Eirchirfir
-
Posts
35 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Eirchirfir
-
-
4 hours ago, stew said:
Bugs: Nations seem to go to war even straight after selecting an option to pay them off the turn before. They also go to war the turn after peace was declared and a peace conference was finalised.
I also encontered this bug were wars just keep getting declared for no apperent reason. The olny war I got to chose if I wanted peace or war was a war with France which would have been an easy war if not for the constant flow of new nations joining or rejoining the war without even an option to say no to new wars. I whould still have been able to win that campaign but it whould not have been fun to deal with constant war on all sides.
So I started a new campaign to wipe the slate clean but the problem contuned to apper in regard to dipolmacy. This is a new campaign were all I did was to create a new campaign and go to politcs tab:
The only options for diplomacy is the increase relation for both Briten and Spain with all other options grayed out. I have tried to regain the diplomtic options but nothing has worked. Even reinstalling the game did not work.
So it seems like to fix the diplomacy problem were only a few diplomatic options are capebale of being chosen is to deleate all existing campaign saves and all options will return.
-
2 hours ago, Admiral Donuts said:
For a year the game acted like my fleet didn't exist. It did nothing. It projected no power.
It happens to me nearly every campaign, especially as Japan. No matter what I do I cannot engage an enemy fleet blockading me with vastly inferior numbers. It's one of those things that should have been corrected from the beginning.
What concerns me is how this is all going to translate to 1.10 when these bugs are not fixed, then we get a whole new set of them. They really need to hire a second programmer.
edit - It just hung up on Update Missions again. I'm done for the night. I'm seriously considering heading over to EU IV to see how they F-ed that up.
So during my Japan campaign did I also run it to getting blockaded by an inferior fow with one case when I was blockaded by Germany who hade fewer ships than I hade BB which was 16 BB at the time. What made it more iretating was that most of my 200+ ships were in Northeast Aisa but I got blockaded by a few DD.
When I got blockaded did I send out a task force to deal with the problem and the blockade was lifted without a battle.
This might mean that a there needs to be a task force in the sea region to aviod blockades from inferior enemies.
-
1
-
-
In my Japanense campaign which currently is on year 1934 and I am the most andvanced navy in the world with USA being in seconed place. I have already taken every port I can from the US but keep getting into wars due to the US parking their navy on the west coast and sending ship through the panama cannel which I own leading to tenstion being generated.
This lead to another war with the US. In response so did I send a task force consisting of 2 BB armed with 4x4 400mm guns and radar with an escort of 1 CA and 4 DD to help my submarines with clearing the west coast of American ships.
I came into contact with an enemy task force of CA, CL and DD as I have taken all American BB in the last war. During the process of sinking the enemy task force so did I spot this relic:
This is a campaign start CL which was designed by the AI in the start of campaign generation which means 1886 in this case. I do not know how it survived for all these years but it did not survive this battle, but this brings me to the point that I have not seen the AI srcapped a single ship during the 1.09 uppdate. I have notice the AI send some task forces into ports but they have yet to scrapped any outdated ships which take up crew which could be used for better designs in this case.
-
11 minutes ago, Lima said:
I can't take Tsingtau (Kiautschou Bay province) from Germany
I have also notice that you can not take Tsingtau but it is not the only port that can not be taken.
Both Fort Bayard (Kwang-Chou-Wan province) and Perth/Darwin (Western Australia province) can also not be taken.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, admiralsnackbar said:
is there any way to reduce relations with a particular country after said relations go above like 50? since the fleet presence ceases to deteriorate relations.
Unresticted submarine warfare is a sulution if you are in another war so that the submarines try to sink enemy convoyes.
-
So I just fought a battle and noticed that two CL shared the same name.
I do think I know what might have happed to cause two diffrent ships to share the same name.
1. The first thing that happed was a new CL-class was designed named Oryol-Class.
2. Then a new ship of the priveuse class of CL was laid down with the name Oryol.
3. After that the first of the Oryol-Class CL was laid down which whould have been given the name of the class which whould have been Oryol.
4. The russian navy now have two diffrent CLs with the same name.
This is the most likey thing which caused the ships to end up with the same name. Yet it mattered little as both ship whould be sunk in the battle with the rest of the task force.
Whatever caused the cruisers to have the same name so is it still better then nations running out of names and just giving random numbers to their ship for names.
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, DieselPower said:
Then when finally moving the surviving ships back to port, they are forced into a port strike mission...when they have no ammo! So now, we're back to giving away VP's when forced into a battle we don't want with damaged ships.
So this is intressting as I have encontered an enemy task force without ammo after being hit a lot by my submarines. I will note that the enemy taskforce still hade some ammo on DDs and torpedo armed ships with 1 torpedo per ship. There do seems to be a lot of problems when any task force gets hit by submarine currently.
-
25 minutes ago, Admiral Donuts said:
A quick update, I had to fight that battle 3 times each time failing and having to dump the game from task manager. The 4th I noticed after deciding to auto resolve it and move on, that my entire force were all reinforcements (R). I don't know if that matters, but I thought I would toss it in there to help out.
It has been some time seens I have encotered this bug as it is rare.
The reason that you could not fight the battle was because your entire force was in (R) state.
There most be at least 1 ship which is not in the (R) state to fight battles manuely. If the entire force is in the (R) state then the game get stuck trying to load none (R) state ships which does not exist in the battle so it searches for somehing which does in this case not exist.
To get around this bug is simpely to use auto-resolve which you did or ingonre the mission if possbile.
-
1
-
-
21 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:
There are remaining issues with VP, known, that we will either fix with a small update or in the next major update.
As always, it will help to use the in-game report when you notice something not working right for VP.
So I have enconterd the free VP bug in my current campaign which is well repported and I have also repported in a earlier campaign. I will instead try to give context in the situation it ouccered under.
To start with the Russians are haveing a bad time with 7 diffrent wars at the same time and also has the smallest navy due to severe losses in their constant state of war.
We can also see that there are war going on that is independent from the Russian wars so the world is caotic.
When we look at the world map allow us to see that there are currently no missions left to do and there are only 1BB, 1 CA and 1 CL of the russian navy in the Northeast Asia. It also show the current VP standing in each war I am fighting and that there are no current blockades I am involed with.
So if every thing works as intended so will the VP stay the same after I hit next turn but it did not stay the same. During April 1903 I hade 27,774 VP vs Russias 335 VP became 27,774 VP for me and 585 VP for Russia during May 1903. My VP stayed the same (27,774-27,774=0) and Russias VP changed by 250 VP (585-335=250).
To explane the change in fleets so can I say I hade a task force return for repair and the russian fleet ran into the chinse doomstak. There also did not generate any missions due to the russian/chinse battle so no other reason for VP gain.
At futher observation of the to diffrent turns also shows how random it can be as the VP in the German and Frence war has also changed during the diffrent turns but I was the one gaining from it. In the Frence war my VP went from 81,463 VP to 81,713 VP so a change of 250 VP (81,713-81,463=250) and the Frence stayed the same (331-331=0). For the German war is the same story with my VP going from 26,479 VP to 26,729 VP with the 250 VP change (26,729-26,479=250) and the German staying the same (80-80=0).
Even the alliance war screens VP changed for some reason to diffrent numbers with me gaining 2,000 VP (323,118-321,118=2,000) and German/Frence alliance gaining 2,750 VP (122,693-119,943=2,750). The fact that the alliance VP gains are can be divided by 250 (2,000/250=8 and 2,750/250=250) is intressting but not sure of what to make of it.
-
So I am fighting France for control of the southeast aisa region and got into a battle with the frence doomstak which resultet in this:
Considering this is 2/3 of the frence fleet which have just been sunk makes the amount of VP gain from this battle alone seam fair due to how badly this is for a setback for the Frence navy.
The only surving ships of this battle is 5 CL and 8 TB so the frence doomstak hade 135 ships vs my 14 ships and my 7 CL controled by the AI did not try to fight so it was fought by my CAs and BBs. My damage control on Musashi prove to be good to make sure the ship did not burn down during the heavy concetration of the frence firepower.
-
1
-
-
16 minutes ago, PainKiller said:
Am i supposed to get this much VP? Is this intended? The patch before this, 15 ships sunk would have been around 300 VP
VP gain seams to change depending on how many ships each side has active so if the 15 ships sunk is a sizeball amount of the american fleet then it whould give a lot of VP for sinking them.
-
18 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:
Ignored Optional Missions where you defend your transports or a blockade of the enemy against your home provinces, will grant VP to your enemy. Are you sure, and other who complain so much, that these points are not derived from one of the above reasons?
It is not related to ignoring convoy defence and being blockaded as as one time I encontered the enemy free VP gain playing as Japan vs Russia, I hade cleared north- and southeast Asia of russians ships so no missions were generating and I was under no blockade but Russia still got 250VP/turn.
To make it even more clear there is a bug in the same campaign during the early war I was blockade by first China then Russia and I was the one gaining 250VP/turn from being blockade. I was geting the VP which the AI were suppost to get per turn during the short blockades.
When someone gives a number about how much the enemy is getting per turn with this bug it is always 250VP/turn. If it hade to do with missing convoy defence missions then the number should wary each turn depending on the amount of transports lost but it is a constant number. The 250VP/turn is also the same amount of VP you would get if you were blockading someone. Most players who are reporting an issue with the free 250VP/turn is not being blockaded or might be blockade and be the ones getting the 250VP/turn.
It seams clear by the amount of players who have reported the same core issue that there is an issue with free VP gain. It is made worse by the fact that it happens randomly and also seams like a coin flip about who will benefit from the issue between the AI and player.
-
2
-
-
So I just got the new building new ships freeze. I got the option to ask for a peace deal with China the preivuse turn which I choose to contune the war. The message about the war with China contuning which means the turn is done loading and then shown the building new ships in the center of the screen again. The AI has even done their events.
If you look at the notefication feed then you can see that both United States and the Spainsh Empire has reacted to events so the building new ships loading part should not be shown again.
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, Admiral Donuts said:
When I beat the Chinese with Japan, it always offers me either Formosa or Mongolia as optional territorial grabs. Do you mean Manchuria?
Manchuria is a province which is used to build ships in two ports and so can not currently be taken.
We are also dealing with Qing china which is in control of mongolia during this time so it can be taken in a peace deal.
-
So I think I found the most harmless BB ever:
I have no ideas why the BB lacks guns or funnels. This was only 1 of 7 BB which looked like this. The rest were fine and looked like this:
-
2
-
-
48 minutes ago, Schmitty21 said:
Don't you get points for controlling areas too?
I do not think so, but I was blockaded at the time I got the 250 VP/turn so I was for sure not in controll of the sea region at the time. It also seams to contiune after the blockades are lifted.
-
12 minutes ago, Lima said:
@Nick Thomadis Can you please explain why I get these +250 VP every turn? I get them from every country, even Japan, which has just declared war on me.
The 250 VP is the amout you whould get if you were blockading a nation but it seams to be buggy right now.
It seams to sometimes just be given to one side during a conflict without any blockades and in an extreme case were I got the +250VP per turn when I was blockaded by China and Russia, if it hade ben working as intended it would have been the chinese and russians which sould have gotten the VP.
-
2
-
-
34 minutes ago, Admiral Donuts said:
The government keeps begging me to end the war because does not go well.
That were things gets complecated because the tally did not reset after a previuse war. Because the nations which were on the side you currently is on in the tally did so badly that your goverment is reacting to that war which you might not have hade anything to do with. You have been left with a mess caused by the previuse nation.
So your goverment is reacting to both tallies on both right and left but as you are winnig on one and losing on another makes the goverment reacte to the greater VP diffrence which is to the tally in which you are lossing as it currently stand. You have to make up that 50k VP diffrence to get the goverment to stop thinking it is lossing a war in which you are winning.
A thing which should be done is to repport the issue with the ingame bug-repporting system to let the devs know there is an issue with VP tally discrepencys which can make winnig war seams like lossing war to the goverment of your nation.
-
5 hours ago, Admiral Donuts said:
I began to notice tonight that the weather in battles is beginning to match what's shown on the screen. That's a great improvement for the quality of the game in my opinion.
I've been facing several enemies now for 10 years. Beaten 2 of them down. The rest are in a bunch of alliance with the Chinese.
Individually, I have a huge VP total to their next to none. But on the whole, I'm losing the war and badly. Why is that? What have I been missing?
edit - more specifically...
My victory point tally on the right screen is 25,368 versus their combined 346.
My victory point tally on the left screen is 155,361 vs their 208,309.
I've never understood why there would be such a disparity between the two totals. Clearly the ones on the right screen are either incorrect, or should be ignored. Their fleets have taken massive damage. They've lost tons more ships than I have - I have lost a total of 5 ships, 4 of them DDs and 1 CA, in 10 years of war. They have lost much more than that simply from the minefields at the Panama Canal. What's more, their losses in battle can only be described as critical.
And yet...
You should not trust the VP tally on the left. It keeps all VP from prior wars. So if you gets put on the side which has lost the previuse war then it will start with the VP total of that war and all other wars that have shown up on the left VP tally. The VP tally on the left can even show a diffrent war which you are not involeved with.
The tallies on the right is only for the current wars you are fighting and so sould display VP correctly as it sould affect you during these war and will be the one that affect the peace deals with diffrent nations.
-
53 minutes ago, kineuhansen said:
please fix the vp bug and here is how you could do it bb=4000vp bc=3000 vp ca=2000 vp cl=1000vp dd=500 vp
VP gain from sinking ships seams to have a relation with the amount and which type of ship the enemy has. This can lead to situations were if the enemy has 2 TB and you sink one of them you could get over 1000+ VP for it. If the enemy has over 20 BB and you sink on then you are not going to get a lot of VP.
The VP system is dynamic and will change so if you do not get a lot of VP then sink more warships until their fleet is almost completly sunk and they you will get a lot of VP.
-
1
-
-
There seams to exist a bug were changes in divisions (detacing/merging) can cause ships to be stuck at 0 knots. It mostly seams to affect damaged ships which are detached form the division. Most changes with divisions in battle should work fine but it could be something to be mindfull about.
-
5 minutes ago, Lima said:
I am the USA, fought with Japan. I finally managed to bring the game to a peace agreement.
When offering peace, I chose "Fight to the end" option, however, peace was still concluded. I was not offered any territories (that is very bad for the US).
Japan currently only have 1 provence which is japan it self and the only province ships can be produced from so there were no territories which can be taken from them.
Okinawa could be split of from the province of japan so it can be taken so the port of Naha can be gained but that is if the devs chose to split the province in the first place.
-
2
-
-
8 minutes ago, The PC Collector said:
Don't forget that this is a game, and as a game, it's purpose is being entertaining. Without absolutely any acritude, if you legit find fun having an endless chase on every single engagement, I'm honestly happy for you. But for most of the playerbase, that is an annoyance at best, and judging by the reaction to my posts, I'd say that is majoritarily considered an very serious issue which completely cripples the gameplay to the point of making the game not worth playing. And as such, it should be adressed ASAP.
Are you using ships with torpedos?
From what I have seen so does it seams that the AI is super scared of torpedos and will avoid battle if it does not have equile or greater numbers of torpedos than you do. This has I been able to observe in earlier versions of the game also so it is not new.
If the AI has a bounch of torpedos and your ship do not then they do seams to be overconfendent and try to get into torpedo range as fast as possable to get to use torpedos.
Note that they will still run if there are to high of a chance that all their ship would be sunk before being able to launch torpedos which mostly affect ambush battles. (Due to DD and TB low survivebilety ageinst to many sec/casemate guns).
This has meant that I did not put torpedos on my pre-dreadnought ships which resulted in the Russian AI to fight me in battles with their ships which were overfilled with torpedos. In one of the battles I fought which were 2CA, 5CL vs. 2CA, 3CL the AI still tried to fight and lost all ships due to my ship having better crew and was gun/speed focused.
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, ZorinW said:
Btw, can anyone think of a single new feature that has been introduced in 1.09 that has anything to do with the formation keeping ability?
I can't and that has me very worried about the state of the overall coding of this game.
There were a problem fix in beta uppdate 2 which hade to do with formations.
On 10/14/2022 at 9:43 PM, Nick Thomadis said:Beta Update 2 (18/10/2022)
- Fixed problem in ship evasion which caused ships in line formation to stall often.
The problem it was trying to fix was that certain ship in formations hade their speed dropped to 0 and then regain its speed breaking formations. it is possable this that has caused the ship from behined in formation to try to overtake the ship in front in the formation which aslo breaks formations.
Nations Dissolving in Campaign
in General Discussions
Posted
I am currently playing in a 1890 Germany campaign were I have reached year 1902. 2 nations have collapsed as the curret state of the campaign with 1 nation returning from collapse in a much weaker state. The collapsed nations are Britian and Spain with both collapsing due to economy problems brought about by loss of transport in AI vs AI wars. Britian has return with 1 province and is very behind on tech.
The reason the transport losses were so high is due to their navy being unable to protect there homewaters by sending their fleet away (Britian) or their fleet were to weak (Spain). Both nations went into a war with France without being albe to protect their transports in their own sea region.
The AI do not know which sea regions which are inportent to its own survival, and will just move their fleet were whole fleet to a sea region bordering were the first nations that decleared war on them are, and ignore or undersupport all other regions, or move their fleet between regions constanly meaning no fleets are in the right place at the right time to defend transports. The AI still needs work here to make it more able to defend its transports which is needed for its own survival.
I might soon lose 2 more nations due to land conquest as their resorsers are depleted by constant waring and pressuer on all sides. These 2 nations are France and Sovjet Union (former Russia) which both thought that they could take on the entire world on their own and is losing badly. The AI is still to willing to start war with everone it can without thinking of the consecenses of their actions.
It looks like the AI is too much of a warhawk to avoid their own collapse in this version of the game.