kjg000

Just a reminder, my understanding of Tsushima is that the Russian ships were effectively floating bombs, having stored coal on deck for much of their journey. This meant that on the day coal dust was filling every nook and cranny. So perhaps not the best battle to base the values on? ( this from a player often guilty of Grand Larceny; Warship :-} )

I think setting the expected date will only prevent the tech from being allocated in the game setup phase. I also set the difficulty to 999 (AKA a big number) in all entries; # $techType_name_submarine_hull,submarine_hull,,,,,,,,,,,, submarine_hull_1,submarine_hull,,$technology_name_submarine_hull_1,1999,,999,unlock(sub_ssc_1),,sub_ssc_1,$technology_desc_submarine_hull_1,"Latest technology allows the building of SSC class submarine up to 400 tons displacement with 2 tubes, 4 torpedoes",, ... # $techType_name_submarine_hull,submarine_hull,,,,,,,,,,,, submarine_hull_1,submarine_hull,,$technology_name_submarine_hull_1,1999,,999,unlock(sub_ssc_1),,sub_ssc_1,$technology_desc_submarine_hull_1,"Latest technology allows the building of SSC class submarine up to 400 tons displacement with 2 tubes, 4 torpedoes",, ... But # $techType_name_sub_surv,sub_surv,,,,,,,,,,,, need not be edited. You will just end up with a load of useless techs. and edit the initial save file to reduce the research rate of the sub techs for all players!. "techMods":[ {"Key":"submarine_exp","Value":1.0}, --> {"Key":"submarine_exp","Value":0.000001}, {"Key":"submarine_hull","Value":1.0}, --> {"Key":"submarine_exp","Value":0.000001}, {"Key":"sub_surv","Value":1.0}, --> {"Key":"submarine_exp","Value":0.000001}, OK, so maybe 0.01 would do! A bit of a belt and braces approach, but if you only edit the dates the techs will still be researched in game and if you only change the difficulty or the (save file) research rate, then the techs can be discovered in the setup phase. However, just editing the date and difficulty will at worst delay subs until late game when they will be very weak and removes the need to edit the save file.

Not what I was asking, but kinda implies the answer. Thanks anyway.

perfectly understandable, just thought I'd ask. Get and stay well!

I use UABEAvalonia which I got from GitHub (I think ).

Sorry, with this site I just get a blank screen using Firefox and it won't even deal with any secure browsers. Any other options?

Looks like a great mod! however I have problems with using Nexus, 240+ "Legitimate Interest" partners seems excessive. Do you have any other download sites? If not that's fine, still looks like a great mod. FYI I'm also having problems with the NAR site. It won't accept any of my secure browsers and with Firefox, which they say they support, I just get a blank screen! C'est la vie.

Ah, yes. Sorry, I misunderstood your post. Thanks for the clarification. Also sorry. I haven't played for a while as I find the replay value low with fixed sequential campaigns. What I found was better in the Barbbary War DLC was that the intro was shorter and you started in the 'Fleet' screen, not a battle. No I don't think I ever mashed the spacebar, I mashed the Esc button apparently whith the same result. So I'll ammend my request, Can we get a single page 'tick and flick' / checkbox start page option please. Reasoning from my original post remains valid. Also; Dev's, Have you investigated the possibility of a package containing a Steam key at an extra price? Not an ideal solution but why let 'the perfect be the enemy of the practical'? Would I buy this? Depends on the price, depends on the direction development takes ;-}

Hey Skeksis I wouldn't describe it as a scam, but I originally bought Dreadnoughts on Xsolla and now of course, we have to play it on steam, however at least steam allows offline play. I'm also not sure Xsolla will be a firm base in the future. I understand that Valve have changed their policies which now prohibit Games Labs from offering as many Steam keys. Overall I'm not impressed with games that I have which started out as early access. I think only one that I have tried (Sprocket) has been a fully positive experiance. I feel the feedback I gave in Dreadnoughts was a complete waste of time and effort on my part, so I'm not keen to have that experiance again. Not that I'd expect GL to listen to what I suggest, but when many people ask for the same, or simmilar, things, we'd expect some kind of result or at least some feedback! GL now seem to prefer Discord as their primary forum. For my part I don't want yet another app and would rather use either this forum or Steam, although the latter would require me to register a community profile on Steam. Not sure about the emails, I don't think I registered. I do find it somewhat surreal that GL started a forum For UG:American Revolution then seem to have all but abandoned it.

So, looking at several online early reviews the game is deffinatley interesting. However, I would like to see a quick campaign start option, something along the lines of the DLC in Age of Sail (I think it was, one of the three campaigns anyway). This is especially important if you want better facilitate good feedback from your testers. I am sure that many players like the story mode start but I am equally sure many others are like me, we just want to get on with and enjoythe game. As EA testers are likely to be restarting a campaign often, and for many others, the story style start just becomes tedious and a barrier to enjoyment of the game. Full disclosure, I have no intention of buying while the game is on Xaolla or while the game is in early access, I made those mistakes with Dreadnoughts. However I am intending to buying on either steam or GoG, should it become a mature game. Also:- What are the modding plans for this game? As can be seen from many other games, including the Ultimate General/Admiral series, tacking on modding capabilities after development is well under way generally results in an inferior product. Yet modding is an excellent way of prolonging the lifespan, and thus sales, of a game. FYI I don't Discord

Hi I wonder if this type of problem is a Unity problem and nothing to do with Games Labs coding? I'm having problems with Grand Tactician: Civil War which are very similar to the problems we've had on UA:D. In particular It is often severly lagging with all system recources nearly idling except 5% of the cpu is maxed out (one logical processor, 1/2 of a core with 19.5 LP idling). Same with other Unity based games I have although the older games are less ambitious with their graphics than either GT:CW or UA:D and the problem is less pronounced.

Problematic at the very least and not practical in most cases. Say. for example, both mods change gun penertration values, how do you resolve the conflict? This is why you often can't combine mods even in profesional, well written mod managers.

Yes? A doable workarround, but not a solution to the problem. The entire rational for casements is that they do not interfere with turrets.

@Nick Thomadis YES !! This is the type of thing I feel I have been banging my head against the wall about. This goes directly to solving one of the problems that cause an otherwise brilliant game to get negative reviews, along the line of "I'd reccommend it BUT ...". The same logic should be applied accross the UI. For example Fleet losses and Research notifications. It would speed up the game and reduce these annoying start of turn intermable popups. Include a roll-over to display the details and your one big step towards revealing the true brilliance of this game.

Also, allow the player the ability to select the font size, select the delay time and make the popup textbox a dragable/resizable box with the ability to both resize the box and scroll text within the box. In 1.3.9.9 we had some ships with so many faults than many of the ship data were off the top and bottom of the screen, paying the price for a feature many don't want. If in doubt, make it an option. Heck,just make it an option anyway!

Hmm, I notice the Dev's are still 'Flat Earthers"!

Sorry, not looking good. I was (Joyfully) hoping that the long delay was a sign that the dev's would be through. I was wrong. I have designed 1 ship (BB) and fought a custom battle (1x BB.BC,CA,LC,DD each, I designed my BB). The battle took 5 minutes to load. The AI designs were fine (yea) but every one of my torpedo salvos launched fired at 180 deg from the target at empty water (no smoke, no ships), AI salvos were fine. I couldn't really evaluate formations as I had too few ships but I did notice that there is no pre-battle deployment phase so many players, myself included, have been desperatly asking for, even if it was merely assigning ships to divisions. The shipbuilding UI is still poor. Mirroring only works with simple, unrotated components. Important information is still hidden in long lists (ignoring a basic principle of UI design or even basic database design), no rollover for the data showing affecting factors presented for entries at the center top of the screen, which you would assume the Dev's thought were important. Some models are asymetric, Dual barbettes are one example, which prevents mirroring from working in tight spaces. When mirroring does work for rotated components the mirrored component is unrotated. It would seem the pleas of many, many players have simply fallen on deaf ears. New models for hulls and components are great, and much apreciated but I can't help feeling this is not the highest priority for making this a great and successful game at this time. I can only hope the devs release some comprehensive modding tools as this would enable the community to do their thing and turn this into an exceptional game, greatly enhancing sales as, after all, you need the base game to mod it! I'd like to see tool to import ship models from common file types, edit or creat countries, so for example, players could activate the ottoman empire/egypt/india/... as a player option. Sure it would use other countries ships, but it would at least be available. At least make it possible for the players to do the work themselves (Oh no BLASPHEMY! but more sales). Obviously I'd like to see the ability to turn off controversial features such as mines, subs and flaws (What MORE blasphemy). Still waiting for a 1900 campaign to load which I started about ten minutes befor logging on to this forum, currently up to May 1897 and I am not a fast typer. Oh wait "Click to Continue"! something like 35-40 minutes after launching the campaign just as I was about to sign off.

OK, for those who would like to see some auxillary vessels, introducing a kludge for ... the minetender! just add the following files to the 'parts' and 'technologies' entries in resources.assets using UABE or some such. parts ##,,hull,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,dd_ML_CHEATY,,hull,Minetender,,-1,-1,1,1,dd_s_hull,0.7,,,china,"type(dd), dd, mt, g1", "hsize(200), hull_form(45), stability(80), floatability(5), fire_ex(-20), endurance(70), spot(0), turn(90), vis(2100), beam(0), draught(0)",,,,0.4,1,2,200,250,,,,,,,,14,1,1,,14,,##,,tower_main,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,dd_tower_main_CHEATY_MS,,tower_main,Minetender,,0,0,,1,dd_s_tower_main,0.5,,tower_main,china,need(mt),"tower_main(1), tower_sec(1), funnel(1), torpedo(1), size(0), smoke(5), fcap(6)",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,270,216,, (add before ##,,END,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,") technologies add dd_ML_CHEATY to the unlock() line you want # $techType_name_hull_strength,hull_strength,,,,,,,,,,,,hull_strength_1,hull_strength,,$technology_name_hull_strength_1,1890,,42,"start, unlock(dd_ML_CHEATY;b_1_austria;b_1;b1_massena_var1;b1_massena_var2;b1_massena_var3;b1_brennus;b1_germany;b1_germanyexport;b_1_usa;b1_russiaold;ca_1;ca_1_small;ca_1_small_austria;ca_1_small_austria2;ca_1_friedrich;cl_1_medium;cl_1_medium_strbow;cl_1_rambow;cl_1_straightbow;cl_1_austrian;tb_lowbow;tb_highbow;tb_standard;ca_1_rambow_france;cl_1_medium_russia;b1_maine;b1_maine_varsides;b1_maine_varsmall;b1_maine_varsides;b1_maine_varsmall;ca_maine_varcoastal;ca_maine_varcoastal2;ca_maine_threemast;cl_maine_threemast;cl_1_rambow_early;cl_1_straightbow_early;ca_austria_monarch;ca_austria_monarch_small;ca_1_spain;cl_1_rambow_boat)",,,$technology_desc_hull_strength_1,"The ironclad era is superseded by a new class of warships. The latest developments bring new standards for Battleships, Armored Cruisers, Light Cruisers and Torpedo Boats.",, to enable the hull from 1890 OR add unlock(dd_ML_CHEATY) at another tech such as below to enable it when mines are researched. # $Ui_Constr_Mines,tactics_mines,,,,,,,,,,,, tactics_mines_1,tactics_mines,,$technology_name_tactics_mines_1,1890,,30,"start, minefieldmax(0), unlock(dd_ML_CHEATY)",,,$technology_desc_tactics_mines_1,Naval mines containing high explosives that can detonate upon impact is a cheap but very effective method to destroy enemy ships. *Enables Mine Sweeping / Mine Laying equipment that can be fitted to small military craft*,"Enables Mine Sweeping / Mine Laying equipment that can be fitted to small military craft, Minefields are generated during war but in a limited area around our ports", This will give you a DD hull from 1890, which never becomes obsolete, called 'Minetender' at the end of your hull list and a Main Tower called 'Mintender' at the end of the main tower list. Note that the tower serves as a main_tower, sec_tower, funnel and torpedo and is only availible to hulls with the attribute 'mt' (in this case this hull only), but it does need a gun (reccomend a 1.1"). The model is a generic dd hull scaled down with transport inspired specs. I strongly suggest you place it on 'LIMITED' or 'DEFEND' orders as soon as possible as these will die quickly in combat, as intended. Replace 'china' with the country of your choice but I do not reccoment leaving that field empty as the AI will not know what to do with these ships and may become confused. Obviously these wil then only be available to that country. Of course you can adjust the specs to your whim but as presented it is intended to allow a cheap mine defence for your harbours. I haven't yet looked for a way to stop allied neutrals from trying to buy these and again I do not reccomend selling them as the AI may become confused. I may also seek a way to mark them as non-combat vessels to the AI, like transports, to stop then being thrown into missions. Don't forget to backup, use at your own risk and don't bug the devs if it causes problems. This should be compatible with other mods.

Bored now.... OK, so a quick tip on modding the resource.assets file ;-} You can collect all of your NEW ENTRY mods at the end (or start) of the file before the ##,,END,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,," line. So for a hull entry, ##,,hull,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, bb_4_britain_MINE,,hull,N3/G3 MINE,,-1,-1,0.01,900,bismarck_hull_a,1.3,,,"britain, usa","type(bb), BB_British_N3, bb, g4, Small_Deck, Narrow_Deck, Nelson, Middle_Towers_Chance, var(nelson)","hsize(3000), hull_form(99), stability(99), floatability(99), endurance(99), spot(0), turn(42), vis(7900), beam(0), draught(0)",,,,0.155,1,3,38000,65000,19,,,,,,,30,3,6,,30,, will create a hull with new specs and using the german bismark Super Battleship hull scaled to be slightly smaller(1.4 -> 1.3). Changes in bold, just for demonstration purposes. ##,,hull,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, is required to ensure the relevant table is open. Remember to unlock the hull in the technologies file other wise it will not be visible (see below). The first entry must be unique (bb_4_britain_MINE). The hull is called N3/G3 MINE (does not need to be unique), can be used by britain and the usa, max weight is 65000 tons, it is limited to 19" guns and can do 30 knots before extra penalties. Note this hull will appear at the end of the shipyard hulls menu (after DD, TB) for britain and the usa and will use the structures for the british hull, which are defined in the param section shown in italics. It will use the selected countries guns, in this cas britian or usa. Entries are listed in the order they are loaded into the table so if you want this to be elsewhere on the list either: enter your changes at the start of the file, before the first ## entry (keeps all of your changes in one place) or place your entry in the relevent section where you want it to appear in the menu. (just your entry, no ## line and this means you will have to hunt for your entry if you want to edit it). (original specs for the N3/G3 hull are bb_4_britain,,hull,N3/G3 class,,-1,-1,0.01,900,dreadnought_hull_flat_b,1.49,,,britain,"type(bb), BB_British_N3, bb, g4, Small_Deck, Narrow_Deck, Nelson, Middle_Towers_Chance, var(nelson)","hsize(2000), hull_form(93), stability(85), floatability(80), endurance(70), spot(0), turn(42), vis(7900), beam(0), draught(0)",,,,0.155,1,3,38000,61000,18,,,,,,,22,3,6,,21.5,, ) To unlock in the technologies file # $techType_name_hull_strength,hull_strength,,,,,,,,,,,, hull_strength_2,hull_strength,,$technology_name_hull_strength_2,1891,,42,"hull(2.5), stat(hull_form;2.5), stat(endurance;2.5), unlock(b1_brennus;b_1_russia;bb_4_britain_MINE)",,,$technology_desc_hull_strength_2,"Materials with better strength-to-weight ratio can produce bigger hulls. *Hull weight -2.5%, Hull Form +2.5%, Endurance +2.5%*",, will unlock this hull when hull_strength_2 is researched. Again, remember this is just to show what is possible, nor what is recommended. Remember, backup backup backup, remove all extraneous formatting you might have introduced to make the file readable (including whitespace) and above all ... enjoy.

Just noticed a potential hitch, hopefully a one off. On restarting a campaign in which I have swapped AH and UK I am back in Jan 1890! not sure why but the game doesn't seemed to have made any updates to the savegame (save_0.bin) even though I habitually hit save before exiting and no errors were reported. Not sure if this is a problem with the vanilla game or with the (savegame) modded version as i haven't played for a while and this is the first time since coming back that I have tried to resume a campaign. I had noticed one other person mentioning something like this on steam but it doesn't seem to be widely reported.

If I understand your question correctly, you will need to edit one or more of the assets in the resources.assets file using something like UABE. To start with, open the file then search for technologies. ("View" then "Search by Name" or [Cntl-F] in UABE). Then "Export Dump", ensuring you have the correct entry selected. You will then need to load the exported file into a suitable editor, Notepad would work if you are desperate but NotePad++, amoungst others, is a much better option. You may need to reformat by selecting ONLY the last line and replace all \\r\\n with \r\n which will result in a much friendlier format. Ensure you have backed up any filed you are editing first as even slight errors may en up with a corrupted file. When finished, remove all extra formatting, includine extra spaces or line-feeds and replace the \r\n with \\r\\n ONLY within the range you reformatted. then maksure you have the correct entry selected, check again, then "Import Dump" and save the file to your working folder. Then copy the file to the appropriate game folder while the game is not running. i.e. 0 TextAsset Base 1 string m_Name = "technologies" DO NOT reformat this line or above. 1 string m_Script = "name,tech................................ ONLY reformat this whole line, it is a looong line and make sure you undo the formating before importing. ANY errors are on you! DO NOT report errors ingame to the Devs if you have modded the game (including editing save games)! You will need to understand the file format and may need to edit other files, such as Languages>English.lng (or whatever language file you are using) first. Note that the Language files, or any given file, may not always be available to edit. So... Backup, backup, backup, take responsibility for your own actions, otherwise ... have fun. EDIT Ahh, may hae read too much into your question ;-} in the converted savegame file "technologies" are the tech that you have researched and your current progress in the latest tech. "techmods" is the rate at wich you research technologies. So, more or less; {"Key":"engine_engine","Value":100.0}, will give you a new engine tech every turn, {"Key":"engine_engine","Value":0.01}, will research this tech at 100th of the normal rate. techs with an end option in the "technologies" section, i.e. {"name":"engine_engine_end","progress":35.0,"index":5}, also have an entry in the "techlevel" section i.e. "techLevel":{"engine_engine_end":5} and will keep adding a set value every time 100% is reached. This includes bonuses AND penalties. which is why setting the index value too high will enable superships which are impossibly heavy and/or costly. Techs without an end option (guns, cruisers, destroyers) simply stop researching.

OK, so I've tried swapping the Brits and the Ottomans and the Brits and AH, Both times editing all three variables, "ControllerPlayer", "Controller" and "ClaimPlayer" (where "ClaimPlayer" was the relevant player - not every province controlled is also claimed). So far no problems having played 10 to 20 turns each time. As mentioned in the original post this adds an interesting dimention of mixing things up and even allowing players to try out their favourite nations in varying locations. Ofcourse there is no reason to just swap two nations. Why not try swapping all of them (copy nation A to placeholder, Nation A to B, B to C ... I to H, H to Placeholder, even throw in a couple of neutrals if you like). Warning with neutrals, check to make sure whatever neutral you are swapping with has sufficient port capacity to build a worthwhile fleet, otherwise they will not be playable or be a challange to play against. You could take over the ports from several neutrals to make a playable faction though (untested).

Apologies! even though your post was time-stamped 2 hours earlier than my last login, it was not visible. I assume your account was awaiting approval. If by file converter you mean from the .bin format to the .json format and back, there is an app available on the games main menu. Look a the top right of the screen, to the left of the book like Help icon you will see what looks like a compass rose, thats it. Given its crypitic nature it is not suprising that many players miss it (or should that be most?). WARNING when converting from the .json format to the .bin format your .json file will be deleted, another eccentric choice by Games Labs. I reccomend making a copy of the .json file before and after making any edits so that you have a copy of both the original and a copy of your edits to fall back on. Also your edited .json file needs to be named save_0.bin to save_4.bin otherwise it will not be available to be loaded. If you named it save_0_trial_1.json for example you would end up with a file named save_0_trial_1.bin which would not appear in the "Continue Campaign" menu and so could not be tested. Another eccentric choice by Games Labs (wait, have I already said that? Its a well worn phrase!). Also, if the .json file won't convert it probably has an error in it. Check for incorrect syntax such as missing punctuation etc. The system will NOT give you any sort of error message other than refusing to convert the file. Have I mentioned Games Labs eccentric choices? For the purposes of this thread you do not need to format the single line presented after the conversion to a nicer human-friendly format (what was that about GL choices?). However if you want to do so, for error checking for example, search and replace all },{ with },\n{ (note direction of the backslash). This will give you a more friendly format to work with. No need to convert back once you are ready to save, the game will read the file despite the extra formatting. Should you ever get into resources.assets editing with something like UABE however, this will NOT be the case.

Sorry, one of us is not making themselves clear, probably me. I don't use Notepad the microsoft app included with windows, I use Notepad++, "a free and open-source text and source code editor for use with Microsoft Windows. It supports tabbed editing, which allows working with multiple open files in a single window. The product's name comes from the C postfix increment operator; it is sometimes referred to as npp or NPP" (wikipedia). It supports a plethora of languages including JSON, XML, HTML, Java, C, C++ and many, many more.

Hi All, haven't played for quite a while as I'm waiting for 1.4 before I re-evaluate the game. So no comment on the current state. However, I did get curious with a bit of "modding for simpletons" (i.e. me). I've just swapped China and the Ottomans quite simple really, start a new campaign (for simplicity, but you may be able to use an existing campaign) save and close to the main menu open file converter and convert your chosen save to a .json file. (back up the .json file first is wise) open in a text editor (like many I use Notepad++) Select your chosen swap victims (I have chosen the ottoman and china, MWAHAHAHAAAA) search for "ControllerPlayer":"ottoman" and replace all with "ControllerPlayer":"ottomanXXX" (ottomanXXX is just a placeholder) search for "ControllerPlayer":"china" and replace all with "ControllerPlayer":"ottoman" search for "ControllerPlayer":"ottomanXXX" and replace all with "ControllerPlayer":"china" do the same with "Controller":" PLAYER" where PLAYER = your chosen victims as above and also with "ClaimPlayer":"PLAYER" if desired (I THINK countries cannot surrender regions where they are the claim player) Save and convert back to .bin A bit of confusion while they sort out their fleets but presto switcho the chinese are now in the mediterainian and the ottomans are in South Asia. Not as good as making the Ottomans a playable faction but something to mix things up a bit. BTW be carefull, every comma etc has a meaning and adding or loosing any character can cause the file to fail. CAVEAT; i'm still on turn one and i didn't swap the claimplayer so I'm interested to see how this plays out and if it is really workable. Almost forgot - DON'T complain to the DEV's about files you have modded and use at your own risk ;-} Observation 1: It looks like if you don't set the "ClaimPlayer":"PLAYER variable, then an active player (in this case China) will actively try to reclaim their territory. The minor player (Ottomans) do not.) Also you may consider adjusting the "wealth": ,"wealthGrowth": and ,"wealthGrowthMul": variables for each of the affected countries. OK, I've played about 15 years from 1890. The swap seems to work fine, however I'd deffinately swap the "ClaimPlayer":"PLAYER variable as the Ottomans quickly fell to revolutions in the Chinese claim provinces. The chinese never had this problem, presumably as they are a major faction. The Ottomans have survived in the non-claim provinces they inherited without any revolutions. Other than that it made an interesting change in the game. When I get time I think I'll try changing two major factions next, say USA and Spain?