with, as they would have been able to tear apart the Russian screen, focus down their one BC, and begin assisting the BB's. But, it would also be expected that my BB's would take some damage as they contended with the Russian battle-line. However, as it turned out, the Russian BB's Didn't Even Land a Single Shell. Despite almost 40 years of technological advancements, at one of the fastest paces in human history, Russian capital-ship gunnery is Somehow Worse Than It Was At Tsushima. The Russian guns were more akin to something you would find on one of the early Standard-Type BB's of the USN: Where as the guns they had to compete with, were in fact, very advanced. From this battle, we can very clearly see that, despite both nations being listed as "Very Advanced," there is a massive difference in the actual technological capabilities of the two navies. A much better system would be to list the tech level of a nation as a year, corresponding to the average year of the best technologies they have researched, as well as providing some highlights with regards to areas they're ahead of behind in. EG: Germany: Average tech level: 1940 Ahead in: big guns, engines, armor quality Behind in: submarine improvements, mines, naval communications

I've got some quick campaign battle feedback here. Like pretty much everyone else, I've been mining the hell out of the waters surrounding my ports, and I've occasionally damaged a few enemy warships quite badly. The most recent victim was the Russian CL Kuban, who took about 15% hull damage, and 35.1% crew damage. Since the ship wasn't too badly damage, she was allowed to continue her sortie. Fast forward a few months, and my fleet's run into Kuban again. Except this time, she didn't get off with just a mine hit. Instead, she surrendered at the beginning of combat due to high crew loses. This isn't the first time this has happened this campaign, I've run into similar issues in my previous war against Russia, over a decade ago. it seems that some AI nations just don't maintain their ships well enough. I know there is a historical precedent for the Soviet/Russian Navy taking poor care of its units (See: Arkhangelsk, Murmansk, Moskva) but in this scenario, it's kinda detracting from the gameplay. I didn't mind too much in the case of Kuban, as she's got a half knot speed advantage, and would have probably escaped despite her existing damage, but if it was a 1v1 between one of my 100,000 ton BB's and the largest unit the Russians could field? I'd be a bit disappointed.

I've got some feedback here regarding the AI's handling of nations, particularly with regards to Austria-Hungary. The past decade has not been kind to the once mighty empire of the Von Habsburgs. It has fallen from the height of its power down to a measly 3 provinces, a situation which poses a unique problem for their navy. Trying to operate a 400,000 ton fleet out of a single, under-developed Montenegrin port. This, coupled with the loss of most of the Empire's old territory, Including Austria Itself, is causing the "Austro"-Hungarian Union to bleed cash at a rate I've not seen in several patches. The solution to this is pretty obvious, the Union needs to accept the situation for what it is, and cut back it's navy's tonnage accordingly. There's another issue I'd like some info on though. "Austria"-Hungary never collapsed, despite losing almost everything, and is thus still counted as a major power, with the ability to construct ships for both domestic and foreign service. They've also had revolts in every single one of their provinces with a port, with the Croatian War of Independence depriving the Union of 3 out of their 4 original ports, with those 3 being the only places in the empire at the start of the game that can store 50,000 tons of shipping. Had the revolt in Montenegro succeeded, the Union would be left with nowhere to base its navy. What happens to their navy in this scenario? Does it all just disappear? Would it go into the ports of minor allies? What would the player be able to do in this situation? Is it just game over, or some sort of soft lock?

1: to answer your question, I'd take practicality over realism. If all ships in a formation are undamaged, such as at the beginning of a battle, I don't mind having ships exceed their top speeds in order to keep formations, or assist with creating new formations if the player so chooses. This worked out fine in the Battlestations series, where ships were given 5 knot speed boosts when getting into formation, or when the player changed their exact position in a formation. Breaking realism for the sake of greater control over a formation didn't detract from the gameplay experience, it just added to it. 2: This still doesn't explain why ships behind the leader of a line formation would slow down. If they can't keep up with the leader, then they should still be sailing at full speed in order to keep up with a formation's leader as best they can, not dropping their speed so that the gap between them and the leader gets bigger. The formation pictured started out as 2 separate formations, one line of 4 CL's with about 750m between each and 1 CL off the port bow of the other formation's leading ship at about 2,000m distance. I ordered the 1 CL off to the side to fall in behind the other 4 CL's. All units had above 90% fuel, and were completely undamaged. The only reasonable fault with the formation that could have occurred after grouping up would have been the 5th CL trailing slightly behind the other 4 maybe at about 1,500m, with the gap between the leading 4 possibly expanding slightly. As it happened, each ship was trailing each other by about 4,250m. Had the battle not ended after 30 minutes of searching, this gap would have likely expanded even further. Edit: I should add that I tried slowing down the lead ship in order to fix the problem. It didn't, the trailing ships just slowed down even more, and didn't try to catch up with the lead ship.

I'm not sure if anyone's reported this yet, but there seems to be another bug with formations. I ordered this line of 5 CL's to sail ahead at 35.5 knots in close formation, but instead... They decided that this meant they should sail in an impractically loose formation, with each consecutive ship proceeding at a slow pace than the ship in front of them. This has turned what should have been a line of 5 CL's in tight formation... Into something that can't even be called a formation, just a collection of ships sailing in roughly the same direction SPREAD OUT OVER 18 KILOMETERS. I can't think of a single example of a formation of ships covering this much ground, aside from maybe the British line at Jutland, but that was over 2 dozen battleships, and their escorts, setting up for the biggest gun-line battle in human history. This is just 5 10,000 cruisers chasing down a lone DD. WHY?

So about hostile fleets not being able to move through canals/straits you own. That's Not Actually the Case, it Would Seem. These boys just forced the Kiel Canal in the face of 4 modern dreadnaughts, with 4 battlecruisers in nearby ports. Did the canal operators just sit back and watch? Where the hell was the Reichswehr? Did they not bother to station artillery to defend the canal in case of this exact scenario?

I've got some feedback here with regards to the international warship market, namely the absolute state of the Russian ship-building industry. Having Gone to War With Almost the Entire World, this industry is, as you would expect, working double overtime to churn out as many warships as possible. The problem is, these ships won't go toward the defense of the Motherland, because They're Almost All Foreign Orders. Russia's minor allies have placed so many orders that they've almost completely destroyed Russia's ability to contest the seas. There's currently 92 ships under construction, mostly light and heavy cruisers, but with only about $50B GDP, Russia cannot handle this many orders at once. I'd estimate they can handle 250,000 tons of production, but they may very well be trying to produce double or even triple that amount. Obviously, this is causing massive delays, and coupled with the heavy losses the Russians are taking by trying to take on the 3 largest navies on the planet, who are backed up by Austria-Hungary. China, with Italy poised to join the fight in a few months, the Russian Navy is facing a crisis it won't be able to cope with. If they are to have any chance of surviving this threat, let alone beating it, then the Russians would need to stop taking foreign orders, seize whatever ships are currently on the stocks for their own use, and begin working through the massive backlog to repair and rebuild their fleet. Instead, they continue to accept foreign contracts, greatly compromising their own ability to fight, for very little in return. Edit: I should also make mention of the Chinese ship-building industry. Whilst not at war with almost everyone, their foreign order situation is Somehow Even Worse. Total ships in the Chinese fleet: 24. Active: 0. In Repair: 24. Why? Currently under construction: 182.

British losses: ~4 battalions worth of B.E.F. and colonial troops German losses: Every single German to have ever existed, as well as all their ancestors and extended family members. I know this isn't realistic, but I'm pretty sure the Hague would be investigating the Gold Coast campaign for flagrant disregard for the rules of war and massive human rights violations if it was.

I've got some quick map feedback here, in regards to one of the quietest places in the world. Nome, Alaska, is a sleepy little town on the southern side of Alaska's central peninsula. As of today, it's population is less than 4,000, so I can forgive the devs if they get the exact location of this little hamlet wrong. But placing it here probably isn't going to work very well. It's tied to the Bering Sea region, which is technically correct given it's actual location irl, but if we look over at the Bering Sea, There's no Nome. What we do have is Provideniya, almost directly across from where Nome should be. Interestingly, despite being along the coast of the Bering Sea both in game, and irl, this port is tied to the Sea of Okhotsk region. Which is over here, south-west of the Bering Sea, past the Kamchatka Peninsula. Nome, Alaska, again featured. I get that this part of the map doesn't see a lot of action, but it still needs to be accurate. There are still more pressing issues at hand, such as the ones discussed in the last few posts, that should be addressed first. Get battles working properly, then we can worry about where they can take place.

Honestly, I don't see the issue with the flag being wrong, especially in a beta for a game that's still indev. I'd be fine with a place holder, it's not even critical to the ship's design, unlike, you know, a working rudder and correct fire-control mechanisms. As for the Nazi flag or any other flag someone might find offensive? If you're that offended by a Nazi flag flying on a ship, I suggest you sink that ship, and any other ship that might be flying a flag that offends you. If you hate Nazis being in a game, and you still want to play that game, chances are the game will give you an opportunity to kill them. Take it.

I've got some quick campaign feedback here with regards to the map. There's No Arctic Theater of War. One of, if not the, most critical trade routes the Allies used to supply Soviet forces with Lend/Lease simply doesn't exist in game. After 1941 this became a major theater of war, as the German navy could very easily cut off Russia's Baltic ports, couldn't do anything about her Black Sea ports, so needed to control the Arctic in order to finish the blockade of the Western Soviet Union. In UA:D however, there's no real point in sending ships up there. All you can really do as a Germany player is mine the crap out of Kiel and the Baltic, and wait for the Soviet economy to collapse. On the other hand, a Russia player just has to worry about maintaining a strong enough fleet to break through German lines, and keep trade flowing into St. Petersburg/Petrograd/Leningrad. Hopefully they don't rename it Putingrad to boost moral. There's only so many times you can change a city's name before it starts to annoy historians. TL:DR, Please add the Russian Arctic ports so we can have another major theater of war that can actually be contested by multiple parties.

I don't have any specific feedback here, but holy f*** the absolute state of this game is atrocious. It was atrocious in the last patch, and it hasn't gotten any better with this beta, we've just traded old bugs for new ones. Please, for the love of God, Stop Adding New Features and Rebalancing Components Until Every Single Bug is Fixed. Adding New Content Shouldn't be the Priority when the Current Content Doesn't Work Properly. Please, Just Slow Down, and Fix Everything That's Currently in the Game Before Adding More.

Pretty long standing issue here, but the enemy is still able to run away at great speeds despite being out of feul. HMS Grafton here is out of fuel, But Is Still Making 90% Of Her Design Speed. It took almost an hour to catch up to this little bugger, as my BC's had to chase him into the shadow realm, a bug I thought was fixed a few patches ago, but still seems to be happening. I'd also like to mention that "Command and Control" of a taskforce is more of a myth than an operational reality at this point, as despite very clear orders coming from my mouse and keyboard, my ships are still fishtailing around the ocean shooting at whatever they feel like rather than what I'm explicitly telling them to.

I've got some feedback here on the AI's ship buying habits. I didn't think I'd be getting any foreign orders playing as Weimar Germany, but I've actually managed to sell a few ships to both Argentina and Bulgaria, the later of which has given me some cause for concern. It's not that I'm worried about facing these ships in combat, but rather what their fate will be after arriving in Bulgaria. They weigh over 45,000 tons each, but the largest port in Bulgaria, Varna, isn't actually large enough to support these vessels. Varna can only support a measly 26,300 tons, and the only other port in the country Burgas, can support even less, at about 25,000 tons. So the Bulgarians have ordered 3 modern battlecruisers, and have nowhere to put them. I'd also like to note that the ships started construction with German names, meaning the flagship of the Bulgarian navy would have been commissioned as Gneisenau, and the Argentinians would have had their coasted being patrolled by the likes of ARA Fraunlob and ARA Stettin. I've taken the liberty of giving foreign orders names suitable for the navies they're going to, but the AI isn't as attentive to such things, so there's a few oddities like HMRAS Pittsburg and NMS Ibuki sailing around. There are more pressing issues that need to be fixed, but this is still one of those things I'd like to see improved.

2 things, First, the homeless fleet bug caused by economic collapse that causes the turn to hang indefinitely still appears to be present. Given that this issue was first reported a few days ago, I wasn't expecting it to be fixed this quickly, but it's worth mentioning that not all issues regarding turn delays have been fixed yet. Second, and this given the speed options for torpedos this was bound to come up eventually, AI ships don't appear to be able to dodge their own torpedos very well. Due to the very low speed of electric torpedos,(35 knts) and the extremely high speed of late game CL's (regularly in excess of 36, some times up to 40 knts,) this Russian warship has, in fact, gone and f***ed itself.

Can personally attest to this being the apparent cause of the issue. Germany collapsed about a year and a half ago now, but there are still units on the High Seas Fleet carrying out orders from their deposed Kaiser, or trying to return to a homeland that no longer exists. Since the collapse of Germany, I've had the turn hang up on "Updating Missions" every single time. The only bypass I know of to progress the campaign is to save before the turn actually ends, and then go to the main menu, and reload the new save, which starts at the beginning of the next turn. I'm pretty sure this is having some issues with the save's stability though, given what sort of effects pulling this bypass can have both in UA:D and other games.

Meanwhile, further south in the Pacific. It would seem that VP's are pretty borked right now. Even if the USN ships were obsolete, That's Almost 50,000 US Sailors KIA.

I've got some ship balance feedback here, but it's actually pretty amusing, so I wouldn't exactly mind if this issue goes unfixed for the time being. November, 1930, I'm refitting my old "CL's" with RADAR and other new technologies I've picked up over the past few years, when I notice something incredible. I've managed to make a ship with an 80,000 kilometer operational range. In 1930. This Sub 10,000 Ton CL Somehow Carries Enough Fuel to Circumnavigate the Globe Twice Without Refueling. (Assuming she can sail in a straight line the whole way, but still) I think we can safely tune back the operational range modifiers a bit. All this CL is going to do is sit in harbor and lay mines, not try to beat Von Spee at his own game. Not the most critical thing in the world, but it's just a bit much imo.

Slight bug with mission generation here I think. Every single month of the war thus far I've gotten a "Battlecruiser to the Rescue" mission. Problem is they've always looked like this: That's every single operational capital ship in the entire Japanese navy being "Rescued" from 2 CL's. The AI, rather understandably, isn't too keen on committing suicide by 356mm APC, and is just going to retreat from this battle as soon as it starts, just like the last 20 times this has happened. Also, I wouldn't exactly call a convoy sailing with 7 BB's and 6 BC's "unescorted." So, this rather clearly isn't a rescue mission like it was in previous patches, but rather one BC rather awkwardly reinforcing a one-sided slaughter of a battle, should the AI actually advance to contact.

I know we've been over this before, but I feel that the minefield mechanic might need a bit more tuning, especially in the Straights of Tsushima, and other confined waterways, like the Red Sea. I've had 8 minelaying CL's deployed to Sasebo for the past 6 years, and they've been able to go about their business unmolested, causing heavy damage to any fleet passing through the straights, regardless of size or composition. The AI doesn't seem to have much if anything in the way of minesweeping at the moment, so this lone DD is all that's left of a much larger unit that was disabled by the minefield. A much, MUCH larger unit, in fact. The AI Ran Their Entire Fleet Through a Minefield, killing the mobility of the vast majority of their ships. With so many ships sitting around with disabled engines and low fuel, sending in 12 BC's to mop up a force 5 times their size was child's play, as I didn't need to engage anymore than a handful of enemy ships at a time. No fleet commander, upon seeing their vanguard take hits by a previously undetected minefield, should order his ships to sail straight through said minefield, consequences be damned. And perhaps they should bring someone who can sweep mines next time?

Don't forget to mention that the "Next Turn" button stops working after a decade or so in game due to Building New Ships bug. Pretty basic aspect of a strategy game right there.