Pappystein

Switch to metric in the settings (20" is 508mm) And see what the penetration is listed at then... Then if it is showing the same 214 but now in mm then it isn't "Super bullets are Bad" it is "UI has wrong math displayed" And that is an actual bug that should be reported. Because then, the lack of penetration would make more sense

Really needs to be a 4th option on these events.... "LET THEM" Does not cause an increase in Unrest and FINALLY lets you be the good guy without being ripped off!

Remember it isn't just How many inches, but what type of armor and more importantly the ANGLE of Impact. what you are experience is pretty much Real life of guns vs armor

Bug report: Winning war against Russia: VP are me (China) 1275, Russia 1276. Get an event that pops "The war is going badly do you wish to sue for peace" It was my only war at that time... And without transport loss or lost battles Russia some how got 250VP a turn for the four previous turns (they had no ships in the Pacific region at all to interdict me or for me to kill.) Russia had their entire fleet in the med fighting and LOOSING vs Austro-Hungary. It took me moving a fleet to the Red Sea for me to A) engage Russia, and B ) actually stop the 250pt per turn run that Russia was somehow doing against me with no ships near me. I had early Submarines, Russia doesn't even have Fire-control yet (at-least on their ships)

That is down to RNGus. You have to be pro-active in deploying fleets (don't keep them all in harbor) I found it easiest to trigger a war by setting a baby doomstack between Japan and Korea in the straights. I played Japan and was at war in 1890... For me China took longest on the post 1.09 beta time... 9 months. I have not tried US since 1.09 Release but I was able to get to war in that early 1891.

A bunch of ship updates were supposed to be part of 1.09... But the number of bugs with the map seems to have delayed it... They will come eventually

Only had time to play a year and a half on RP3 tonight. Not seeing AS BIG of doomstacks as before (I am playing Russia and so far only at war against Japan.) But I am seeing a startling increase in shipbuilding tempo others seem to be mentioning... Japan had 2 fleet units on the map last month I played. Both were 3BB, 0/1 BC,. and a bunch of Heavy cruisers (I have decimated their Light Cruiser and DD forces.) Japan has kept ports with minimal ships (one or 2) But that is what I do as well so I think it is "fine" No hangs or Locks so far (but those tend to happen when 2 3 or 4 wars are going on at once in my experience. I have seen no indications of anyone else being at war yet. SEEMS to be tweaks around convoys that have happened (or RNGus is just teasing me IDK) I have gotten the transports every convoy mission (Auto or manual battle.)

I assume this means the Suez, Panama and heck the Great Lake Locks in the US and Canada will or can all be unlocked over time coming in the next update? IE the next update will focus on Map + new ships that were defered from this update (no need to answer that just guessing)

Thanks, I never put a lot of armor on my tin can's turrets so I was un-aware that was the max armor that showed up! On a different note... I would like to thank the AI for being a Big Chicken! The cruisers + destroyers could have easily overwhelmed my Protected cruiser and Torpedo boat

Something else that is broken... thought the AI couldn't build invalid ships.... I do not know about you all but I would love a destroyer with 3.8" of armor! Shipdesigner maxes out at 1.5" on each entry

Ok this is part two of my notes I dropped the other day Formations/Station Keeping. Note it would be REAL nice to have a Formation editor and assign divisons to sector X Y or Z and they would then attempt to STAY there...... oh well Origional post: Roles and responsibilities in your fleet. So this is both a Bug-report and a way to explain to those that don’t understand what the various roles in your fleet of divisions are for. Formation Spacing: Loose: In the age before Radio (so start of our game) a Loose formation was a formation where the ships were at the maximum distance to clearly see the command flags being used to communicate orders. Standard: as above except it is now the range that hand held semaphore flags can be seen at with a viewing glass. Tight: This is the range that someone could YELL a command to others assuming ships were not moving… also semaphore flags can be see unaided at this distance. Formation shape: Line Astern, From the division flagship to the last ship in the division, they form a nearly straight line from bow to stern to bow… Abreast: With the flagship in the center, the remainder of the division is both left and right of the flagship. Typically the extra ships in the division are slightly aft of center of the division commander… However that changes with the advent of radar. Line Abreast formations seem to be the #1 trigger for collisions currently Surround: Missing from UAD. Division flagship is surrounded by the remainder of the division, One ship in front, one to each side and any left would be to the rear. Lead and trail ships would be loose and broadside ships would be standard distance away (to allow for maneuvering.) In terms of Spacing, the in game bugs only really occur with TIGHT formation spacing. Specifically large fast ships that start at TIGHT will often collide with each other right out of the gate. In terms of Formation Shape, Abreast seems to trigger the most collisions but I do not know if that is caused by pathfinding or by anti-collision AI not functioning as intended. Formation Roles: Battleline: This is the default player-controlled Formation. Depending on ship class it will start out either with standard or tight formation spacing and it will always be line astern in formation shape. No real bugs here other than all the collisions that happen… but that could be several issues of which I address below. SCOUT ROLE: The buggiest of all the Formation roles. The AI is supposed to scout ahead of the division you select it to scout for… then why are the scouts behind the division line of travel and going the WRONG WAY? Scout role SHOULD, be in a unit faster than the division it is scouting for (ideally) and should always attempt to be in the front 90 degree arc (45 degrees each side of the line of travel) of the division it is scouting for. Obviously this won’t be the case if the “commanding” division is violently moving but that should be the first goal. ONCE a scout force detects the enemy forces it should maintain contact at maximum visual range and not engage unless ordered to do so (a weapons tight button would be nice in conjunction with the scout role) Or if another enemy surprises (pop up target that was not detected earlier in weapon range) SCREEN role: Not a Huge amount better than the Scout Role, the Screen role has a lot of bugs. Priority of screen role should be 1. 1 Stay between protected (screened) division and any known enemy contacts. With RDF and or Radar this should be automatic 2. 2 Surround the screened division if no targets are discovered (prioritize Front, Side THEN back) 3. 3 Engage any targets away from your protected division… CHASE any targets between you and your protected division (IE shrink protected zone to stop enemies Currently the Screen does none of these well. It is probably best at the first half of priority 3. It is the worst at Both 1 and 2 (equally bad) FOLLOW Role: Ships follow the division they are tasked with following. Bugs out quickly if the formation they are to follow is going a different direction than the Division assigned the Follow role. Also bugs out if you change formation type at the same time as you assign the follow role (eg from Line abreast to line astern)

well may be an overstatement in my opinion. Rather I would say it works better than MOST games of this type but no where near GOOD. That being said, there should be a technology well after many of the advanced radio functions (Forward Observer) A ship/division in the SCOUT role that is closer to the target than the division they are scouting for give a +10% hit chance ONLY for canceling out negative modifiers due to weather and self motion.

I have the same complaint and several people stated that it was "boring" to sink the convoy ships thus we can't. To me that is a poor design choice given the Convoy ships are the LIFEBLOOD of the enemy

So as you can see CL Wels and CL Ennis are both stuck on each other with Avoid ship function on. Only way to fix is to remove one from the formation and shut off avoid on the formation. I have only seen this happen to ships in the same division and only after I have turned the core "player controlled" division more than 90 degrees to intercept a new target.

So RP2 seems to fix MOST of the end of turn game locks... some of those locks it does not clear can be solved by ALT-Tabbing out and back into the game (wait 10 minutes, Alt tab out do something for 2 minutes alt tab back in and the turn finishes) But this Bug is starting to DRIVE ME CRAZY This was a valid ship before refit... now it isn't? If I remove the offending barbette and replace it the game goes along fine... until the NEXT refit... Happens to me on almost every hull form where I can install barbettes to raise the cannons

I mean it worked for division lead ships in 1.08... just the remainder of the division would plow into your flagship. And it really seems that the issue wasn't the Auto-Avoid on it's own but the rest of the stationkeeping mechanics... SHRUG Well I mean excluding the fact that Auto-avoid would stop your flagship AND the ship colliding into you if you have specific vectors...

Then you have been lucky. Most of that SEEMS to have been fixed in the past couple releases but my not finished document on the roles these ships are not doing correctly (screen, Scout) etc will point out a bunch of problems... sadly RL is keeping me from putting it together ATM

TYPICALLY but not always you are adding bigger shell and bigger powder (thus heavier) I think a prefect example of this is the Italian Dreadnoughts that were upgraded for WWII. they were upgraded from 12, to 12.6" but the same barrel length (thus the caliber of the barrel was actually reduced since the diameter of the shell was increased without lengthening the barrel) And the rate of fire went DOWN. Bigger shell Bigger powder... slower rate of fire.

This is exactly why I point it out as a bug. It SHOULDN'T be ship size affect abilities to see others... rather it should be ship Height (which is why the Cage masts are pretty OP...) HOWEVER I think the player needs to be forced to switch to something else (Tripod, Pagoda, whatever) to utilize the bigger/better Rangefinders just like IRL. that is the reason the US switched from the Cage mast to the Tripods and then the Giant towers...to support the mass of the improved gunfire rangefinders/target measuring devices. Also While cage masts are more stable when damaged than other tower types, they are quicker to absolutly fail... It does not seem that is modeled either (eg 1 5" hit on a cage mast might as well be called NO DAMAGE so no penalties should be applied to the part... but a bunch of hits and the cagemast should have greater penalties than other forms of towers. Just my 2 cents on that sidebar-subject

I can agree on this HOWEVER I *assumed* that the devs wanted us to sink our own ships (Convoys did scatter IRL and they somewhat try to do so in game as well) Hence wording it the way I did. Both of these together are kinda the same subject so: Yes the game uses that mechanic but that isn't how spotting works IRL. The Big ships have the same chance to see the smaller ships when the smaller ships first crest/cross the visual horizon. It is only when the small ship is CLOSER to you than the visual horizon that the way the game dev have this mechanic setup makes sense. And yes our sailors should be able to tell us something more precise than a 45 degree arc of direction. Thank you! I learned something new today!

Actually Small Dreadnought is not meant for that. Rather your Semi dreadnought hulls are the Battleship hulls that allow for Battleship caliber wing turrets. EG the Semi-Dreadnought Hull Of course I run it as a straight dreadnought but whatever

Going to cover several points here: But before I do, I want to thank the dev team for how they seem to be cranking out updates that hopefully address serious and powerful bugs almost daily! Thanks, team! I want to preface what I am about to say by stating I have been a beta tester (both paid and unpaid) for more than 25 years and have beta-tested many of the early PC games in this genre (Patches for Great Naval Battles of the North Atlantic, and actual game for GNB-II & GNB-III.) I also played an active part in developing the premier Naval strategy game of the 1990s to the 2000s (Computer Harpoon 3.) The point of this "bragging?" I know testing + Development cycles and the software industry better than the average gamer. I am NOT associated with Game-labs other than having purchased this game. So please bear that in mind when I say what I am about to say So, there are several essential to solve bugs that still need to be addressed in this Release candidate. Mostly those bugs revolve around Victory conditions, Convoys, and the ship designer. Yet in forums and discord, everyone wants to talk about "you didn't put ship hull X or Y in" yet. I get it. I, too, like historical things, but this game is an AB-historical game. If this were a historical game, then you would ONLY get the exact ships as they were built, and you wouldn't be able to modify or tweak them. That is what the "Great Naval Battles" series by Strategic Simulations was... it was nowhere near as fun as this game can be... As playtesters lets focus on REAL BUGS and not "but I don't have X fluff feature yet." Having a US standard class BB hull, or HMS Vanguard's hull, would be a huge boon; I get it and agree. But currently, there are things orders of a magnitude more important to talk about with this game. Sorry if that sounds harsh fellow players/testers... but the reality is this game is a very good game with some minor but severe issues and that is where the focus should be currently. Once the serious issues are addressed, then the fluff should be our focus. Here is my list of bugs (Labeled as RC1 for Beta 109 or 108 for the current release AND Beta 109RC1) NOTE: I use the campaign almost exclusively for testing, so I am not covering tutorials or simple battles/custom battles. TIME COMPRESSION: The number one Bug/error/bad decision, in my opinion: The point of the step down from 30 to 10 to 5 to x is all too conservative, meaning instead of playing the game, I crank the volume, get up and make food or something. The trigger points as you close with the enemy need to be MUCH CLOSER for each time compression step. This is a V1.08 and still in RC1 Convoy battle (any type): 108 and RC1 Once escorts are destroyed, battle is over PERIOD. THIS IS A HUGE BUG No victory points for sunk transports when the above happens (The escorts were between you and them) even if you sink most of the transports to the goal (50% 100% seem to be the goals I have seen only) but do not meet your goal and the escorts are sunk no matter the victory points you LOOSE SOLUTION: Do not end the battle when all escorts are destroyed... instead end when all ships are sunk or the player hits the END BATTLE button only. Maybe that should be "include transports as actual combatants." On the positive I have been having fun with the "Battlecruiser to the rescue" Convoy missions. But the above errors/issues remain. Shipbuilding: (108 but improved in RC1 but not perfect yet) After unlocking Dreadnought BB, AI should no longer make non-dreadnought ships (ships with many different calibers of guns basically) 1 Primary caliber for the main and two secondary calibers ONLY. A latter tech point could add a 3rd caliber for AA weapons. Casemates blocking items on the deck above (RC1, but it was rare in 108, too) Casemate models seem to have gotten larger, causing this (supposition) "Invalid build" on refit. It happened in 108 but is worse in RC1. You build a ship, and it is legal... save it; when new tech comes along later you plan a refit and your Barbette is now RED, and you get the message "invalid location,” "Part too far from original location," or "Poor weapon arc" Note I used Barbette as the example here because that is the most common trigger, but I have seen towers, smokestacks, and turrets on deck trigger the same kind of error messages Destroyer size in the campaign. Early on, when you unlock Destroyers, they are 1100tons... then you are restricted to 850/900 tons? It seems a simple fix in the tech tree is in order here Large ticket items (specifically cannons) are automatically updated on a refit to the latest tech. This is a colossal mistake, instead, it should work like Armor, torpedo protection, and the like where you have to CHOOSE to upgrade it. This can trigger the Invalid Build refit error referenced above, where your ship gets caught in a loop, and you can't refit it to a new standard and have to spend months/years with a substandard hull while you await a replacement ship. Several hull forms need TLC currently but given updates to those seem to be pushed to the next release, I won't belabor the point further right now except to suggest to all players that if you can't place an Item on a ship hull where it SHOULD go then report a bug while in shipbuilder I guess. Ship formation (in battles) Covering this before Battles because, in many ways, it is CRITICAL to how both the AI and the player battle each other. (108 and RC1 are the same) None of the assigned roles except battle-line and follow do as the tooltips suggest they should do. I will cover the parts in a couple of additional posts later (as this is getting long already) Battles: 108 + RC1 Doomfleet stacks are still a thing . Bad AI for putting all of your ships from all of your oceans into one extensive fleet to crush us! AI is still a Big chicken and won't attack in manual battles most of the time. Even when the AI on paper has overwhelming superiority. AI will almost always spot you before you spot them. AI almost always gets the first shots of the battle. Without ESM/RDF or Radar, it is nearly impossible to find ships at any seriously long distance (more than 10x time multiplier away). Need to be able to see smoke from vessels if they are coal burners on the skyline. You really shouldn't see smoke from Oil Burner II and above tech (or Gas Turbine + Oil I) We need a visual "estimated speed" once a ship has been identified (our gunners know this information, why don't we?) This prevents overshoot/undershoot by not enough or too much speed. No tool tips in open water (eg on the various range bands) can cause player to fail to click on their target or point of maneuver and in a big battle with the doomfleets this is life or death! Keep tooltips to those areas we have buttons and no where else please! World map: RC1 It was mentioned that the maps are still not final... so much of the next points about things on the map may not be solvable until the map is finalized Many close ports interfere with each other (you send ships to one port (only) and they end up in the sister port... you can't move ships back and forth between the ports because the computer thinks you are not moving at all Battle menu on the top left (where it shows the sides fighting a war) should only focus on wars the Player themselves are involved in (to make things easier to see/figure-out.) Mines: RC1 Damage factor seems to be consistent with historical mine damage. Great job Minesweaping seems to not have much/any effect Minefields are often well beyond the size and shape they are portrayed to be. This leads to heavy mine damage when a task force shouldn't intersect a mine field at all. this is a serious issue. End of turn: RC1 Still getting the "building new ships" crash. It does ***SEEM*** to happen when there are 2 wars going on that The PC player is not a part of (if that is of any help, I know it is a dubious observation) RC1 it is less often, or latter in the game. But still there. ALT-Tabbing at this point for any reason can also cause the game to hang/crash. I know I have not covered every bug and issue... I know I have included one "feature request" in the Battle section and I know there are two change the UI to do X mentions in there. But for the most part I think this is a list of the major issues currently facing us, the player in the game.

Quad Channel i9 9900x with RTX2080 64GB here. And I let the game go on a hang last night... This morning it was still hung with no other programs running (just my AV software, the game STEAM and the NVidia experience.

I have found shutting my computer off reduces the lock on Building ships. IE I can get about 3 or 4 turns in before the lockup re-appears. I am guessing there is something left in memory that isn't cleared out by default data trash cleaners? But that is Just a guess.

I think you are mixing up two issues here. Station keeping, and the Speed issue. The speed issue, a specific issue in the general stationkeeping woes, was caused by the lead ship slowing down to follow new orders. Other ships in formation wouldn't slow down as well and would ram the ship in front of them almost always. THAT has been fixed. Now the general station keeping AI is still in need of major TLC (as is the Scouting AI... never seen scouts ALWAYS behind the main force prior to this game ) AI Issues in order of severity (my opinion obviously) Fear factor. How quickly the Op4 tries to turn and run Needs to be turned down signficantly Scout Role: Need to LEAD the fleet, not be behind it On sighting of enemy, should turn and attempt to circle at max visual range the enemy target and on each new enemy sighting should alter course as needed to keep in sight but at max range. BOL launch torps even if near max range near 0% hit chance This should be a switchable option for the player and ON for the AI Should not attempt to close to best weapon range. Station Keeping. Ships should individually follow "other ship avoidance" Current this seems to only be enforced on the lead ship As needed squadrons should speed up or slow down to maintain position in regards to the Fleet flagship Screening forces should be AHEAD and to the sides of the Fleet Flagship not BEHIND and to the sides Only if there is one squadron screening a target should the squadron be split arround the target. 2 Squadrons would be "front arc, Rear arch" Three would be Front Left Arc, Front Right Arc Rear Arc 4 would be the four quadrants etc... Units should not inter-mix with units of other friendly squadrons. EG if two squadrons are screening the same target they should form up as a squadron on either side of the target... not each split apart and colliding with each other A station keeping "formation editor" would be a welcome inclusion but I fear we are too far down the pipe for that. I really miss the Formation editor from Harpoon2&3 and Command Ship Building: AI needs to stop building pre-dreadnought ships after Dreadnoughts are unlocked 1x main caliber 2x secondary calibers max +1x Torpedo caliber if so fitted. 7.5" and up Need to be considered MAin gun calibers for BB/BC 7.4" and lower are 2ndary (11-7 MAin for Heavy cruisers 6.9-1 Secondary) 7.9-4.0 main for Light Cruisers, 3.9 and under secondary...