nightraven1901

Hahahahahahahaha... Yeah, I hear you mate. I wanna scuttle the ships that obstinately refuse to fire their torpedoes despite being on in a situation where other ship's existence depends on them. But I got ships with that kind of gunnery performance too, and Davy Jones can have them if that's what it takes to get ships I can depend on making up my fleet numbers. I think both weapon types' performance at point-blank and close ranges needs serious attention... A BB or CC engaging at close range, especially when I wrap them in secondaries, should melt anything that gets within about 5 Km.

G'day folks. Yet more suggestions for yet better gameplay. Enjoy, and let the good times roll. * Duplex rangefinders should be available; options for whether main guns also have rangefinders to minimise the loss of accuracy when main rangefinder(s) are hit. Number and sizes of rangefinders should have rudimentary options- none, one, few, moderate, many, maximum options. Rangefinders could also be a placeable structure, assuming implementation of the structures system indicated earlier, instead of abstracted options, with each rangefinder being individually modeled and it's effect on accuracy individually tracked. Also would be nice to include rangefinder blind spots. * All turrets should be individually searching for targets when set to aggressive fire-mode; including main and secondary turrets, so we can get all our guns blazing when surrounded, as I prefer to be. * Battleship ambush defence should not include merchant ships. If it does, that's a very unfair convoy defence, as even a maxed-out battleship ain't killing that many light ships before they drop torpedoes and ruin your defenceless and ignorant transports. * Save tabs- at the top of the saved designs window, an extra button to switch into your universal saves would be appreciated. This would preserve function and cleanliness of current saves window but permit persistent saving of designs. I'd also like filter controls to filter by type, weight, modernity, etcetera as I plan on creating large libraries of designs. Now, this final part might be controversial, but I would like this tab to allow me to construct other nation's ships, assuming none of their components would be unavailable to me from a technology perspective. Again: if I want to build ships that look the same as my enemy's that's my prerogative as the ultimate fleet admiral. Some nations just get plain screwed with their available designs... * Near miss damage: large-calibre HE should cause some shrapnel/splash damage, and AP that falls short on trajectory to hit the hull below the waterline should be modeled. * We should be able to click the "some guns have poor sectors of fire" warning and be brought to the offending turret and have it blink for us a couple of times. This is so we can actually know what turret is causing the issue. * The new turrets with little gunnery nests on them are quite nice. Now can I please have an option to not use them, so I can use the old generic ones so they'll fit with barbettes? Better yet, a simple option to remove the nest so I can properly put a superfiring turret over it would be ideal. * Please set all armour preset values to balanced figures so I don't spend ten minutes getting the weight balance perfect only to find that the ship has 500% more aft deck armour than fore deck armour, requiring a complete redesign *after* I think I'm nearly done. * In the Fleet tab, the tooltip keeps getting in the way of what statistics you're trying to look at. Redesigning it so that information is displayed in a dedicated window to the side would be ideal. * In the shipyard for ship design, there's a large dead space where the keyboard move buttons and the mouse movements are all ignored. Please increase the bounding box in which these functions work. Suggest making all space that isn't a button or sidebar accept these inputs. On the sidebars up/down buttons should scroll the sidebar we're mouse-overing. * Speaking of the shipyard, it would save me a lot of effort if the engine efficiency and pitch/roll values all displayed the same tooltip as the sidebar provides. Please. * Aim high and aim low settings would be appreciated so we can exploit poor superstructure armour or aim to hole the targeted ship. * When about to initiate a battle, the window that opens causes the countries, warscore and fleet dispositions tab to fade into inscrutability. Respectfully, don't do that. There's no reason for it and in the current build there may be several consecutive battles scheduled for me by the AI between which I cannot check this tab. In fact, stop making those tabs impossible to close; I may want to order new ships or adjust my spending as a result of the battle I just finished and there's no mechanical reason to stop me. * Convoy escort missions are just not acceptable in current build if you want your game enjoyed or sold. It is literally impossible to protect your convoy from long-range torpedoes, even if your whole force is immediately sent out to meet the attackers, along any relative bearing, the AIs super-torpedo ships are going to fire on your escort force with the rapidity of a machinegun and as you evade you'll inevitably attract salvos that can go on to hit your convoy ships. The crux of the matter is detection range and initial force placement. RADAR is supposed to detect things in plenty of time to respond to it, and even if not (or not available)you're going to have a far more satisfying game if these battles are remotely under your control to win- maybe lengthening the distance between the starting would help, as might reducing the range of torpedoes to nearer their indicated maximum range, or PUTTING THOSE CONVOYS UNDER PLAYER CONTROL and ADDING AUDIO AND VISUAL CUES THAT A SHIP IS ON COURSE TO TAKE A TORPEDO, that latter two being highlighted as they alone will fix this issue without making every convoy defence mission a drudgery of waiting to make contact. Also, if the convoy ships are going to be under AI control, whether we set them to it or you force us to use that alone, then they should follow Mr. Piccolo's advice and DODGE! 'Coz trust me, we're begging them to. I reiterate: all ships under AI control should be using AI dodge-hacks, a term which will be replaced with AI evasion when it becomes more accurate than the former. * Related to the former: please stop letting the AI build super-torpedo ships with literally a hundred or more torpedoes on them each, ESPECIALLY in historical build mode. No-one actually did that. Just we armchair admiral wondered about doing it. Even the Japanese didn't go that far with their most outrageous designs... * Make AI dodge-hacks less noticeable. It's immersion-breaking. Reduce all values that they exceed the limits imposed on a player ship by at least 50% of the difference, preferably 100%. This is a priority concern. * Fleet tags in campaign are way too big to function right, both for ports and ships. Interface is messy and unwieldy; I don't feel very in control of my ships... * Fleet tags could use the silhouette from the designer's plan to show us the heaviest ship in a given force, thus communicating considerably more information than they do now. It would also be comparatively simple to do, too. * I'ma repeat myself: light ship spotting mechanics are not sufficient. Being fired at by ghosts also isn't sufficient. Most other games mitigate this by having the ship that fires balloon out it's detection range by up to 50%, but my primary desire is to get RADAR and SONAR mounts to exist and have more realistic ranges regardless of what they're mounted to, except a slight range buff *for free* by being mounted higher- say, on a BB mast. This bonus should not be *that* high, as it isn't in reality. No more than 100%. Again free from a weight perspective- same RADAR module, same weight- but it should be a roll concern as in reality. After all, that weight is very high up on the superstructure and that's how you get roll. * The dispersion of guns in the current patch is so poor as to be offensive to the Youtubers playing the game (though admittedly, I never really paid it much heed, understanding how the math behind this system works and that the displayed rounds are merely a visual representation of that math). Anyhow, relatively easy fix: reduce the maximum dispersion of the shells being animated by say 30-50%, especially at short ranges, just to improve the aesthetic, if not affect the performance which seems adequate for this stage of development. Nice work making the fall of shot from the same turret look realistic, though; even War Thunder couldn't pull that off. * Please have speed stat display to two decimal places, as it already actually accepts inputs down that far and adjusts the ship's weight and stats accordingly but doesn't actually show the difference (except by the altered stats). * I think we need a mini-map. I am having severe trouble tracking all the ships involved in larger encounters... * Would like an "assist ship" order; for when a ship is critically damaged. Allow us to send another vessel to rescue survivors (adding them back to the trained crew pool after battle) and attempt to stabilize the ship in trouble, at the risk of potentially losing the rescue craft. This will add a new dynamic for damaged capital ships and give us an organic objective mid-battle; we may find ourselves trying to fend off attacks while we complete a rescue or salvage operation. Dedicated salvage ships also appreciated as a long-term stretch goal. * Flagships suffer a -15% accuracy malus due to being out of range of the flagship. Hilarious, but better removed. Okay then, as ever feel free to cite both liked and disliked ideas to allow the devs to better understand our wants. Happy hunting, Admirals. o7

As title. The barbettes you include on towers and hulls should be able to mount barbettes on them to permit triple-superfiring designs and generally allow more customisable design work. At the very least, these positions should be able to mount barbettes their own size or smaller, or have selectable heights and girths (including "none."). The French super battleships being able to mount a barbette behind the hull barbette can be charitably deemed very silly. If these tower/hull barbettes didn't get in the way I would dislike them far less. I see this as a necessary stepping stone on the road towards truly customisable designs.

Oh, that's gonna bug my OCD so dang hard... Good eyes though mate, thanks for mentioning it. I think this is a fine place to post that point too- it is directly pertaining to the shipyard, after all.

As title. Would prefer there to be a handful of adjustable barbettes than a huge list of niche-use ones. I'd prefer to have each barbette be adjustable in height, girth and therefore what it can allow the turret atop to fire over (and naturally the weight of such of barbette) and also mount. I can't get barbettes to go to triple superfiring for main-calibre guns and I'd like to on monster hulls; I'd like to create light ships with stacked weapons too, and in current patch this is unavailable. Might also intersect with sunken mounts; where giving a barbette a negative height value would be the means of implementing turret mounts slightly sunken into the deck for firing arc conservation.

Nothing against the French, their gloried war history, their delicious food, or their people. But those battleships are ugly and ill-suited to defensive engagements, in my opinion. I do love the Jeune École strategy though- and it works too. Loading 51-knot intercept destroyers with as many torpedoes as possible is an excellent strategy- but faster launcher traverse speed would help them actually launch when I give them perfect firing solutions, as would pre-training launchers on the selected torpedo target when on final approach. There ain't a lot of leeway in the displacement for armour if you go with an engine that big...

Full support. If I was leading the dev team, we'd be working on mod integration right now.

Until better implementation of the convoy system is complete, please display percentages down to two decimal places, so I know if I need more transports to stay at a given percentage. Identified enemy ship classes should be viewable outside of battle, so we can check out their builds in a more calm setting. Implement via mouse-over of enemy fleet strengths for a given nation displaying a drop-down list of identified classes, which clicking will lock open so we can click on individual ship classes and easily tell how many you have seen but not immediately sunk. Repair costs for the final month should scale off actual damage. The AI has a nasty habit of bruising every ship in my force, and even though they're still at 99-100% integrity, they still cost the same full price to scrub the scorch marks off the hull that a ship that got gutted by a torpedo would cost that month The warning for guns having poor sectors of fire is broken, and will display when there's one gun on the ship with near-perfect coverage. All hulls should have a flush-deck option, available somehow. I already hate the oversized towers we're forced to use, I don't want to be forced to use a ship designed solely for frontal main gun layouts (like the new French battleships). I reiterate: I would like to be able to add or remove everything on every hull until it's a flush-deck design, and add or remove those cutouts and additions as I desire. As it stands those new French battleship hulls are my new most hated hulls in this game. Please stop, URGENTLY, making these hulls the only option for a ship of that size for a given nation. The Dunkirks (excuse English spelling; French is hard) were both ugly and not suited to defensive tactics; I don't wanna have to build them because you built the hull so no other option is available. Flush-deck setting, PLEASE. Stealth17's circular battleship video shows that the game can in fact support much more manipulation to hulls than the designer currently allows. Please widen those sliders concerning width and length to the maximum they can support without causing serious issues. The Russians dd actually make circular battleships- I'd like to at least get close to that if I don't mind making hideous monstrousities. Further, whatever is making the game lag out during designing of all heavy ships requires some attention. Draught remaining limited to what ports could reasonably support is however already as far as it needs to go without save file manipulation. Requesting permission to fire: when a ship has an excellent torpedo or gunnery solution on a target but is currently under orders not to fire that weapon, they should have an indicator that essentially represents a commander bitching to the admiral that they have a clean shot and they want to take it. All I need is a flashing icon shaped like either a torpedo, large gun, or small gun (use the extant icons in the fire control options menu) coloured in green to indicate, "I wanna use this weapon on my target, admiral!!" It is difficult to order a ship to cease maneuvers. Attempting to use fine mouse control to order forward rudder is time-consuming and not suited to high-intensity battles. I'd like a "steady as she goes" button and a manual entry ability for rudder controls so we can type in desired rudder settings while paused as the mouse accuracy needed to achieve this currently is not presently a realistically viable option. The Let's Players and I struggle with that interface; I request it receive some attention. Would like a "hull material" button, with steel, aluminium, and wood being my first three options to stock the choices pool. Tiny ships in the world wars periods were often made of wood, as it was well-known that a heavy hit would simply sink them anyway if they were made of steel. Would like torpedo trackers on both friendly torpedoes and observed enemy ones. A green or red coloured line indicating their path would help. It need only be visible if one of the lines intersects with one of your ships' courses, as they could and did calculate that in real ships. Would like an option to increase the investment in torpedo launcher traverse speed, like the extant one for big guns. Again, I would like fine control over this on a turret-by-turret basis. LSM (R) type LSTs carried rockets. Those rockets could conceivably hit ships. Rockets for late-game..? Would like to customise ship designations. DLs and DDs are not the same. Nor are DEs the same as DDs. I can't differentiate that right now; I have to manually select the ship and assess its weapons to determine if I have an intercept destroyer, a destroyer leader, a support destroyer, a fleet destroyer, or an escort destroyer. And that's just some of the stuff currently crammed under "DD." Don't get me started on other ship types... Early tech-tree ships have minimal customisability beyond what size guns to fit and spending your leftover displacement. Implementation of any of several ideas I have already presented would fix this; in the meantime just flush-deck hull options for all in all time periods, please. Yes, your exceptionally limited options *look* slightly better but I don't care- their extreme lack of customisability makes them obnoxious to build- it feels like I've made the exact same ship a dozen times. It also makes early naval academy missions just plain slogs to get through. No, I *don't* want to spend an hour watching three ironclads slowly expend their entire ammunition supply into each other, please; nor do I want to do half of the missions I *did* do in that academy as they were plain boring. They don't get interesting until fairly late in the academy (say, one-third to halfway through) and that is a flaw that will drive new players straight outta the game. Would like working searchlights that mitigate aiming penalties at night. Give me something else to place in those turret slots. Larger searchlights, more mitigation. Would like some basic automatic orders, like having my intercept destroyers start tacking without constant player attention. Some basic evasion patterns can be coded in without too much difficulty; they may even benefit the AI as it develops. Would like more *gameplay-specific* information from just about all tooltips. It's mildly interesting that radio direction finding is a thing that was used to find ships in real life, but what is it's *gameplay function?* That's all we need in those tooltips. Save history lessons for the loading screens. And I *like* the history lessons, and still feel compelled to say that... I want to know how much of a penalty I get to aiming for having mixed batteries and when it applies. Maybe adding those two-inch guns to my destroyers is disrupting their accuracy- it doesn't look like it but I can't tell that anywhere. More ideas as they brew up. Feel free to cite the ones you do and don't like by quote; otherwise the devs can't tell which ones we really want and which are secondary priorities or even plain duds. Brainstorming is like throwing shit at the wall; not all of it will stick...

A lot to do, but I could work with this idea. I personally want more freedom in what turret I place- gun shields should be optional, turret armour should be optional with the armour setting being at zero literally stripping them bare so they can fit in new and interesting places, and turret types should also be an option. I'd also like to choose armour layout on a per-turret basis. If I want a British-looking German ship, that's my prerogative as supreme leader of the navy (seeing as the game combines the duties of the navy's admiralty with those of their design boards and in some cases civilian governments to release funds for warship construction). The exact manner of implementation is semi-irrelevant to me so long as it's fairly usable by newcomers to keep sales high (and thus patches happening).

I wholly disagree, OP. I want unlimited turrets excepting what I can physically fit. But hey, thanks for your opinion, mate,

I am aware, but it still can be a bitch to get those turrets exactly where I want them... Thanks for the info though mate,

As title. It's nearly impossible to place a turret or tower on those orange snap points. Ideally, you'd just plain remove the snap points entirely excepting the ones in casements and on towers. I want to freely place objects- no forced placements, please. I wanna build second ranks of secondaries on barbettes behind the first outer line, and I can't, even when there's space. Just allow utterly free placement please.

I want corvettes and PT boats, and frigates too. I want *everything that floats* under my command- seaplane tenders, resupply ships, landing craft and LSTs, picket boats, merchant craft of all types (regular transports, passenger liners that are possibly full of invasion troops, oilers, colliers and munitions ships), PT tenders, scout ships, even fishing boats and whalers so I can at least get them out the way of torpedoes. As for Ukraine- you're right. The poor bastards are fighting alone and still doing far better than anyone expected. They're pulling a Finland right now and they should be proud of themselves- but seeing the citizens of Mariupol trying to survive in what looks like a f...ing Fallout setting saddens me to my heart. May God have mercy upon their souls...

I would like to have these two components divided into two different options. I want to be able to add both secondary engines and electric batteries at the same time. I want to be able to add secondary engines to each main-calibre turret, too; a dedicated secondary engine to the rudder control systems. I'd also like control the amount of batteries present- which should determine the length of time their benefits apply. Just an idea...

I too would like a scuttle option, just in general,

All nations should also be able to capture enemy hull, weapon and tower designs, if they seize a ship carrying those components and built on that hull. Such captured tech should then be available after the ship has gone through a "study" period during which it cannot leave dock. This process, while comparatively short, should be interruptible by port striking the port in which it is held, forcing the process to resume with some loss of progress (or cease completely if the inevitably cadet crew aboard manages to lose the captured vessel in the fighting). This would add an interesting and dynamic value to seizing enemy ships during wars- if your ally loses the war and surrenders, losing some ships, you can make dang sure the winning nation doesn't get any long-term benefits from them. For components like guns and towers, their designs should unlock naturally as you progress, allowing you more freedom in design if you successfully study enemy ships. This would make each campaign unique and more replayable, as your available build options would change based on your choosing to take their ships instead of their territory (because as it stands you'd never take the crappy AI designed ships if territory was available). Just have the affected modules and hulls have a second button located above them in the designer- if I take the British battlecruiser with the deckhouse and casemates playing as Germany, I should be able to mouse-over that hull and another option should pop up above it with a British flag to show I can make a British style battlecruiser instead due to my capturing efforts (or whatever way you'd like to implement it; it's your game after all). Unlocking another nation's tech tree should require more research to develop their versions of a given technology, whether that be their turret styles or their towers or etcetera- anything that would be unique. As such, trying to research the entirety of the of the tech tree should be prohibitively expensive, so if you happen to kick everyone's butts early on in the campaign it should require a vast increase in research budget to research multiple different normally unique tech tree options. As an aside, the amount of tech budget directed to each branch should be selectable with sliders, replacing the flawed favourite system that presently exists. This way, one could stall research into a newly-unlocked tech tree to save budget, or prioritise it with fine control as opposed to effectively retarding all other research to have it. I would like to be able to increase the tech expenditure to whatever level I please without major repercussions besides increased costs, and I would like this idea considered separately but adjunctively to this main idea. This would allow the player to easily bankrupt themselves trying to research too many trees at once- but it would also permit another way to spend excess income gained by controlling vast swathes of other nation's territory. Another way to gain a nation's unique tech tree options should be to control all that nation's core provinces- If I own all of Germany, I want to take over their tech tree as a secondary prize and a money sink. Just an idea. Taking ships seems useless and vestigial as it stands...

As title. I played the British campaign first- I'm an Aussie, we fought for the allies. Imagine my disappointment when I found out they simply don't get a super battleship II hull at all, even if they decided they wanted to build one. The campaign is going to be inherently ahistorical; the options available to each nation should not be restricted by such things as historical plans if we're not playing a firmly historical campaign. If they're different shapes or have different towers, great. It adds flavour. But all nations should get a competitive option within 10,000 tonnes of the baseline. If you want to make Germany's one the biggest, I'm cool with that. Make the UK's option stronger in other ways, like spotting and gunnery accuracy on the towers that one is likely to have when it's available. But all playable nations should get one- copies accepted for small nations or placeholders. The Japanese already get a unique, slightly smaller super battleship II hull; 5,000 tonnes lighter but it gets the excellent and space-efficient Pagoda tower to make up for the smaller size.

As title. Upon starting a new campaign, we shouldn't have exclusively cadet-level trash crews. It sabotages game fun when your pride of the fleet battleship can't hit a slow target at a coupple of kilometres reliably, and it's *horrifically* unrealistic. Ideally, there would be a start option that switched between the current starting experience conditions, a randomised veterancy value for each ship (which roughly makes sure you don't exclusively get veteran destroyers while the AI gets a full fleet of veteran battleships, which I *know* it will do with how hard it cheats), and purchasable veterancy using the slider normally only available in the Naval Academy- which assigns a portion of extra funds to pay for this veterancy, so we're not left shot-changed.

Yeah- we should be able to over-ride the base travel position using the R and T keys.

As title. As a stopgap to designing our own transports (if we want; auto-create should be available to the uninterested) we should be able to pay extra on a separate slider to enhance their combat capacity. It shouldn't cost much- it's not like four-inch guns are expensive- but I really want this option please. Though, I'd much rather every transport was unique and capable of being constructed to my own exacting standards and each convoy was able to be manually loaded with my selection of ships and escorts, including both warships and Q-ships as detailed in my list of suggestions, batch 1. I am sick of seeing my transports be unarmed. I don't care what the AI wants to spend its (apparently infinite) resources on, I want convoys to be one-third corvettes, frigates, and Q-ships so if they have to defend themselves for a while they can manage it. Also, stop spawning the AIs escorts in their transports and my escorts ten-to-twenty kilometres away. The AI cheats harder than a five-year-old playing Monopoly already...

As title. Start them on the same conditions as they do now, retreating, but let me over-ride the frankly idiotic task force system. I'd also prefer if every ship was in its own division, to help minimise the almost deliberate ramming and torpedo eating they insist on doing that I could save them from. Do not ever, give a player a defence target that can't perform basic operations, it's poor game design. If a player doesn't want to control them, this won't cause them the slightest hassle at all.If they do it'll cut frustration by a massive amount.

As title. If my BB is sinking its way through the masses of crap the unfair battle generator forces it to face, it should be capable of becoming a veteran during the battle. Real warships were considered veterans after one major battle. On a related note, their should be no limit to the amount of experience a ship can earn in one battle. Further, how is the AI fielding veteran ships against me that have never seen combat or indeed have just rolled off the slipway? Quit making the AI cheat! It can also build ships instantly, as demonstrated by them building ships in the first turn or three or a campaign (and not just destroyers but big ships), and it almost universally has favourable engagements even if *I* cheat to compensate for it. I get a convoy attack? One destroyer of mine, they get three cruisers, their convoy is itself armed, and they start between me and the targets. They get a convoy attack? They out-mass me in ships again and for good measure spawn half the distance from my convoy than I bloody do. I get a destroyer ambush? They get escorts and I get four ships. They just ambushed me with eleven, which has never happened for me. It's not that my ships are more expensive or heavier, either. It's just the battle system being straight-up unfavourable to the player. They get about triple-to-quadruple the victory points I do for the same kill, and they claim victory even if I save my BB and kill 10/11 of their ambush ships, despite that ostensibly being a victory for me. What is this nonsense? The task force system had better bloody well fix this... Also, if I kill off all but their battleships and three other ships, leaving them seven total, that had better be considered a major-to-resounding victory and let me take their core provinces after task forces drops. Getting told that utter thrashing counts as a "minor" victory is frankly bull...t.

Only serves to reinforce my thoughts that the devs should basically polish up their dev tools for making hulls and superstructures and release them directly into the game- there's no Earthly way they can do with dozens what we could do with dozens of *thousands.* Like I said: it worked incredibly well for Super Mario Maker. If we could just make our own if we had the determination available about 70% of this entire wiki would be happy (assuming they did a good job of it).

G'day. After a grueling experience of chasing down the British fleet, I have some further suggestions. Literally never disable the x10 and x30 options, please. I just wasted half an hour or so chasing a lone heavy cruiser with a torpedo cruiser of my own that it clearly didn't want to fight. It felt like an eternity, and it keeps happening. While we're on the subject, a x50 and x100 option wouldn't hurt either for that kinda crap. Torpedoes need more information about readiness. I have no idea why the underwater lateral launchers just refuse to work; I can't slow down to give them more time or my attacker will die. I'd like coloured arc lines to be displayed when a launcher type is mouse-overed so I can visually determine when a ship is in range and a World of Warships style targeting line for all launcher-equipped ships when they're selected and have a torpedo target selected, even if the launchers are switched off. I still want all launchers to pre-train when a torpedo target is selected again even when the launchers are switched off. I'd also like to select which launchers to turn on- I'm happy for my ships to lob a bow tube shot almost all the time; it's the deck launchers I want to be more careful with. I'd like to mount additional bow torpedo tubes underwater. Five to seven seems possible on larger ships. Aft too, though I doubt I'll ever mount that many for any reason beyond having more underwater torpedo ammo- past 1900 ships move too quickly to effectively use stern tubs anyway, unless their arcs are widened as per my earlier request. My battleships never seem to fight. I spent hours making the design and the AI just never uses them. I want to use my battleships, please. I imagine the task force system will fix it, but the footage I've seen from let's players looks awful... Victory points awarded to the wrong party, task forces can't engage other ones even though they're within spitting distance of each other, and direct assaults on ports seems impossible. Further, I'd like more starting options for campaigns- adjusting ship build times globally, a slider to adjust naval budgets for all parties, separate sliders to boost or reduce each nation's relative strength (a la Hearts of Iron), and special campaign options to block certain ship types or configurations would also be nice (so I can just stop nations using 120 torpedo heavy cruisers, for instance), etcetera. I despise the lack of backwards compatibility for techs as it stands. I would like a button for "display outdated techs" for all circumstances, please. Please increase sonar detection range. If the module system is implemented, then having multiple mounts stack would be nice. Torpedoes are dang near invisible. This is good and realistic- but spotted torpedoes should have tracks outlined in red with a separate warning (with audio) for torpedoes on course to impact a friendly non-transport ship would not just be nice, it's nearly necessary. I can't even see the warning when I have seven plus one-ship divisions to handle... I need to know when a ship is actually in danger, please. If the avoid torpedoes button worked for single ships, that'd help a lot, but further warning is desired. I would like to specialise each weapon on a ship. If only my main armament needs more ammo, I want an option to make that change without increasing every weapon's ammo load, with reduced penalties for partial increases. Same goes for torpedoes. I seldom run out of underwater torpedoes, but my deck launchers need more ammo. My interception destroyers with one quintuple and one single launcher could do with more rounds for the single launcher, but the quintuple is fine with one reload. Similarly, bow-mounted launchers on cruisers often need a few extra reloads but stern launchers are normally fine with one. I would like to specialise each weapon's role and configuration. We should be discounted in money and weight for turrets with smaller firing arcs as they're simpler to build and require less resources. I would like to specialise weapons to focus on range, rate-of-fire, damage, and turret traverse rate separately, with appropriate penalties and trade-offs. My main guns need electro-hydro treatment, my secondaries normally do not. Same goes for barbettes. I don't care if my super-battleship has a two-inch secondary ammunition explosion, a twenty-inch ammunition explosion is less tolerable. Many towers and some hulls have perfectly good firing positions I can't use. Implementation of my structures idea would solve this- I could sink a barbette into the tower superstructure and mount the desired firepower there. Failing that, please add additional low-calibre secondary mounts to pretty much all towers, and force the engine to allow mounting turrets on raised deck sections which at the moment are utterly unusable. Would like to add sunken turret mounts in all sizes. Basically, a barbette that takes a small chunk out of the deck to permit the mounting of turrets that don't interfere with their neighbours. Would like finer control over range, quarters, and other things. Also I would like to mount my towers and funnels wherever I please. I have no idea why, if a secondary tower suffers from smoke interference, why I can't just mount it forward of the dang funnel. No, I don't care if it looks silly; have you seen what it looks like to add a central funnel between those hideous Bismarck-style towers that you've forced upon us on all 1940s heavy German ships? Because it isn't any worse than that. Speaking of, mounting four funnels abeam of each other seem like a perfectly reasonable thing to do. They already do dual funnels, for crying out loud. Would like a length slider to go with the beam one, for making super-fast but very slow to turn ships. Like battlecruisers. Would like full underwater torpedo turrets, placeable in underwater torpedo slots on larger ships. If large subs could use them, large surface combatants should be able to as well. Would like to extend funnels and towers for bonuses. Would like mounting options for adding small turrets off the side of the hull, like they do on carriers, so my light guns (and possibly AA) can have perfect firing arcs at the expense of roll. Would like to add a third tower. Because damage control. And also spotting... Fleet spawn ranges are a bit off. Convoy escorts are a complete crap shoot as to whether you're able to get to your ships to protect them. For the distress call scenario, this is fine, if unfair and arbitrary and poor game design. The range from your transports in this specific case should be based on the rescue ships' speeds. In all other cases- put the dang escorts in the transport formation, where they bloody well would be in reality... It seems that only happens for the AI and it cheats enough... Please correct victory point calculations. Why is it that I can sink a heavy cruiser, a light cruiser, and two destroyers, along with eight transports, lose one destroyer, and the enemy gets nearly as many victory points as me? It's garbage... Gun shields should be optional for al weapons. Simply setting their armour values to none should remove the gun shields. Some people want to faithfully recreate real ships, and we can't because of forced gun shields. This also needs to be optional on a per-turret basis; some destroyers had gun shields on their bow turrets but not on their stern ones. Raking a ship with fire should kill gun crews on secondary weapons. A button to call in and send out secondary gun teams should be added in case you want to turtle up while being barraged by multiple ships but you don't need your secondaries right now (say, because you're on a torpedo attack run). Please do *something* that stops destroyers and cruisers from being blind... Smoke sightings and RADAR spotting lines inaccuracy is too great. Please reduce by 50%. Gun accuracy on a relatively stationary target (one with no transverse velocity and minimal closure or escape speed) should improve gun accuracy. That'll teach the AI for running directly away from my ships! More suggestions to come. I brew then up as I play, so give it time. Also please excuse my poor wording; I am so heavily medicated right now I can literally barely stand...

Wow, very concise folks. Full support: I want complete barbette placement freedom- no limits ever for any reason barring "it physically won't fit."