neph

Delaying "Meeting" engagements seems to spawn a second duplicate engagement.

"Move" button seems to be bugged--frequently you can't move ships--seems like if they've moved before/recently it's disabled? Is this a feature? Seems like it's got to do with range of the lowest-range ship? Very unintuitive--still not really sure what's going on here.

A lot of superstructures can't quite fit on resized beams. Any chance we could get a workaround? Some ability to resize them, or just less-stringent placement/border restrictions?

Don't forget the classic: County-class cruisers just perfectly happened to have the displacement for a bunch more amour to be slotted in once the treaty system failed.

Please check the original post again. I've updated it with hard numbers.

God bless you devs. Stay safe & hello kitty the fascist invaders

That was my interpretation as well--although it seems like something that ought to be handled by the gun quality/mark system?

send your prayers out folks, kyiv is under attack

Hmm I have literally 16 times as many ships as the foe surely I shall win this battle and sink their vessel, which is notably slower than my CLs and substantially slower than my TBs and doubtless I will be able to kill their transport, certainly nothing absurd could occur like their lone cruiser fighting off my entire force, surviving the encounter, and preventing my bombardment sike, bitch

Seriously, just compare the stats. Regardless of mark, year, or # of barrels, the 12" is insanely accurate comparatively. Comparison: penetration: vs accuracy: The coloring's slightly off; 13" are mark Vs. You'll note that 9", 12", and 15" are all quite exceptional. 12" in particular is more accurate than any other weapon out to 10,000 m. After that, the 15" is better. You'll also note that it's a relatively continuous increase in mass with caliber, but there's a serious leap at 18" and a huge one at 20". There's pretty much no reason to ever use 18", however--19" is almost the same mass, cost (not shown), accuracy, but much better punching power. Never noticed that before. This is for a plausible 1940s build: TNT IV, Triple Base, Stereoscopic V+Gen II radar (so you'll note that this is with a buff to very long range), semi-auto, standard loading. All guns compared are twin turrets. Thanks for taking a look.

It makes it very difficult to make historical builds when a manually-loaded single 6" turret is the same as an auto-loading triple 6". Would be very nice if turrets got larger with more complex loading mechanism and smaller (both narrower & somewhat shorter in length) with fewer guns. Just look at the 14" quad/duals of the KGVs: Or the QF 6-inch Mark N5 gun, an autofiring 6" dual turret which was larger than older 8" turrets. This problem is particularly obvious when trying to recreate Scharnhorst, whose secondary battery was split between two very differently-sized 5.9" turrets: In-game right now, it's impossible to place most of those guns, especially the singles, due to their abnormally large size (the singles are the size of triples).

(my next rant would be about the continuous late-time continuum from fast battleships to battlecruiser to heavy cruiser)

This is a good point--you're right that auto-resolve seems to be strongly biased towards torps. I'll see if I can use it in my favor in those situations.

this forum consistently seems to breed the most entitled and pretentious sort of member, one who somehow assumes that this in-development indie game ought to be held to the professional standards of a triple AAA dev house. touch grass

Yeah, this gets old No warning either! You have to watch your destroyers like a hawk...

I lose more ships to my own torps than hostile ones! Thank you devs, goes to show how effective this new system is at avoiding enemy torpedoes. Just needs this one last tweak. Also, any chance we could get "avoid torpedoes" to not always turn away from torpedoes, if turning towards them is possible? With very fast ships (near the speed of incoming torpedoes), they end up running away from the fleet for a very long time trying to "avoid" torps, but actually just steaming parallel away with them. By the time the torpedoes finally pass them or run dead, the ships in my battle line are 20 km away from their leader.

I hate the "auto-resolve" button. Should be called the "kill my ships" button. Seriously, every time I push that thing I think "this is going to kill my ships, isn't it", and then I think "no, surely the odds are too overwhelming in my favor" and then it goes and kills my ships. I think there's only been once that I can remember where I won a fair fight (CA duel). Every single other time, I come out the loser. Just as an example (not even the greatest one, I've seen far worse): I haven't lost a battleship yet. This design has 3 hulls & anti-torp V. I've seen it eat 8 torps at once & still kills everything. It runs 12x15" guns at 32 knots and eats cruisers for breakfast. So what the hell happened here??? Anyways, misery loves company. Feel free to post your outrageous defeats.

Modernized Dreadnought II Japan. This one's really annoying https://imgur.com/ZmDouY8

Excellent summary!

protip: build two tiny and cheap ships & just ram the enemy

This is the reason I've found. This is compounded by the fact that disabling torpedoes locks their mounts in position until they are reactivated, so there's always (occasionally substantial) rotation time before they have a launching solution.

The distinction between hulls is arbitrary & prevents design creativity, particularly with the constraints of armor & armament on "light cruisers". The two classes ought to be merged. Now, you might say, this is madness. What blasphemy! Cruisers have always come in "heavy" & "light"--surely you don't want to throw history out the window?? Ah, but there you are, my thoughtful reader. There existed absolutely no distinction between cruiser types until as late as 1930. To distinguish the classes before this is pure fiction. But what happened in the year 1930? Why, the London Naval Treaty happened! Let me back up a bit: back in the 1920s, the Washington Naval Treaty said that all warships which weren't a battleship or carrier may have no more than 8" guns & 10,000 tons of standard displacement. Also, the Washington Naval Treaty said you couldn't build any battleships for 15ish years. Of course, everybody immediately began building 8", 10,000 ton cruisers to effect foreign policy & protect trade routes. However... it's worth noting that a 10,000 ton cruiser can really only have either 8" guns OR substantial armor, and everybody picked the former. Keep that in mind. Okay, so what about the London Naval Treaty? At the London Naval Treaty, cruisers were arbitrarily divided into "heavy" and "light" cruisers--with no prior basis for this division! "Heavy" cruisers were newly defined to be those with 8" guns, and "light" cruisers were defined to be those with 6.1" guns or smaller! Why the distinction? Because the treaty placed limits on how many heavy cruisers signatories could build, but no restriction whatsoever on the number of light cruisers. (Both had total displacement limits.) Side note: at this point, "destroyers" were also official defined as those ships with smaller than 5.1" guns and less than ~2,000 tons standard displacement. Anyways, everybody started building light cruisers because although undergunned, 6.1" light cruisers were more than capable of crippling the lightly armored "heavy" 10,000 ton cruisers, and they could build as many as they wanted. So what's the point? The point is that all the wargames that you know and love use this arbitrary historical terminology which barely existed before the treaties were signed. That's great for WoWS or whatever, but the UAD universe is one which very explicitly does not have naval arms reduction treaties. Why do you think you're building 80,000 ton behemoths in 1932 & 120,000 ton leviathans in 1940? Why do you think everything has 18" or 20" guns? Because the joy of UAD is a world without the arbitrary restrictions of history. Then why are we restricted by naval treaty nonsense with the small ships? Why do light cruisers exist? Their role: of being heavy cruiser killers & large torpedo sleds without the numerical limits of heavy cruisers or the displacement limits of destroyers, does not exist in the UAD world! Before the treaty limits, "heavy" cruisers and "light" cruisers all existed along an uninhibited spectrum, allowed to exist as the designer desired. The limitations: that I can't put 12" guns on a "heavy cruiser, or that I can't put 9" guns or more than 6" of armor on a "light cruiser", is all silly. Get rid of the restrictions and let us design freely!

Japanese Modern Battlecruiser

Similarly for japanese Modern Sec Towers I & II.

The Modern Tower I model is bigger, the bridge is higher, etc. Seems backwards?