SodaBit

Sorry for the doubletake here, but I've got some more diplomacy feedback. These Little Shits Have Been Generating 10 Tension Every Month For The Past Year And A Half Why would the German people care about this They're in British territorial waters, in what seems to be an attempt to intimidate them Despite the fact that Britain and France are allied. Why. These 4 ships are going to cause a f***ing world war just by hanging around off the coast of Britain

I've got some quick diplomacy feedback here. While there is historical precedent for it, the massive relations change when war breaks out is something of a kill-joy for this game's diplomacy system. While folks might not like it when someone declares war on their ally, this sort of system greatly impairs the player's ability to actually change the diplomatic situation of their nation. A better way of doing things would be to give the player an option on which side to support through an event, where siding with a nation you don't have good relations with over a nation you do have good relations with would cause some unrest and maybe cost some prestige, but the point of the event would be to give the player the choice on what side to take, if any. One of the options could simply be to support neither side, at the cost of prestige, but lowering unrest.

Some very quick weight issue feedback here. While this issue has been the subject of detailed discussion since the opening of 1.06 beta and has improved quite a bit, there's still a bit of work to be done with it. Pitch and roll seem to be working as intended, but longitudinal offset continues to be an issue. I believe this remaining issue to be caused by the location of secondary weapons. E.G. SMS Bayern as of update 22: SMS Bayern with the forward most 5.9 casemate guns removed: Now, it's fair to argue that removing ~180t of weight off the front would have that sort of effect on a 34,000t BB, but I'm still not convinced this is working as intended because of what happens when we do the same sort of thing with Yamato: When we remove 2 of the rear 40mm mounts and this is what we get: We only removed 14 tons, and the ship's stability has increased by a significant margin. I'm not an engineer, but I'm not sure this is how it works. On the real Yamato design, this section of the ship was utilized for aircraft facilities, with those aircraft being stored under the deck, next to the barbette for X turret, meaning that even more weight was present on this part of the ship IRL. Yet, this didn't have a massive impact on the ship's overall stability, if anything, it seemed to balance out the weight of A turret and Yamato's rather long bow. TL:DR, secondary guns need to have less influence on the weight offset of the ship. If this change is implemented, then it might prove the final change we need to resolve the weight issue that has plagued us for the past few weeks.

I've got some quick AI designer/campaign feedback here. 1922, 4 German BB's vs 1 "Brand New" Austrian BB. My BB's are relatively old, originally built in 1914, but were refitted back in '21 with new guns, and the Austrian design is even older than the original design of my BB's. (1909 I think?) Yes, the Austrians are still using the same design from over a decade ago, and it's a quite flawed one at that. This BB Entered Service in 1922, and Its Main Guns Only Have A Max Range Of 14km. As you can probably guess, the penetration on these howitzers is pretty awful. What's worse is that they have to go up against one of the best guns I've got in my fleet, the 350/65. The result of this massive difference in range, accuracy, and penetration was entirely predictable. The Austrian BB hit the bottom with all but 8 of her main battery shells still aboard. It should be noted that in the politics menu the Austro-Hungarian Empire is listed as "Very Advanced," but just built an obsolete mess of a ship, despite that class of ship having been proven to be wholly ineffective on the modern battlefield. I've lost count of the exact number, but I've probably destroyed almost a dozen ships of this class by now, they rarely achieved anything even when they were still relatively new designs, and aged like spoiled milk as the years rolled on. Update: 1924 2 years later and the war's finally over. I managed to take an example of this class in the peace deal, with this unit in particular having been built about a year after the battle pictured in this post. The Austrians were using this as a frontline unit in 1924. Those are Mk. I 12" guns. They Were Still Using Mk. I Guns In 1924. A Nation Listed As Very Advanced In 1924 Was Using Guns From The 1890's.

Got some campaign feedback here. I've been trying to avoid allying Austria as Germany, but alas, I've gotten dragged into one of their pointless wars without even being allied to them. I'm currently at peace w/ GB, but GB is at war with Austria, who's at war with France, who's at war with me. So according to the AI GB is at war with me? Even though that is very clearly not the case? Honestly, I was rooting for the Franco-British alliance in their war against Austria, but now that alliance is trying to kill me, so... I'm still not going to ally Austria.

I know I've already touched on this issue, but it is so game braking that I think it should be made a priority for future fixes. Speed tanks are exceptionally powerful right now for one simple reason. They Can Prevent The Enemy From Firing. Not By Disabling Guns, But Because The Enemy Doesn't Want To Waste Ammo On An Impossible Target. 15 minutes into battle, enemy has only fired ~30 shells. The reason for this is because they're trying to take out Lebe, but she's too small a target, moving too quickly, and at too long a range. This last part here is really critical, especially since the enemy is trying to open the range. If you can't hit your target, the oldest trick in the book is to get closer, not run the other way. I'd assume they're doing this to get out of range of the 530mm guns on my BB, but that's much easier said then done, with those guns having a maximum range of over 55km. If this is the case, then by using super-heavy guns and very fast light forces, you can essentially neuter the AI's offensive capabilities. If they target your light forces while trying to run away, all while waiting for a better firing solution on your light forces, despite the fact that they're only going to get harder to hit as the range opens, then you can basically trick the AI into not firing at all, making them a literal free kill. Update with the result: 30 minutes and hundreds of dead later, still not a single shot has been fired in return.

Look, I know this is kinda an extreme option, but at this point it might be worth considering. Can we just revert back to when the citadel didn't have such a massive impact on stability? Or remove the citadel's influence on stability entirely? I know it's not realistic, but holy f*** the realism isn't worth it at this point

Well, it ain't the best build I've seen, but at least it can be done. Just wish I didn't need to use a bloody distributed armor scheme to pull it off. Could you post the full components list? It looks like you made some sacrifices in certain departments, and I'd like to know what they are.

Alright, general challenge to everyone who sees this post. Design a BB with the Dreadnought 3 hull that has Less Than 25% Pitch, Roll, and Longitudinal Weight Offset. I'd like to see if it's even possible with the meta-centric gravity changes.

I'm very glad that this issue is being addressed, but there's still the issue with the Modern BC hull for Germany. The largest towers on that hull, Main Tower 3 and Rear Tower 4, can only fit guns up to 14" in caliber on its attached barbette, despite the hull itself being able to support guns up to 18" in caliber. I think there's a few other German hulls with this kind of issue, like Super Battleship 1, where the hull can support much larger guns than the barbettes attached to the towers, and if you want to use larger guns, you'll have to provide separate barbettes for them, unless you're planning to go with an A-X turret layout, and make what is essentially a gigantic Deutschland.

Alright, I've got some ship design feedback here, it's going to be a long one, so go you might wanna get something to drink before taking on this text wall. While there have been recent improvements to player agency when it comes to over all ship design, in my opinion, Designing Ships In This Game Has Gotten Worse Over The Past Few Months. It's gotten to the point where I've Lost More Viable Designs With 1.05 and 1.06 Than I Gained. This isn't just down to the weight issue, but also baffling limitations for certain hulls. Some examples of previously viable designs that aren't viable any more due to "Improvements" are as follows: 1. Alaska Class CB. As of 1.05, this was the go to cruiser killer for the USN, and now in 1.06... No fun allowed. Mind you, that's the same main tower as before, and if I'm not mistaken, the largest main tower available for this hull, but for some reason it can no longer take the same 12" triple turrets. 2. Super Dreadnought SMS Bayern. Probably everyone's best friend for a 1920's Germany campaign, Bayern is a very well rounded option for the time. Decent armor, large guns, and good accuracy. I hope you weren't too keen on that last part, because with 1.06... Even if your crew wasn't constantly seasick, they'd still struggle to hit the broad side of a barn from the inside with the way Bayern bounces around the waves now. Good luck finding another Super Dreadnought to take her place, there's preciously few good hulls available for Germany these days. 3. "Scharnhorst" class BC. I've always found it rather humorous that my 1940's German BC's come out looking like Bismarck while the corresponding CA's come out looking like Scharnhorst. When I heard that I'd be able to mount 200mm guns on CL's and 150's on DD's, I was looking forward to continuing the trend in 1.06, with CL's that look like Hippers, and DD's that look like M Class CL's. Had I known that in order to make Hipper a CL I'd have to give up making Bismarck a BC, I probably wouldn't have been as exited. It's the same story as Alaska's above. Worked just fine before, but now it doesn't because???? 4. One of, if not the most iconic BB's in history, IJN Yamato. Well balanced, tough as nails, and hits like a freight train. A truly legendary ship, and with damn good reason. It's a shame she went down on a pointless suicide mission, but what's even worse is what happened with 1.06. From a marvel of modern engineering to an unmitigated disaster. Hey, at least I got a uniform secondary battery out of it. Still don't know why she can only have 1 row of 127's, given that the mounting points are exactly the same size for all the side mounts. And finally, an honorable mention that didn't make it to 1.05 live for some reason. USN Fast Battleship, USS Iowa in the BC slot. This option is no longer possible because the largest guns you can mount on this hull in 1.05's live version and 1.06 is the 15" gun. Really doesn't make much sense when the CB's from the other side of the Pacific can mount up to 18" guns. If you really wanted to, you can get 9 460mm guns on a 35,000 ton hull and call it a BC. If the IJN can do that, why can't the USN get 9 406mm guns on 50,000 ton hull and call it a BC? Last I Checked This Game Was About Being Able To Design Your Own Ships. The Last Thing It Should Be Doing Is Limiting How Players Can Do Just That. I understand that some designs players want to make aren't going to be viable, but that doesn't mean that they should be prevented form making those designs. If you're going to have realism play a part in the design process, then it should at least be, you know, realistic. Last I checked Yamato didn't have the hilarious stability issues that were present on Fusou and Yamashiro, nor did Bayern's crew leave the ship puking their guts out from how bumpy the ride was.

Diplomacy could use a lot more work IMO. Every campaign as Germany thus far, I try to do the opposite of her historical alignment, swapping out Austria and Italy for Britain and France, as they're much MUCH better allies than my neighbors to the south. I'll try my a** of to improve relations with the two, avoid every possible conflict with them, increase relations when ever I get the chance, all while telling the Italians to piss off and the Austrians where they can shove it. The end result should be at least some sort of mutual understanding between Germany and the Franco-British alliance, and icy, if not outright hostile relations with Austria and Italy. Instead, what I get is France and Britain constantly harassing my country's fishers for 50 years straight, Italy just neutral, and Austria refusing to let go like an obsessive ex-girlfriend, constantly asking for an alliance As If I Haven't Spent The Last 5 Decades Trying To Avoid Just That.

Quick feedback here, but I've just about had it with the way missions are generated in campaign. Please, for the love of God, allow us to give more specific assignments to units, and ACTUALLY MAKE FORMATIONS OF SHIPS. It's well and good and all to put a squadron of BB's in a port, and give them an assignment, but this might as well not even be in the game if the ships don't actually follow instructions. E.G; I had 16 dreadnoughts for a 1920's campaign, and no light forces as pre-1930's cruisers and DD's are kinda crap. Fleet was broken up into 4 squadrons, 4 ships each, over 4 different ports. The idea was that these units would be able to sortie and attack enemy task forces as they sailed into range, but instead, they elected to Sail Out Alone Into Hostile Waters. Not all 4 ships sailing out together as intended, but a single ship sailing out without any support for no f***ing reason. The result was entirely predictable, single BB's getting ambushed by upwards of a dozen enemy light ships, Even Though I Explicitly Designed Formations So This Wouldn't Happen. I know that an enemy cruiser group stands no chance against a squadron of battleships, and that it'd be a one sided slaughter if they engaged. That's The F***ing Point. I'm not sure how the campaign match maker works, I know that it loosely tries to arranged fair fights, but making fair fights shouldn't come at the cost of breaking up player-made formations. If the AI can't put together a taskforce capable of taking on a player's taskforce, that's tough shit for the AI, and it should pay the consequences. I set my fleet up to have a strong, yet flexible response to hostile incursions, but instead I have BB captains sneaking out alone to commit mass-suicide-by-enemy-fire and endanger the war effort. I believe my strategy to be sound, but if my captains are just going to wipe their asses with my orders, then I'm really not sure why I'm bothering.

Well, this is one bug I had hoped would never come back. This seems to be caused by the guns "waiting for all guns of the same caliber to be able to fire on target." It's pretty annoying, and I'm not sure how to fix it other than wiggling the ship left to right in hopes of tricking the guns into firing.

I've got some quick Battle AI/Targeting feedback here. While there have been improvements, the AI still has issues with target selection with regards to battlefield realities. Our friend here has been *trying* to shoot at one of my light ships with no avail, not because the shots it fired missed, but because it' hasn't fired at all. The target is too fast, too far away, and the base accuracy of the guns is less that 100% at 1km, the bare minimum I'd shoot for on any weapon of any caliber. This inaction against hostile ships has cost this BB quite badly, as an unending torrent of fire has poured into the ship, with the crew refusing to reply, as the accuracy isn't good enough to waste shells, and they need to wait until the target gets into range in order to fire at it with some hope of actually doing any damage. However, there's one massive problem with this course of action. The target is player controlled, and even if this wasn't the case, the ship has no incentive to move any closer, as her own gun's accuracy is more than sufficient at this range. The result of the predicament is entirely predictable. The enemy BB has been Hit Over 500 Times Without Reply. With just over 2,000 hits scored on the ship, the fact that she has only sent 157 shots back at the enemy is simply unacceptable. Whilst the main guns have taken substantial damage, with one turret knocked out of action completely, the BB's secondary battery is mostly intact, with plenty of ammo left, and several targets in range, including... An 82,500t BB steaming along at 30 knots. A much easier target than a 2,500t DD at almost 40knts, and significantly more deadly, as said DD has already fired her torpedos, all of which motored on harmlessly past the the AI's ships. The course of action for the AI BB should be fairly obvious at this point. With her powerplant entirely knocked out, a dead rudder, and fires and flooding weakening the ship further, it's pretty clear that this ship won't be making it back to port, and should attempt to do as much damage as humanly possible on her way to the bottom. Instead, she's going to continue using the foolhardy tactics that got her into this scenario in the first place, waiting to line up the perfect shot on a less than ideal target, a shot that will never come. Edit: Attached is the scoreboard from the battle. As you can see, the only ship that was actually hit on my side was my BB, all the others emerged without so much as a scratch in the paint. Focusing fire on Leberecht Maass was completely unjustified in the end, with this unit having come in 4th place on damage on my team, with only the M class CL doing worse, probably on account of the comparatively poor accuracy of the 200mm guns she uses. Whilst the BC did the best of all units on my side, it's got a max speed equivalent to that of Maass at 39.6 knots, so hitting it would still be something of a challenge at longer ranges. Again, the most viable target in both hit probability and threat level was the BB, as it carried 8 16.5" guns, and could be reliably hit from ~18km due to her large profile.

Quick feedback here with regards to the whole French weight issue. I've got an incomplete super dreadnought here with quite the forward weight offset. Now you would think that the way to fix this issue would be to remove some of the truly hilarious amount of guns located on the front end of the ship. And you'd be wrong. This is how you fix the forward weight offset: By adding an additional 2,000 tons of weight right on the front of the ship. I'm not an engineer, so I don't know if this is actually how these things work, but it's starting to look a whole lot like Baguette Space Magic from where I'm sitting.

I've got some more ship design/gun feedback here It would seem that things are shifting in favor of smaller guns, in addition to the previous comments made by others on the effectiveness of the 8" gun, there are some other calibers with truly exceptional characteristics on the lower side of 16". First up, the Mk.5 305mm guns. These are really something to behold. While the penetration isn't as good as larger guns, it's still quite capable of taking out any cruiser it comes across. I'm not entirely against the 12" being effective, as it provides a reason to actually make Large Cruisers in the first place, but we can have effective CB's without adding Alaska's Point and Click Adventure in as a minigame. There's also the topic of secondaries that might need to be discussed again. All of these ships have been eliminated by secondaires. By using capped HE rounds, you can almost guarantee 1-2 crew killed per hit. It might not sound like much, but when you have a dozen or so guns per ship firing every 3 to 6 seconds, those hits are going to add up very, VERY fast. You combine that with the fires that secondary hits might set, and a few salvos from a cruiser's main guns, and light forces tend to fall apart fairly quickly if they aren't maxing out the amount of crew they have aboard. This tactic can also work on larger ships, but you'll need more time to pull it off, and it might not be high crew casualties that seals that ship's fate. While not killed entirely by small caliber guns, the hundreds of hits from those weapons sure didn't help matters. By setting so many fires, secondary hits greatly increase a ships' vulnerability to large caliber hits. A nasty main gun hit from a BB or BC might set a few fires and do a fair bit of structural damage, but so long as the rest of the ship isn't alight, the crew would be able to douse the fires and continue the fight in due time. If the ship is almost constantly ablaze with 3, or sometimes 4 fires, that same hit might push it over the edge, and "sink" the ship due to extensive fire. This makes secondaries and spacious crew quarters an absolute must have for any ship that's going to be in a large fleet engagement.

Some very quick campaign feedback here I know I've already talk a fair bit about this, but the overbuilding problem seems to be worse than I originally thought. I've got Liverpool blockaded by a gaggle of DD's, all well and dandy seeing as the Royal Navy doesn't exist any more... Except there's one problem. The Royal Navy does still exist, and the contingent based in Liverpool is more than capable of breaking the blockade in a matter of minutes. Unfortunately, these ships are all for show, there's nobody aboard to actually crew them, and the Royal Navy is allocating enough resources to keep hull watertight, and nothing else. HM's government has spend millions of pounds in tax payer money to build the largest fleet in human history, only for it to sit around gathering barnacles when the British people need it the most. That's got to be the most British thing I've heard all week.

A bit of gun/design feedback here. I've started making what the Germans would call "Scout Cruisers," DD's armed with 150mm guns, and in my opinion, they're way too effective. July, 1944, 2 such units were assigned to protect a convoy, along with one of the fleet's oldest units, a BB from 1910. Whilst the fire control systems might not be the best on a pre-war superdreadnought, that doesn't really justify the two "DD's" managing to tear apart 2 CAs, a CL, and a DD, pretty much on their own, without taking a single hit in return. The 6 150/50 guns equipped on these DD's, despite only weighing just over 2,500t total, with about ~%30 pitch and ~%15 roll, had no accuracy issues whatsoever. In fact, the opposite was often the case, with truly remarkable accuracy being achieved as the range closed, the combination of a 6 second reload, and over %50 accuracy resulting in the enemy rapidly being overwhelmed by dozens of fires. In contrast, these units took no damage in return, the small target profile and high speed confounding even the more experienced crews on the enemy's side, with no gun on any British ship achieving over %1 accuracy during the battle. While this battle did take place during 1944, I'm not sure the success of these units can be chalked up to technological superiority. Even if this is realistic, the damage ratio of every enemy ship destroyed without a single hit being taken in return is not going to fly from a game balance perspective.

Some very quick campaign feedback here. The economy of the continuous campaign seems a bit off. I've played a few 1890's campaigns at this point, and the highest I've seen GDP's go is about $12B, even as late as 1930, the highest remains $12B. This is a bit weird considering that for the 1910's start the nation with the lowest GDP is Italy, at $15B. Economies don't seem to be growing properly, with the GDP modifiers from most event not actually increasing or decreasing it. This might explain how some nations are defeated in times of peace by cannibalizing their own economies, as their economies haven't grown at all since the start of the campaign, which makes them incredibly susceptible to the negative aspects of the over-building bug. 1940's France might actually be able to support a navy of over 250 units, and will build up its forces accordingly, regardless of the fact that it will have to do so with the economy of 1890's France, which probably can't support such a fleet.

I've got some campaign feedback here, and I'm really not sure what to make of it. I was doing a tech-rush run to see how early I can get things like RADAR 3, Oil 3, etc, etc. War broke out on the continent, managed to stay out of it myself, and I've been watching the other powers fight each other with these very modest fleets, even by 1920's standards. So, I decided to check in and see just how many ships the AI actually had in their ports and.... dear f***ing lord I wasn't ready for this. Austria here is by far the worst offender, they're down to only using CL's and smaller in the war, while this is just one of their anchorages. I say worse offender because the British and Italians are doing the same sort of thing. The rollcall for each active port on the continent as of October 1920 is as follows: Danzig - 6 BB, 1 CA, 1 CL Scapa Flow - 13 BB, 25 CA, 29 CL, 36 TB Rosyth - 16 BB, 14 CA, 41 CL, 30 TB Sunderland - 14 BB, 13 CA, 41 CL, 27 TB Hull - 20 BB, 11 CA, 44 CL, 35 TB Yarmouth - 34 BB, 25 CA, 90 CL, 68 TB Dover - 5 BB, 12 CA, 27 CL, 18 TB Newhaven - 10 BB, 6 CA, 20 CL, 27 TB Portsmouth - 10 BB, 18 CA, 47 CL, 24 TB Plymouth - 15 BB, 18 CA, 41 CL, 26 TB Barry - 30 BB, 30 CA, 100 CL, 86 TB Liverpool - 25 BB, 38 CA, 82 CL, 54 TB Limassol - 1 TB Olbia - 17 BB, 20 CA, 33 CL, 22 TB Cagliari - 11 BB, 18 CA, 25 CL, 22 TB La Spezia - 13 BB, 25 CA, 41 CL, 14 TB Livorno - 9 BB, 16 CA, 29 CL, 23 TB Gaeta - 15 BB, 10 CA, 35 CL, 26 TB Naples - 11 BB, 21 CA, 36 CL, 22 TB Messina - 11 BB, 18 CA, 35 CL, 29 TB Palermo - 27 BB, 36 CA, 67 CL, 46 TB Catania - 18 BB, 20 CA, 37 CL, 27 TB Taranto - 17 BB, 22 CA, 26 CL, 37 TB Bari - 16 BB, 25 CA, 28 CL, 16 TB Ancona - 26 BB, 49 CA, 56 CL, 47 TB Pula - 45 BB, 27 CA, 14 CL, 7 DD, 11 TB Spalato - 49 BB, 25 CA, 19 CL, 19 DD, 25 TB Cattaro - 43 BB, 21 CA, 19 CL, 25 DD, 15 TB As you might have noticed, there are no French ports on that list. The French Empire collapsed a few years back, with the reason given as "Economic Collapse." I didn't check what the size of their mothball fleet was, but given the state of her rival powers, I'd assume trying to build a fleet of truly hilarious size might have contributed to the end of the empire as much as the war which said fleet was being built to fight. While I'd like to move in and occupy Paris and the rest of Northern France, that can wait, as there are much MUCH bigger issues to attend to. The AI is literally building itself to death, not even at the height of its power did the Royal Navy posses as many dreadnoughts as the Austrians have mothballed in a single port. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if those last warfighting units were de-activated in favor of building ever more paperweights. Edit, with the fate of the British Empire: Death by paperweight. And then there were 3.

Update 7 doubled the speed you can increase the size of your shipyards at. I'll admit I was a bit surprised that I managed that before I got the tech for super BB's. I also started in 1920, so that's enough time for 5 whole upgrade cycles.

Some quick campaign feedback here. Franco-Italian war's not going well for the French. It's so bad that they've elected to scrap their entire navy. They didn't do it all at once, but the fact they managed it at all is not a good sign. It's not all doom and gloom though, the Austrians have followed suit.

I've got some custom battle feedback here. Overall, update 6's balance changes feel pretty good. Heavy guns (17" and up) feel much more balanced than they were in update 5, with these weapons being better suited for taking on other capital ships, while mid caliber guns (14-16") are more flexible than their larger counterparts, making both sets of guns valuable on their own, without one set being outright better. The AI has also seen a decent improvement with regards to tactics, with light forces actually taking independent actions rather than loitering around embattled capital ships. This is a change I've wanted to see for a very long time, and I'm glad it's finally been implemented. There's still some issues with the AI's division of labor, namely some units seemingly having no orders and sitting around waiting to get shot. Wuhu here has been on lunch break since the battle started. Pretty decent CL, but it literally hasn't moved this entire time. I still prefer this over previous versions, I'd rather it be blatantly obvious when a unit isn't going to contribute to a battle rather than having to guess if the units assigned to useless tasks are a threat or not. As for this battle, both enemy CA and DD charged my BB and BC as soon as they realized I had no fleet screen, and I'm guessing this CL was supposed to be assigned to screen the enemy capital units? Wuhu should have been deployed with the rest of the light forces in their attack on my battle line, but fact that said attack happened at all is a massive improvement. I'm still waiting for the victory points bug to be fixed before I get into campaign, so I'll probably only provide custom battles feedback for the time being.

Got some gun accuracy feedback here, pic kinda speaks for itself. I don't even know how this happened. Standard Yamato build, 460/65's 155/60's 120/60's, super-heavy, modern triple base, TNT 4, coincidence rangefinders 5, radar 3 Update w/ results of that battle. After 540 hours in this game, having tested hundreds of ship designs, I have never scored that many secondary hits. Even excluding the 40mm mounts, this is the highest number of hits I've scored with a single ship, mainly due to the fact that I've never needed to do so. I'm not sure what happened to BB caliber accuracy, but I'm not sure its something that should stay as it is right now.