Eirchirfir
-
Posts
35 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Eirchirfir
-
-
I have also encountered the turret not rotating bug. It seams to be very common and effect the majority of guns in battle. It also happens fast as all turrets could rotate when fhighting one enemy ship and 75% of all guns could stop working when fhighting the next enemy. I have also notice that casemate guns do not rotate at all in battle making pre-dreadnought era even harder as most secendary guns are casemates which no longer works. I would say the gun rotationtion bug is a gamebreaking bug and should be fixed quickly.
-
4
-
-
1 hour ago, ZorinW said:
After the update submarines still do not generate any missions plus they don't add to the power projection.
Submarines are not meant to generate missions. They are meant to raid convoys and hurt large ships of screen in auto resolve battles or lay mines. This is stated in the update log about submarines and ASW.
On 10/14/2022 at 9:43 PM, Nick Thomadis said:Submarines & ASW: The technology tree is enriched with the submarines which you can fully use in the campaign map. ASW new techs will help in the countermeasures against submarines. Fleets with no ASW and light ship escorts will be very vulnerable against submarines.The submarines will only be playable on the campaign map and will execute autoresolved missions against convoys and enemy fleets.Special mine submarines could sink enemies with their mines without engaging them.
Whould it be better if submarines could generate battles: YES!
Whould it be better if we hade to hunt down enemy submarines with lighter ships in battles: YES!
This is not something the devs are trying or planing to implement right now as stated in the their 2022 Q&A.
Submarines are still useful as a supplament to surface fleets to convoy raid or as minelayers. Submarines can not win wars alone as the enemy will just mass build ships design to for ASW. This is what the allies did to counter the german U-boat fleat during WW2. This would not be possble if germany was able to maintain a surface force in the atlantic then it would increase the usefulness of the U-boats as the ASW forces of the allies would need to be protected agenst surface combatens.
The americans were able to use submarines to disrupt japanese shiping during WW2 and became a bigger threat as the japanese lost more warships due to american surface and air forces.
Submarines should not be the main focus of a navy and strategy but used with a strong surface presense becomse a great economical threat to the enemy.
-
1
-
-
29 minutes ago, Urst said:
We should be able to put 6" guns there. I want to make USS St. Louis (though she's a protected/heavy cruiser, you still can't put 6" guns into the casemates of any American heavy cruiser hulls in 1900 in the game).
Indead we should be able to use casemate main gun, the AI proves the hulls are able to mount main guns casemate. The only thing in the way of casemate main guns is that there is no option to use main gun casemate in the designer.
I was able to get 5 of the heavy cruiser with the main gun casemate and the 15,7cm (6,2inch) is labeled under casemate.
-
So I was playing a German 1920 campaign and I came arcoss this british heavy cruiser:
Is that a 15,7cm(6.2inch) casemate on a heavy cruiser. The main gun on the ship is 16,7cm (6,6inch) so it can not be a single main gun as it too whould be a 16,7cm (6,6inch) gun. The only thing now is to make sure the a casemate can be put in that locaktion of the ship which is hard to tell from this image as that part is under water.
Was able to get this image before the screen tored to black after winning the battle. In this image is is clear to see the 15,7cm(6,2inch) guns are casemate mounted in the front of the hull. I whent into the custom battle to check which hull where used to make this heavy cruiser.
The hull used to make the heavy cruiser with the casemate is armoured cruiser hull IV and it do have a point were it could mount a casemate in the front of the ship. Could not use a 15,2cm(6inch) casemate to show as casemate main guns does not exist in the current version of the game. How the AI was able to mount a main gun case mate is unknown. I am going to try to get a hold of one of this heavy cruiser in a peace deal if any of the heavy cruisers survive the war.
-
12 minutes ago, o Barão said:
If you had instead advocated for better AI task forces managements, or better, to implement mechanics to encourage split the forces, from both the AI and the player across the campaign map, that would sound a lot better.
Indead. This is baddly needed as I have NEVER seen the AI split a taskforce by its own will. The only time AI taskforces gets smaller is if ships needs repair or are sunk. Allowing the AI to split taskforces is the first step to make doomstacks rarer.
I would also try to have it so the AI will make taskforces around the same amount of tonnage as the average player taskforce. This tonnage amount could be greater if playing harder diffeculties. So let say the average amount of tonnage in a player taskforce is 30000t, then the AI will make taskforces around 30000t (Normal), 45000t (Hard) or 60000t (Legedary). Note that the AI should also try to at the same time as matching the players tonnage should it try to match divations from the average tonnage. As an example of this, let say the player has a lot of smaller taskforces with a few bigger once then the AI should aslo use a lot of smaller taskforces with a few bigger once. If the player is not deploying taskforces then the AI should try to match the average BB tongae with 1-2BB (Normal), 2-3BB (Hard) or 3-4BB (Legedary).
The calculations for average tonnage should be done after the player hit next turn but before AI movement and battle genration to allow the AI to react to player movment.
53 minutes ago, o Barão said:- Instead of having the need to create a power projection unbalance in a sea region to create a blockade, why don't we have individual port blockades?
- The enemy have multiple ports in a region.
- I could move a fleet to one of the ports to start the blockade.
- That port will immediately would be under blockade next turn if the enemy fail to challenge my sea control in the area.
- Now you and the AI already have a good reason to split forces.
- The port tonnage capacity value would influence the country GDP according to the total ports tonnage capacity value of that nation. This is an arcade solution to make things easier to understand for the player when reading the campaign map. As an example, I will use round values in the following example to make it easier to understand. A nation have a total 1.000.000 tons capacity from all the ports. If there is one port with 100.000 tons capacity, having that port under blockade, would influence the GDP of that country in 10%. Now the port tonnage is no more a value about how many ships you can have there, but is also a value to represent the economic power of that area. With this simple change, now we have valuable targets and second rate targets in the campaign map. Much more interesting and realistic, right?
This sounds like a good idea which I can support. It could also be intresting if a blockaded port can no longer repair ships due to bombarment from blockading fleet. It should create insentive to try and keep some ships active to insure that no port gets blockaded.
1 hour ago, o Barão said:-To create the need to protect and raid commerce routes far away.
- For the players that played "total war" games, this will be easy to understand.
- There are trade routes generated automatically, coming from the ports to friendly or neutral ports or the nation colony ports.
- This will be trade lines in the ocean map connecting both destinations. (each nation trade route, can have a different color to make it easier to see in the map)
- The trade route can be raided anywhere where it travels. As an example. Let's say you are playing with the English. You have colonies in India. You automatically have trade routes in the Indian Ocean coming to Europe all the way to England. The AI can dispatch small forces to raid your trade routes in the Indian Ocean region.
- If the fleet raiding a trade route is not defeated, it will sink some transports every few turns and will add a small GDP negative modifier to the country that owns that sea route.
- Now both you and the AI have another reason why to split forces. To protect and raid trades routes far away.
- This also have the side effect of creating the need to have cheap but with long range ships (light cruisers and heavy cruisers) to protect or raid trade routes far away from the home ports.
This is also a good idea. Currently the only way to passively raid convoys is to have good power projection at a sea region and have a port in the same sea region. Having a system like this whould be better. It could also be points on a trade route were a taskforce there whould be sufficent to blockade severale ports from the outside world. Points like this could be around Gibralter, Suez, Gothenburg and Bari were there are not a lot sea between diffrent landmasses.
1 hour ago, o Barão said:*Colony ports are all ports in a nation from a different world map region.
I whould say a colony port whould be a port not connected to a nations heartland by land so the brits whould hve problem if taskforces was able to get into the irish sea and strated raiding there.
-
1
-
38 minutes ago, ZorinW said:
Has anyone else noticed that the tech level of the AI makes impossible leaps?
I have my tech slider on 100% since day one and for like 20 years the AI struggles to be "Average" in terms of tech and out of the blue they are also "Very Advanced". That should not be possible.
I have seen AI having "Very Advanced" but it often happens after an AI nations collaps. A collapsed nation still count towards the "Average" tech level of every nation even if the collapsed nation no longer gain new tech.
It is very easy for an AI nation with tech from 1921 to be "Very Advanced" compared to a collapsed nation stuck at 1904.
The label "Very Advanced" can be missleading so it is better to try to lock at what tech the AI unlock each turn to see where they are tech wise.
If you have tech slider at 100% then most likely you whould be ahead of AI when it comes to tech no matter what even if the AI is "Very Advanced" as you should be more advanced.
-
3 hours ago, The PC Collector said:
I'm afraid that the AI crew pool black hole bug might be back... since I started my current war with Italy and France, neither of them are gaining any crew pool... and neither of them are building ships... Even more, France has only 5 ships and is building none... 800+ sailors per month and no crew pool being built.
I do not think the crew pool bug is back. I have seen AI nations lossing their crew pool and all ships during war. When the ability to lose crew is gone when the AI has no ships or during peace will result in the crew pool staring to regenerate and new ships being laid down.
The AI seems to have a hard time keeping crew around during war due to losses from players and other AI nations but will recover when they can no longer loss crew faster than they get new crew.
-
7 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:
Fixed major bug which caused the crew pool of AI to stall and eventually the AI to have no active ships left because it could not convert mothballed ships to active, even when they became fully crewed.
I went into a campaign fil were all AI nations hade lost their crew pool to see for my shef if it has been fixed. It does seem like it has been fixed as both France and Austra-Hungary are staring to recover crew. The brits has not seen a crew recovery yet but they are fhigting 2 wars so most the bug is most likely fixed.
-
I have been playing a German campaign from 1890 to now 1945. It is already desided so I am going to comment on things I found.
The campaign setting are: 1890, Normal, Historical AI and Create own.
Crew
Despite starting fresh on v.1.08, I still got veteran crew without going to war. This resulted in when war broke out classes like TBs, DDs and to some extent CLs hade a hard time and got destroyed by BBs, CAs and other CLs. All sides hade veteran crew so no adventage there.
Crew pools on the other hade was a diffrent story. The brits, french and austro-hungarians all lost their abilty to get new crew so they stoped building ships and the italians collapsted but hade crew left. It looks like the problem to generate new crew might have a connection to ships being sunk. The problem seems to apper after a war which the AI lost a lot of ships and start to build new ships to replace the lost ships. Parts of the crew pool is used to crew the new ships and the other part might be used to try and crew sunken ships. Sunken ships is not allowed to have crew which then results in the crew being removed. If the AI is trying to send crew into sunken ships which effectivly functions as a black hole then that would also explain why after the problem start happening that the crew pool changes small bits after every turn. As the AI do not have spare crew to crew new ships will result in the AI stop building new ships. It also explains why the player dose not have this problem with the crew pool. But this is just a guess and should not be treaded as facts.
Taskforcres
The AI seams to have no problem creating and merging taskforces. They do have a prblem with spliting and sending taskforces back to port. When a new taskforce is created will result in the AI sending it somewhere on the map and then mayby move it sometimes. This will lead to merging of diffrent taskforces until a doomstack is created out of starting ships and ships built after the first war the AI was in. The ships in the taskforce will not be scraped or retrofited allowing them to get obsolete. An exemple of this was an austro-hungarian doomstack with 85 ships in it which hade 16 BB and 45 CA from 1890 to 1902 faced 4 BB, 7 BC and 8 CA from late WW1 to interwar period retrofited to the best tech I hade during 1930. The doomstack was destroyed with only light damage taken on my side. The problem of outdated doomstacks most likely will be fix when the AI builds new ships and send bake old ships from taskforces for retrofit or scarping.
The AI can move their taskforces in a way that can result in their own collaps. The italians was winning a war with the french and brits with the french navy almost being destroyed. Then the italian moved their taskforces from the western mediterranean to the eastern mediterranean and just sat there with their fleet. As expected, this resulted in the italiens losing a lot of transports to the point of the italian GDP started to go down even during peace time. The AI could not do anything about the collapsing economy but it was happening so slowly it allowed years to pass by. Only after I started a war with the italians and their navy being destroyed with only 2 TB left is when they collapsed. The italians hade a stronger navy than the french but did not react in time allowing several turns to pass by with the french destroying their transport.
Economy
The growth was good during the early game. It was not too bad or too good. It was importent to balance the economy during peacetime and all economies grew at around the same rate during peace time exept for the italiens which was collapsing after their war with the french. This held upp until around mid game where everyone started have a lot of money on hand. Also around mid game was when I notice that it became extrimly hard to get an AI nation to start falling into a deathspiral. During the later mid game and late game so was the economy so great that there where no way to spend it all away. Most port able to build ships in has a port capacity of over 1,000,000t with only britan lacking behind as their economy is the weakest of the nations that are left. For context the brits GDP during this campaign in 1945 is 162,010,100,000$ and the biggest economy which is austra-hungary 893,362,100,000$. As the AI can not build ships resulting in they just sitting on their money. Nothing is happening between turns which can effect the outcome at this point. All economies are too strong to collaps.
Research
With research set to 100% during most of the game with an exeption for 1 turn were it was 75% and rare use of research focuses results in pretty good research speed but it is not universal spred. Some tech are easy to get a lead in like Armor Quality. Others are easy to fall behind and might not be albe to be done before 1950 like Control Stations, Boilers and Big Guns. Most catagoris of research are going in a good spead and will be done before the game is over. Some researches can be researched in wierd times. I hade researched Dreadnougth Hull Design (1905) for dreadnougth hulls by 1903 but Underwater protected Deck II (1901) for citadel 2 was researched around mid-1910 and Battle Cruiser Design (1906?) around the same time.
The AI seams to be behind but it is hard to tell as all are being shown as "very advanced" compared to italy which collapsed and is not shown. They seams to also get research at a good rate which is good for balance if the AI could get the crew to be allowed to build new ships.
Ship Design
It seams like if a ship is sunked or scraped then it will still be counted as using a ship design and will disable the abilaty to delete a design. Being able to delete design which are not in used but have hade ship sunked or scraped would clean upp the ship design tab.
Ships Names
The name generator work fine for the most part. It does not generate the same name for two diffrent ships even if the ship with that name has been sunked or scraped. The player can easly change the name of ships in the fleet tab but the AI can not. When the AI runs out of names to generate will lead to ship classes being named after letters like "A-Class Ship-type" and after they run out of letters it is "<class>-class Ship-type". It could be an issue when the AI can build more ships when they have crew to crew them.
-
2
-
1
-
Japan 1890 start stupidly hard
in General Discussions
Posted
Good to know.
There are 2 good options for playing japan 1890. The first one is to pay them of and rush mass BB of around 10000t. The seconed option is to start with no ships and gain passive good relation with them until it is at +20 with both empires.
In the first case is it importet to try to use torpedo boats to get a meeting engment and a manual battle (Not auto-resolve) with the russain doomstack to force it back to port and lowering its power projection. It can allow you to isolate and sink russian ship to avoid another blockade. China is a paper tiger and strong CA can generate alot of VP by sinking transports in convoy raiding or sink any chinese warship that chooses to fight. The strategiy should be centered around the BB which should be capeable enought to sink russian and later chinese BB meaning war should be avoided until you have a lot of BB active. This should take around 33 turns to do the fastest (15turns dockyard expation + 14 turns build time + 2 turns commisisoning).
In the second case is it importent to be patient and wait until the threat of war with both Russia and China is over and then think about when to start building your navy. This also allow you to choose when the war should start and you should at that point be too strong to be blockaded by Russia. As there are no ship that need maintainence if no ships are built from the strat allows you to focus on dockyard, crewpool, transports and research which can lead to you getting ahead on research and build larger ships.
It is important to keep an eye on Germany with both options due to their port in china which they will defened it with there entire fleet if a war strat between you and Germany starts.