Makko

Apparently deck armor represents almost half of the hittable surface area of this CL at 4km That don't seem right Edit: No I'm not using some kind of stubby mortar gun where this might make sense, L/46 750m/s AP 11 inch gun

Tactical battle consumption is probably calculated differently than campaign map

Is this a bug? I thought it was just your government asking for your recommendation, you're the Navy you can't sign a peace treaty on your own.

A couple issues with territories: A tiny colony in a different sea region lets you get transport-massacred. How am I suddenly losing 12 transports a month when I have one tiny port in the south Atlantic???? There should be a maximum amount of transport losses based off of the size of your ports in a region, and defending your shipping should be proportional to that total amount. IE you only need a few destroyers in your 5000 ton port island halfway across the world to stop your maximum of one transport loss a month. Territories cannot be used as real bases for ships I got Malta and Tunis as Austria, and was excited to base my ships there, unfortunately if they are damaged they leave and go back to my three home ports. What is the point of these ports if they function no differently than having your ships in the open ocean lol

I am not behind the tech curve, my ships are more advanced then the enemies, we are in the late 1920s and I have radar already and MKV 9 inch guns and veteran crews, I check the components list of every enemy ship I encounter to make sure I am at least at parity with tech and modernize my ships every couple years. My problem is not hitting, as I've said repeatedly the issue is partial penetrations that should be full or over penetrations. The rate of hits is entirely irrelevant and the issue still occurred against the terrible ~20 knot CLs the enemy has been using for a decade. It is rather difficult to get a partial penetration against belt armor with a miss. Given the decent sized sample of hits against lightly armored opponents with highly penetrating weapons, the proportion of partial penetrations is completely out of line with what should be occurring. It is possible I am getting absurdly unlucky, but we are now into the hundreds of hits on CLs that are approximately perpendicular and hitting thin belt armor. I don't want to be super rude but you appear to be typing a lot more than you are reading. Update: After writing the above I wanted to check something; and the results are interesting.. in custom battles I cannot recreate the issue I have in campaign. The amount of penetrations of CL belt armor (3-6 inches approximately 150% quality) severely overmatched by the 9inch guns (standard length, MK5 APBC1/2 at a range of 10km or less) are in line with what I would expect. The majority of roughly perpendicular non blocked/non ricochet hits (I don't really understand what causes those, hull resistance? anyways as long as its a minority I don't mind much) penetrate or over penetrate. Almost no partial penetrations. Side note: The portion of deck hits at very close range seems ridiculously high, something like 1/3 despite the deck armor being what... something like 5% of the visible surface area at close ranges? This means one of two things: - I have gotten very unlucky and/or have not correctly perceived what is happening in my battles - There is some kind of campaign specific factor that is influencing penetration. Maybe accumulation of techs? Maybe something about the design of the French CLs I've been fighting? I've noticed the issue most against them.

I wish we had a slider for spread distance

The problem is that I am not penetrating the ship. A secondary problem I haven't mentioned is that CLs can do donuts at 40 knots and become almost impossible to hit even at point blank ranges

I had assumed that the penetration values were against vertical and horizontal armor for belt and deck respectively, factoring in the trajectory of the shell at the given range. That's why deck penetration is so bad at short ranges. Otherwise that deck penetration value makes no sense whatsoever. I am well aware that hitting at less than perpendicular will increase the amount of armor that has to be penetrated, but in these circumstances I am talking about where they are roughly perpendicular it should not matter. It's not increasing it by 250% for the majority of shots. Overall I don't really care if the ballistics and armor are not 1 to 1 accurate to real life as long as the overall result is roughly accurate, but it is very much not. Armor is far too effective and hard to penetrate and far to easy to apply to ships. 6 and 8 inch guns are largely ineffective CLs and CAs just don't seem to work like they should, I built a CA with 12 rapid fire advanced 9 inch guns (almost 60 shells per minute) with the most advanced anti armor rounds I could get and a veteran crew and good coincidence fire control. This should absolutely shred CLs with 5 inches of belt armor and a couple inches on the front and back at ranges of sub 10km, these vessels were weak to 5, 6 and 8 inch guns historically. Somehow though it takes dozens of hits to cripple a ship, and the majority of direct hits to the broadside at approximately 90 degrees inflict minimal to no damage at all. It ends up that this ship is worse at killing lightly armored CLs than conventional battleship with slow firing ~15 inch guns, which... does not make any sense realistically.

Is the penetration formula broken? I am firing on a CL with my BB. I have 20 inches of deck pen at 10km The CL has 3 inches of main deck armor with 140% bonus, so let's call that 8 inches to be nice and round up. How is a partial penetration possible? I overmatch by more than twice, 250% the value of the defending armor. And to be clear it's not like it happened once, it has happened with the majority of hits I land.

The problem I have with doomstacks is that realistically they're an idiotic idea You leave all of your ports and shipping undefended and it would be raided and bombarded into dust while your entire navy won a few 100v1 sea battles

Huh, I learned something today Still: ... why do we not have borderless windowed as an option? I have to run the game in a smaller resolution than my monitor so that vital information isn't cropped off the screen

What ever happened to the game being able to run while not in focus? I have two monitors and it is very frustrating not to be able to do anything else on my second monitor while playing this game.

I mean with way the AI handles fleets, and how shore bombardment works not with my scenario lol I have given up hope for this campaign/game version.

I am austria fighting france in 1923, France has grouped their entire navy into a doomstack and sent it off the coast of southwest Africa for some reason I have BBs and CAs parked along France's Mediterranean holdings which are completley undefended, but nothing happens. Swapping to Invade mode does not seem to do anything. Can/will this get resolved at some point? Leaving all your ports completely undefended should not be okay in a war lol

I've played about 10 hours of the new version this is what stands out to me: Penetration seems bugged, it is far too hard to penetrate ships even when it should be easy looking at the pen vs effective armor. From 5km with 40 inches of pen vs 20 inches of armor and close to 90 degree angle, every single shot should penetrate or over penetrate. Somehow I am getting partials and ricochets for half my hits?? (Including to main belt!) This problem makes it critical to get the biggest gun possible, since weaker guns are essentially useless to anything with more than an inch or two of armor. They rarely penetrate and when they do they don't do enough damage. I should not need 15 inch guns to kill CLs. Another observation is that there is no consistency in the balance between different sizes of gun, 12 inch is still a magical sniper cannon with greatly improved accuracy. All the guns should work off of the same formula, and right now it does not seem that they do which makes no sense. Finally, making your barrels longer immediately destroys any hope of ever penetrating deck armor. Not in a realistic way, but in a completely contrived way that feels very artificial and is completely out of line with the increases to shell velocity. I'm glad we don't just make the longest gun barrels we can without thinking about it, but it's a bit bizarre how it works currently.