Suribachi

Sounds like the Change Flagship, or whatever it is called, option was turned on. When a ship sustains enough damage it will fall to the back of the division. However, if another division is already following the original division, the ship will fall to the back of the following division instead. This is the behavior as I know it currently. But yes, I agree that the ships should only fall to the back of their original formation. Additionally, AI should not override a player's commands. If a player chooses a priority target for the guns, for example, the auto-targeting should not kick in until either the target has been sunk/surrendered or the player uses the "reset targeting" key bind.

Looks like 1.6 Beta is out. Looking forward to the update. I have gotten so used to playing with DIP I don't remember how to design in vanilla lol

No battles or wars yet so I don't have any feedback there yet. However, I do have some feedback on the ship building. Campaign start: USA 1890, create own fleet, all other options default. My usual fleet start was no longer feasible. I usually start with a Armored Cruiser I (CA), 6,000t with 2x single 8" main guns and 3" casemates wherever they fit. Towers are the lightest I have access to, which are usually Small Cage Masts I and III. Funnel is usually the Air Intake Funnel (Large) variety. No torpedoes or other secondary guns are used. Speed is usually set to hull max of 20.5 knots. Quarters to Spacious and Bulkheads to Maximum. Range is usually reduced, one tick from furthest left so between minimum and middle. Left over displacement is used in armor. If I try to do this now, I am looking at a 7,200 / 6,000 t ship. Now, with same towers, funnel downgraded to smallest one available, 2x single 6" guns and all characteristics set to middle, with no changes to armor or other items like citadel or engine, I am at 5,962 / 6,000 t using May 1895 tech with 100% on tech slider this entire time. Either v2 is a bit too aggressive with the changes cruiser weight calculations or I just need to relearn historically how cruisers were designed and fielded and, to borrow a phrase from the Dark Souls community, need to "get good". Will try and get into a fight soon to see how that behaves.

Let's F**king GO! Just came home to a pile of Christmas seeing v2 is out. Installing now and will inform if I run into any issues or have feedback.

There is an answer on this page from Cameron Strasse that addresses something called "broadside drift". This would be the equivalent of a person feeling recoil after firing a gun. An interesting read I think. https://www.quora.com/When-the-USS-New-Jersey-fired-a-broadside-of-all-of-her-16-guns-how-far-did-that-move-the-ship-sidewise TL;DR Recoil penalty for accuracy is not a thing on warships that I can see based on the math equations presented EDIT: Just realized that broadside drift technically isn't about accuracy, but I think my point still stands because the ship does not move in the water to throw off the calculations or anything like that

A resurgence of the over-pen being so huge that it overflows back to a block from a few patches ago maybe? Last time that happened, Incendiary HE became the META. I will try to replicate after work if I can. @sillyrecon What was the engagement distance? Helps to determine if it is plunging fire or not.

Interesting, good to know that it isn't expected behavior and that I am not going crazy. Well, crazier than usual anyway. Looking forward to this V2 of the mod. Sounds like it will have some goodies to look forward to.

Feature Request: Current Version: 1.5.1.5 Live as of June 8, 2024 Issue: In the Settings > General menu, there is a slider to adjust what armor quality the information panels use to calculate the gun penetration values. currently, to switch back and forth between the enemy's guns and the player's guns, the player needs to constantly pause and tweak the slider causing unnecessary disruption of game play. Request: Have two separate sliders in the same menu. The first slider will be the quality of the player's armor. The second slider will be the quality of the enemy's armor. This way, the game already takes into account which information panel the player is looking at during combat and adjusts the displayed value's accordingly so the player is not adjusting the value when going from vessel to vessel of the same class.

Yes. I paid for all of the displacement I am going to use it. I tend to prioritize armor and armament over speed. Also, just for clarity into my line of thinking. My understanding is that the superstructure armor covers the main and sec towers as well as funnels and general superstructure sticking up from the deck. So the armor used is to protect the fire control built into the towers for as long as possible. Correct me if I am wrong on this. Correct. Close, I think they are actually partial pens (the cracked shield icon) I just didn't specify that in my original post. I was under the assumption that if the armor is 2.5x greater than the shell's pen power, it should be blocked regardless but still has a chance to cause fires. Is this not the case or is it more to due with the fuse type used? (Unfortunately I did not note the fuse type before moving on)

Might be a misunderstanding on my part, but I do not understand how an enemy's guns are penetrating me and my guns cannot pen them. My ship: BB with 12" guns with 17.7" pen against enemy's 3.6-6.4" of +53% quality belt armor and 6.4" superstructure. Enemy ship: CA with 6.5" guns with 2.5" pen against my ship's 15" of +73% quality belt and superstructure armor. Both ships decks are too armored for either to pen fully at any range from 1km to 17.5 km according to the in game infographic. Knowing what I think I know about armor, even given the magic 2.5x boost for partial pen, my armor should be shrugging off all horizontal shots from the enemies guns but they are not. Am I missing something? And yes, I am reading the log to see where the hits are coming into.

Good to hear. Time compression in battle is another issue. If that is addressed as well as minor nations being valid invasion targets during a war, I just might sink another 1000 hours into this game. Currently at 1,129 hours.

Easiest way I know of to address that is to have a minimum arming distance the torpedo must travel before it becomes active and capable of damage. If it were to hit something before traveling that distance it will be a dud 100% of the time.

It think its position currently is legacy from when all engines had the same cruise speed sweet spot, so yeah, it needs updating.

Mexico and Georgia have got to be the most loyal minor nation allies I have ever seen. In my current USA campaign spanning from 1890 to 1958, not once have I given them any ships, new or mothballed. Yet they never broke their alliance with me. 70 years of getting nothing would usually make me rethink a relationship haha. I want your territory not your friendship!

It's a pet peeve of mine as well. I wish the naming convention of the game was good enough to recognize when the player wants that naming convention to happen and to follow it. For example, when mass producing DDs, I would normally name them after their job. So a combat DD would be DD, and a Minelayer who only guards transports and lays mines would be ML.