The PC Collector
-
Posts
422 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
17
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by The PC Collector
-
-
12 minutes ago, Alnitak said:
'range found' and 'target acquire' are buffs that will Impact gun accuracy.It's disgusting to set off fireworks at each other.
They should have a significant impact, but not to the point of negating every single other buff/debuff once your crew is good enough. Balance was needed there, which doesn't mean that further balancing might not be needed.
-
Okay. Important things which remain to be tackled:
- Not getting anything when a country collapses while at war. We should still get reparations. Right now this makes extremely frustrating to play.
- Not being able to launch offensives over ungoverned territory nor minors. At least being able to influence the government would be a huge step ahead on playability.
Update won't be ready for launch gameplay wise until at least the first part is adressed.-
1
-
-
Wow, I'm legit impressed. For the first time I have the feeling you're taking your time into actually making the update functional before release, instead of rushing it to live the second it is stable enough to make the game not CTD upon load like some of the previous ones. This is definitely the way of making this game achieve the potential it could get.
Keep this good work!-
7
-
-
4 hours ago, Norbert Sattler said:
Any chance the coastal defense ships could get a different two-letter abreviation so it's easier to avoid accidentally sticking a 16 knot ship into a formation of other ships?
I totally agree. We need more classes. Coastal defence ships should be a different class. Armoured cruisers should be a differenc class from CA. Protected cruisers should be a thing. Large cruisers should be separated from battlecruisers. And we should be able to manually classify our ships for deployment purposes. Shouldn't be too difficult to code.
-
2
-
-
Also: The AI still don't know how to properly refit. I'm still seeing refitted BBs with their speeds lowered to 14 kn and things like that.
-
Okay, bug report: Santiago de Cuba and Davao don't let me move ships to them, no matter what I do. Reported it several times in game.
-
14 minutes ago, anonusername said:
The ship and battle mechanics have improved a lot during the beta, but the politics and diplomacy are still questionable. I see three big issues.
1. Nations getting stuck as Nationalist or Communist.
2. Nations ending up at war with too many countries.
2a. Nations will happily start a new war while already occupied with 1, 2, or even 3+.
2b. Nations get a massive tension penalty with neutral nations who share a sea region with blockaded enemies.
3. No way to deliberately trigger a naval invasion of a minor. This is a particular problem for nations like the US or Japan who may want to acquire foreign ports for supply lines before fighting another major. It should also be possible to "peacefully" annex a minor partner with high enough relations. e.g. Hawaii
I think that the nation dissolving mechanic should be replaced with a "collapse of government" mechanic. When a country is losing a war or has extreme unrest and their GDP is in shambles, they should give an "unconditional surrender" and switch government types. i.e.
1. All ships and non-core territories are distributed to their enemies based on how much VP each has. i.e. Each enemy gets to "peace out" in order of their amount of VP. Any remaining ships are scuttled, and any remaining non-core territory is given independence.
2. Government switches to a different alignment, with a high chance for either communist or nationalist. Communist and Nationalist become very rare outside of this event.
This would also solve the issue where dissolving a major power prevents the player from taking any of their territories. In my current game, much of the world is not controlled by anyone because first Spain dissolved, then Germany conquered most of British Africa prior to dissolving.I couldn't agree more with all of this. If we can't control the land army, we should already be allowed to suggest land operations. And the ungoverned land is really a problem.
-
13 minutes ago, Zuikaku said:
Mission: convoy defense
Convoy defended by 2CLs. Attackers 2 CLs (AI).
AI runs away before making contact.
This is becoming annoying !!!
While I agree this shouldn't happen, how big are your cruisers compared to theirs? Because I'm not having this trouble.
-
12 minutes ago, Zuikaku said:
Also when you have 5 battles, some of them quite big ones and you can not save turn or play them all becsuse you don't have 2-3 hours of time at the moment. Why can't you save the turn before doing battles or after finishing some of them?
You can, you only have to return to main menu, game gets autosaved.
-
Okay, the shypyard upgrade size is now augmenting as campaign progresses. As of 1895, I can increase 6800 T instead of 4000.
However, Those battles which locks your turn until you're done with them are annoying as hell. They can easily take an hour and by then you have forgotten what you had planned to do.
I understand the need to make certain battles unavoidable so we can't just ignore and skip the ones which aren't favourable, but... Wouldn't be much better to, instead, make it so you can't hit next turn, like "graying out" the next turn button, until all mandatory battles are adressed?-
9
-
-
20 minutes ago, AdmiralBert said:
The issue comes when the game generates a mandatory battle (one which you must either fight or attempt to withdraw from), withdrawing fails, and when you choose to fight the action manually (because I'm not going to risk an auto-resolve result seeing several BBs take heavy damage from a single torpedo boat) the enemy fleet immediately turns and leaves, giving me five/ten/fifteen minutes of uselessly trying to chase them down.
Yeah. I agree on that. I've been claiming since 1.02 that if the AI is going to run away, the battle should not even be generated. Pretty much the reason why I always rush RDF. Because with RDF, they can run, but they can't hide. xD
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Zuikaku said:
Battle AI is just horrible. It runs away in every mission. Really, why even generating missions if AI runs away instantly? You are forced to have at least 1 30kt TB in order to catch the fleeing AI ships, force them to divert until your fleet manages to get in range.
Solution: Force AI to sail toward your fleet. When the contact/indentification is done then it can choose either to fight or run away. That gives player chance to fight, makes battles more interesting and realistic. Current system is just ridiculous!!
Dunno, so far I've only had one instance of the AI running away in a situation in which I think they shouldn't. The rest of the times they have, it was in situations in which it would have made sense for them to run away.
-
22 minutes ago, Lima said:
Waiting for her
Me too, but I don't have too many hopes. For now I would be happy to have a hull with a minimum tonnage low enough so it can be built in the 1890 start
-
Edit: Nevermind, the blockade just took a few turns to be lifted for some reasons. All is good now.
By the way, I feel really accomplished right now
By the way, Spain had a BB as early as 1888, what about giving them a BB hull they can build from the start?
Also, captured ship refit when? -
Bug feedback: Panama channel disappears if you take Panama from the US
-
1
-
-
I'm starting to be a bit tired of this nonsense of AI giving what they want instead of what you asked for. We should get and option to restart the war if such thing happens.
-
4 minutes ago, Gsam said:
3) Trying to invade minors. Mexico is an ally of Germany who I was at war with. I blockaded both ports in Mexico and had my fleets set to invade, nothing happens for turns and turns.
That's because that's not what "invade" is for. Invade is meant to set the fleets on actively chase transport and attack ports. Currently there is no way to actively target minors for invasions. Which in my opinion is a huge flaw, but that's another topic.
6 minutes ago, Gsam said:Why do I have to research a bunch of crap I don't want to get to what I do. For example. Why do I need to research light cruisers and heavy cruisers in the same "cruiser" line. Why can't we break these down. If I want to rush battle cruisers at the expense of my DD's or light cruisers, let me.
I fully agree on this. BCs should be either moved to the BB tech line, or to their own line, and the cruiser line should be splitted between light and heavy. Currently that tech fall behind time the second you're not prioritising it because there is simply too much clutter on it.
7 minutes ago, Gsam said:6) There is no national flavor at all. The only thing that feels different is the flag and what ports you have. Really need to differentiate the countries to add replay ability.
Yeah, things feel too genertic at the moment. That's because the game is missing like 90% of hulls that aren't german or brit, and even a lot of those. It will eventually fixed, but for now I personally see reasonable that they focus on make the game work before adding fluff.
10 minutes ago, Gsam said:10) Ship Flaws. I made 16 ships. 6 of them were flawed. That is insane. I am talking so flawed that they had to be scrapped. More than 10% defect. I understand trying for ship variety, but damn thats brutal. You almost have to build an extra 40% of what you need for your fleet so you can delete the ships that come out hot garbage. If that is something you want to have in game, can we develop a ironworkers slider where we can spend extra money to have better workers and reduce flaws? Or Incorporate that into dockyards as we increase the size? Make it a research thing? How about letting us have positive outcomes too? Ship X was made exceptionally well. +5% speed or something.
There is already one tech which reduces flaws. But yeah, early ship are going to almost always be garbage due to flaws. Which, if you read a bit about ships on the 1890s, is actually pretty accurate. Ships on that era very rarely were actually adjusted to their original design or specs, and some of them were so flawed that had indeed to be scrapped. Case of, for example, the Reina Regente class, which had so poor ocenagoing capabilities that the lead ship sank on a storm, and the other two were scrapped after a service life of only 5 years and countless refits and modifications trying to solve it, because their bouyancy was so poor that even using them as training ships was deemed too dangerous.
-
3
-
-
7 hours ago, Lima said:
The biggest problem for AI is the crew. Even a fairly bad ship with a good crew will be a threat. Even a Shared designs ship will be weak with a bad crew.
I've been saying since 1.03 that crew bonuses/penalties are way too big. If the difference in experience is too big, how good each side's ships are becomes nearly irrelevant. I've had state of the art ships trashed by AI clown cars just because I had the bad luck of facing the extremely rare veteran crewed AI ship, and I have trashed fairly good ships with 25 YO pre dreds just because my crew was way better.
In my opinion, crew bonuses/penalties should be halved at the very least. No sane navy would put in the sea a ship crewed by people which would give it so big penalties as we see in game.
Also, we should be able to somehow select with what do we want to crew our ships. Because in any sensible navy, the best crews would go the the best ships/fleets. Maybe with a check which was something like "prioritise experienced crew" in the fleet screen. But that's a different discussion. Maybe the crew button should have more options besides the number of crew, like specifying a minimum/maximum level of crew.-
3
-
-
6 hours ago, Lima said:
Shipyard total build amount.
According to original patch notes, max shipyard output depends on the total tonnage of your ports, and is in no way tied to the maximum size of ship you can build. That's indeed one of the reasons why A-H is no longer playable anymore.
-
3 minutes ago, Lima said:
Ground warfare requires proper prioritization
Germany is attacking
Meanwhile
I think the loss of the main territory of the country is a problem.
Also, we should be able to suggest land attacks, at least on coast provinces. For example, in my bricked Spain campaign, Gibraltar was independent for over a decade. And nobody thought of trying to take it, neither while at war with the UK or afterwards when it became independent. As an strategic naval point, we should be able to tell the government "Eh! We need that place!"
-
6
-
-
I started a new campaign with A-H, and man... They urgently need more pre dreanoidht hulls. The selection they get is so bad that I'm considering essentially giving up the 1890 start. My gameplay on the first years consist on rushing the dreadnought era hulls, and then is when the campaign actually start.
-
Okay... Found a curious bug: If you save your current campaign, and then load another campaign without restarting the game, the land offensives seem to get transferred to the new campaign.
-
1 minute ago, Nick Thomadis said:
There should be fixes, but we are not sure if they are definite. Tomorrow we will fix more.
Oh, I'm not blaming you. I'm just relieving some frustration as I'm reluctant to pour another three days into a campaign for it to explode like mine did.
-
5 minutes ago, MDHansen said:
hooray! for patches
update 11 was feeling really good. diving right back in there to check this one out
Until major nation dissolving/reforming gamebreaking bug breaks your campaign. I see no reference made to that being solved or even attempted to solve...
>>>Beta v1.1 Feedback<<< [RC 6]
in General Discussions
Posted · Edited by The PC Collector
On the topick of aiming, anyone else is getting trouble with main guns simply refusing to acquire target when manually targeting, no matter how long you keep shooting at the target?