Kraut

If you consider everyone swimming money after a few years into the campaign, but the computer still falling behind in tech, designing clowncars anyway, behaving suicidal in battle and as a result of those factors, getting stomped by the player wich doesnt get anything interesting/decisive in a peace conference after the war, despite the fact of totally or almost totally annihilating the enemies navy, then yeah, this version is as enjoyable as the previous ones. As enjoyable as beeing limited by arbitrary rules (buhu, you are not allowed to design BC with german / bb level of armour, cause poor computer cant compete with you) but facing ships so horrible in balancing that they should sink themselves just by shipping around or so ugly that they should scrap themselves. As enjoyable as the computer seems to be obsessed with South-East-Asia (Wich would be understandable, if there would be a ressource system in the game) und reliably low fueling its own fleets by sending them there and back, completly denying the protection of its Core Provinces As enjoyable as having not enough Funnel Locations for german SBB due to a lack of Secondary Tower selection. Or as enyoable as not beeing able to outfit german Cruisers with sufficient Torpedo-Armament thx to way to big Superstructures, that cant be altered in size. And all the other enjoyable thingz.

Since i accidentally uploaded the pics of my improvement of the Auto-Design, i have to upload the third pic now in a 2nd post cause somehow the total allowed Size for Uploading shrinks with every edit .... PS: i cant, even in the new post now my limit is down to 6.x kb although im not nearwhere close to the max of 2.15 MB. so deleted / changed pics are not substracted from the daily upload limit ...

I always struggle with myself if i should write something or not, cause the list of the Problems of the Game is even longer than these ugly dropdowns in the research tab ... 😕 (PS: reason is the amount of text following now, although i only wanted to complain about 3isch major points that make the game terrible) Apart from the terrible UI, not fitting world map, the absence of basic select & command features like "LMB Selects" "RMB moves",´and the abundance of Oil for everyone, the things wich annoy me the most and make this game terrible or even better, not to play, are the following: Ship-Designs by the Computer-Scripts: - i dont know, if i shall laugh or cry everytime i read something about "improved auto-design", when auto-design results look like this ( pls seethe attached pictures) - having a competition is a key element of Naval Designs and therefore a huge portion of the fun of that game mechanic. As long as the Computer-Designs are garbage, every campaign will be a stomp. I feel like a seal clubber. Not only cause the Computer will very soon fall behind in tech (except for the Brits), no ,even the game start designs, were player und computer are somewhat equal in tech, pose rarely, if ever, a real threat to an active player. And Seal-Clubbing has another Component; Tactical Battles: again, read it i dont know how many times; "battle script got improved, etc etc.". But the reality is still... total club fest. I keep my Taskforces small, cause handling 12 ships is already a great hassle to me (im usually on fast forward, since the battles are so boring). Another, but small Reason for that is, it let the Computer engage me. I rarely encoutered the runaway problem that plaqued so many others recently. But i know it from the past. Some small ships engage the enemy in a V-shaped Torpedo attack, resulting usually in a satisfying number of Torpedo hits, cause although Computer-Ships seem to have magical abilites when it comes to dodging torpedos as a lone wolf, the opposite is the case, when it comes to handling torpedo attacks against its large formations. The Result is Chaos, dmged und sinking ships. The Rest is handled by the Artillery of my superior ships. This clubbing becomes extreme with technological advancement usually resulting in battles where the opponent is barely able to even scratch my ships. The Campaign - Performance of Computer-Opponent: peformance is not the adequate word.I dont know what the priorities are, but everyone except for the Brits falls behind in tech quickly. every time. - not as often, but recently a prominent guest in the patch-notes. Economy. Still GDP grows over 10% thru the field... like... really, wtf? Why? I really dont get it. These extremly fast growing economies soon resuliting in my and the Computer not knowing the hello kitty to throw all the money at... And a distinct question in that regard: why the heck is not only the UK but also France outperforming Germany in Economy in the 1910 start ? - Random-Mission-Generator: i know u got this from the game u copied almost 1on1, but why not improving the things u copy? or do something different ... Why are there forced Missions that i cannot object to as the player like .... We caught the enemy bla bla bla... if WE caught the enemy, WHY cant WE object to commit to the battle? THe enemy is smaller, off guard or heavly dmg, so clearly not in the position to engage us, yet there is nothing in the World i could do to prevent to load into these battles... - why are still battles created between forces, that are thousands of kms apart ? not even in the same waters? It seems the if-question in the code asks bout the destination and not the actual position of the taskforces... - Attacks on Harbours are only created for a fraction of the sieged ports - Convoy losses are totally random and seem to have nothing to do with apparent or absent naval forces. WTF. - Invasion Requirements are a complete joke. Who the Frick evar cared bout how many Tons of Ships can dock in a Harbour when it comes to a military engagment? The only Deciding Factor is the guns ACTUALLY PRESENT, not potentially... I had to park almost the complete Might of the German Hochseeflotte to conquer the mighty canary islands .... for example. - Diplomacy is a joke. We cannot decide where to invade, what to invade when it comes to non Major-Countries. If we are fighting a War with Major countries, Land battles can not be interfered with. they take aaages (wich wouldnt be so bad if the Fight on the Sea would actualyl be interesting i guess). Everything that is conquered during the war gets immediatly annexed without a Peace Conference, but when it comes to the Joke of a Peace Conference, only 50% of the Players demands (or non at all) are fullfilled resulting in fighting ( seal clubbing) for month for .... nothing! or some minor territories somewhere... over the rainbow... So much fun! Ship-Designer for Player: - the major selling point of the game. Not the existince alone, the game UA is copied from also had a ship designer. But UA takes Battles und Designer into 3d. thats the difference. And it could be a good designer if it werent for... - Limits of what the player can do like ... armour limits, weapon size limits for classes/ hulls, Conditions of what towers / guns most be present on a ship, etc. - unrealistic costs in terms of money and weight ( radar and the like still weigh a proportional part of the Towers, wtf), Diesel Engines are insanly overpriced und dont even save weight / incrase the Range( for a much much lower price and lower or same weight u get the sameisch Range with Turbines) - non-adjustable Superstructures leading to huge problems when it comes to outfitting of the ships, especially Torpedo-Armament is a huge problem on German Cruisers. Later Torpedo-Launchers make things worse, where possible. Superbattleships lack a 2nd Funnel-Place in TowerStructure for no reason, cause modern BBs have two slots. Why do the smaller Hulls have more Options for Funnels? - Inconsistant stats among Towers, most often with secondary Towers. -Arbitrary and incosistence Hull Stats. My biggest complaint here is the Resistence Value. Resistance, as in how much dmg is taken from a Torpedo or Shall hit is determined by the Armour Material and the Armour Layout, hence torpedo protection und which citadel sheme is used. It makes no sense at all to assign a resistance Value to the Hull, espeically not ,if that value is not constantly rising due to technology improvement, it just varies seemingly random for "balance" reasons? Most Prominent example is, iirc, Germanys "Modern CA II", wich has a ridicously low resistance overall and much lower compared to its predecessor and successor. Makes no sense whatso evar. Escecially not, when there are Destroyer Hulls, that have the Resitance Value of a Battleship ... - Bigger Hulls add much more Money and Weight than Buyoancy, leading to inflated Ship Costs regarding the Perfomance per ton and Money ratio. Another thing about Hulls, wich are also often just copy cats of each other... When you introduced the "Scharnhorst" Hull to the game, why only 1935? Germany can build Modern and even Super BBs since the twenties already. You might want to answer no: It is not a BB Hull, it says BC. Yeah, Problem is, Scharnhorst und Gneisenau were designed and intended as BBs, not BCs. Nobody built BCs in the 30ties anymore... Doesnt matter what some Brits called these ships, important is what the designers and users classified them. The Reason for the 28cm guns was solely a political / diplomatical play, so pls spare me the armament arguement. The Refitting to 38cm guns was planned from the start and only the Course of the War prevented it beeing reality. Not even starting bout the armour-levels of the Class... Talking about German "BCs" und Ship designer: The real BCs from the 1910s had apperently Armour of 300mm, but the game says: no, you player can only have ... 27isch. Wich brings me to my last question, hopefully... What made you think, that a Player of a GAME needs limits in a Designer, wich sole purpose is to give the Player the Tool to use his creativity??? And why are you not instead limiting your Computer-Designer, wich clearly needs tide ropes if it shall evar produce useful results reliably ??? Just Look at the Armour Levels... wtf ?? I, as the Player of a GAME(not reality, not the Museum), am limited in how i am designing my ships but the Computer is allowed to create those abominations with ... 24cm Deckarmour ??? AFT ??? And Cruisers of the Computer have more often than not the maximum armour all around... From my Observations the Priorites of the Computer seem to be low cost, low tonnage, maxium deck penetration at or below sight range and ... lots of crew... , as many guns as possible. everything else seems to be secondary to that. Armour has no clear priorities, but it seems to me, that deck armour resides more often than not over Belt armour. Engine Effiency and Balancing of the Ship seems to be ignored completly. I suspect the Computer ship get help in battle, cause even with those extremly unbalanced ships, they get aroundthe sameisch accuraccy during battle as my ships. And on the Same Accuraccy Probability, score more hits than my ships do. oh, forgot: Pls remove that WoT-Spotting system... that is so stupid, that ships are not able to spot other ships beyond 10km (for example), thats just so obv. bullshit. What evar broken mechanic you try to cover with that... fix it und re-introduce realistic sight and spotting ranges... The End My Minor-Complaint: In your Info-Card of the Loading-Screen of the Week about the Lusitania you forgot to mention that it carried Ammunitions/War-Material throughouth the War. I am not saying, that no other complaints / reports should be mentioned, but imo its futile to fix minor stuff befor the core mechanics of the game are not working properly. The list is not complete, as always, but i am already annoyed that i wrote so much again cause with an increasing number of words the probability of all words beeing read decreases exponentially...

the game Rule the Waves? Part 3 game out May this year and beeing new to this subgenre and Admiral Dreadnoughts beeing my first i am bit stunned about the ...similarities.. these games share... i mean... down to text lines in the evens about Regattas, fishing boat incidents or ambassodors / chancellors saying stupid things or industry wants this and that. I mean, i want competition and i support copieing good game ideas / mechanics but i think in this case someone went a lot further than just taking some inspiration or taking over some core mechanics. The games are literally the same with the only major distinction beeing that one exucutes the tactical battles in 3D and the other in 2D. The Latter has some better / deeper Mechanics regarding Crew Training for example or even offers Doctrine settings. And it has planes. So not for wussies 😛 And a decent task force creation tool.... instead of building taskforces by moving ships via map at the same point... I suspect a lot of veterans of this genre to be around here so i wonder why i cant find any mentioning of said game via forum search. Maybe the search let me down. i didnt searched manually thru all the topics here.

That should be found out quiet easily in custom battles. Question then remains, even if they are better at focus fire, is that worth the extra weight they cost? Is the reduction in Aiming speed compared to C RFs acutally not that much of a difference? Scoring the First critical hit is a good advantage and should be priority over long term aim bonusses, id say. I try to have as few ships as possible in battle cause im to lazy to babysit many of them and i dont trust the computer enough to keep my precious crews / ships alive (although my lazyness has already costed multiple destroyer crews their lifes 😢), so focus fire of many ships is not that big deal for me, especially since i rarely operate a fleet consisting of a lot of different ship types. edit: so i did some testing, 1940 tech, range 20/21 km, Main Battery 425mm/52, biggest Secondary 220mm/44. Those Batteries could shoot right from the start. With S V there was no Interference malus indicated, with C V the Interference malus from own !!!!, not other gunz was around 3%. Thats nothing. With my Setup the C RF saved 400 t in weight. The resulting accuracy was mainly determined by the circumstances, tech / towers in general, cruising speed and most importantly, Range found. A Strange Observation: While Driving on Full Speed the Rangefound Bonus with S RF never exeded 208isch %, with C RF it was around 230isch %. Another Pro for C RF, although its strange that Range found is speed depend and limited when not cruising. About Interference in general; edit2: deleted, own/ other refers to the ship, not the caliber / battery. So, my Conclusion remains, C RF all the way. edit2: i did another battle with lesser tech, 1923 or so, 375mm/38 gunz, the Interence from the other ships gunz varied from 24-35 or so % with S IV. Starting range was 21km, closing to 13km, then the game crashed, and i dont bother to redesign the ships to test for C RFs. but we can just do the math. a Mk. IV S RF reduces other gunz splash inference by 40%, means the 24-35% in battle were around 60% of the original value. so the Original Value would be something around 58%. I never observed such a high value during the campaign, so my trust in that result is low.

Anyone else missing Deck Torpedo Tubes on Japanese Modern Cruiser hulls when they are available? the longer available Light cruiser hulls have them... Or actually everyone else... and now to something completly different! (not really, but meh); Look at those to beauties: https://imgur.com/a/BTm4YN2 The Chishima-Class-DD(Experimental CL Hull) has the much heavier and much much much more costlier Engine despite featering the same Top-Speed, a Hull-Form lower by aroudn 6 (138,x to 144,x) !!!, HALF !!!! the displacement and three meters less beam width, two meters more draught, and a hull given top speed of 35.5 Knots compared to the Chihaya modern CL hull with 36.5 Knots and beeing only fourteen meters shorter ( length to beam ratio is 9,76 for the Chishima and 9 for the Chihaya ). Any reasons why the Experimental CL (Based on Yubari, i assume) has that much more draught to begin with? Am i wrong or is the calculation for Engine power / weight / Cost just out of place here. Even with the Chihayas top Speed raised to its hull optimal top speed limit of 36.5 Knots its still way cheaper, although atleast the engines now are heavier thx to an weight increase of 50% for that one last Knot. I call BS on that. The Engine Cost calculations make the smaller ship unreasonable pricey and a no go cost wise.

Welcome to the CRFFC, the Coincidence Range Finder Fan Club 🥳 😛

That would be Scharnhorst and Gneisenau hitting HMS Glorious. Id rather say nerf C RF, Accurracy is good enough already. So it seems atm after quitting with Germany in 1931 and playing Japan in 1921something isch.

Yeah, that Interference stuff is something "recently" comared to the last time i played. I havent really payed attention to how much Interference is reducing Accuraccy during the battle. I only use uniform Main Gun Caliber and try to use as few different secondary calibers as possible and always, if appicable, disperse Main Gun and Secondary Gun Fire on different targets, so as long as multiple enemy targets are available, there shouldnt be much Interference. Secondaries could even be turned off in case of a 1vs1 of Capital ships e.g.. Design japanese ships atm lead to the observation, that the weight difference got much smaller now, done to only a few hundred tones between S and C RF Mk. IV although the Main Tower weighs nearly 4k t. Strange. Seemed to me in my memory that it was much more on my german ships. Would be interesting to know wich gives the better results in the end. Interference reduction or Base Aim + Double the Aiming Speed bonus.

My guess would be to counter the strong inflation of Money / Income ... and to limit options and therefore bad choices for the computer designed ships? I also hate that restrictive bs... like so many other restrictions ...

In my actual but quitted Campaign with Germany i got to the 1930ies and Mark 3/4 gunz and i still wont use Stereo RF nor would i recommend anyone to use them at this point. Maybe the boost in Accuraccy for Mk. 5 is big enough, but even then their disadvantages are to big to justify there very situational aming bonus, that only applies from... wihc distance onward? 15 km? 20km? Dont Remember anymore, but the discussion bout RFs is pretty old, i just dont remember the Range that triggers the "long range" feature to be active. Coincedence Rangefinders apply the bigger Base Aim Bonus, wich applies in ALL battle Situations and the bigger Aiming Speed Bonus, wich also applies in ALL battle situations. This plus the Weight Advantage, wich gets huge with late RFs and heavy Towers, makes C RF far superior to S RF, wich, if i remember correctly, would only change with the use of Radar. Beause with that u can reliable spot and track the enemy at the extrem Ranges needed to actually make us of "Long Range" Aiming Bonus on S RFs to an extent that justifies their shortcomings. And since the RF choice affects all gunz on the ship, even with lattest tech most but maybe the biggest secondary battery would always suffer from the choice for S RFs, but they might still be good enough to fend of smaller, closer ships at that point. Escort for Capitals ofc recommended throughout the game, so this disadvantage might rarely be one. Thats my experience and opinion on the RF matter edit: its later stated in the thread, that the "Long Range Bonus" is now always active and increases from -1500m to its max. bonus at 48 000m distance.

here, for the "always stay positive faction" ... id like to point out / ask bout so many flaws, but i dont have hope that would make any difference anymore, so i spare myself and you that and present two of the six Leviathans in action in the mediterranean in the French - German War of "19something" shooting on some ai crêpe. enjoy and imagine those atleast nice roaring gunfire sounds of big caliber gunz;

havent made a comment myself for a long time now, since most problems others and i pointed out back when i started with the game are still there, but something im not remembering been there and now killing my mood the most is the following. somebody else musst have noted that already too but a brief search in this topic or a quick scan of the shipyard sub forum didnt give me any results: pls take a look at the screenshots und tell me, whats wrong... First it annoyed me with Modern Destroyer Designs, where i just couldnt fit much more, if any at all of Equipment / Firepower despite unlocking larger Hulls / Displacements, but with the Super Battleship it is extremly obvious that something is not rite. Discplaments were always way to heavy in game vs real life as not long ago was pointed out... again, but this breaks the inner game logic severly. not only that campaigns are very boring since the ai designs only shit, does no research (except GB in my actual run) and finds itself more often than not in multi front / block wars... the latter atleast beeing amusing, .. now designing even bigger ships is not fun anymore. Around 41 000 !!! Tons more of Displacement for the same performance as far as Range, Firepower and Armour are considered, but with 20% less Engine Effiency and overall less maneuverability. ! Masterpiece of Naval Engineering !

The 1931 Deutschland-Klasse ships were initially labeled Panzer-Kreuzer and later during War-times as Heavy Cruisers. The Term Pocket-Battleship is a non-official term created from the British and they were referring to the fact, that the rather small ships with their 28cm guns would rival older BBs and outclassing any other Heavy Cruisers of the time, not modern Battleships of the 30ties.

Its neither a RTS nor a "naval warfare simulator" Why? Its not an RTS, cause the time on the strategic level progresses in turns. So as Taktcom said, its an TBS - Turn based Strategy game. Amusingly he also proclaims the Battles are the RTS part although himself naming them as tactical battles, wich they indeed are. And there for no RTS. We have those two words, Tactic and Strategy, for a Reason. They are not the same. The Only RTS games that come immediatly to my mind, and thats cause im kinda biased in that regard(though im not recommending them), are the paradox games on the clausewitz engine. Strategic Level of Decisions with real time execution / timeline. Why its no naval warfare simulator? Cause not a single bit of what is important in naval warfare past and present is simulated in that game. No water Simulation, No Weather Simulation, no Material Simulation, no Ballastics Simulation. Its an Arcade game thru and thru. Wich should become very evident for everyone at the latest in the editor with all the arcady elements and design choices u can make there. Thatswhy i proposed to call it mediocre Admiral or ... just admiral. Cause i suppose it wont turn out to be Ultimate when its done, sadly. may peace be with u