Panzergraf

Which difficulty were you playing at? Higher difficulty settings give the AI huge economical boosts. (that's all the difficulty setting does - the AI does not get smarter or anything)

Or just make it possible to attack ground (or in this case water)? That could also be used to "blind fire" at smoke screens though.

Here's an example of a battle recorded just now, in the most recent version of the game (no mods). I clipped it out of a video I was recording for my youtube channel. The bug we are talking about appears a few times. Early on in the battle, CA Lutzow has the target lock bug (or ladder aiming bug, if you prefer that term), but it is quickly resolved by it selecting another target. Later on, with only one enemy ship remaining (and thus no other targets to select), both CA Lutzow and Mecklenburg suffer target locking. For Lutzow it goes away, for Mecklenburg it remains to the end even if it was sailing slower than Lutzow and closer to the target. Secondary weapons seem unaffected. To me this does seem like a bug, and not the way aiming is intended to work. I get why some maneuvers and speeds will make aiming slower and accuracy worse, but what we're talking about is aiming not progressing at all. The fact that briefly selecting a different target makes the aiming progress as it should also points to this. If it was working as intended, staying aimed at one single target constantly would result in faster aiming, but that's not the case. And I also want to add that as long as this bug does not appear, the aiming system does work fine. And I also appreciate your hard work and how quickly you released the repair hotfixes for campaing map movement.

That is an older video posted as an example, but the bug is the same in the latest version of the game (1.3.7r, unmodded).

The target lock bug we're talking about is when the aim progress suddenly goes down to -100% (or some other negative number) and stays there, regardless of speed, course and heading. This will often happen after initially having completed the Aiming progress. I'm aware that (normal) accuracy and aim progress goes down with maneuvering and at higher speeds, and that is as it should be. But that's not what we're talking about here. Here's an example of me encountering the bug, battle starts at timestamp 50:45 Granted, this was in patch 1.3.4, but the targetting bug is the same, and it's the best example I have on video. -Accuracy starts off as normal -Aiming progress then suddenly goes from Aimed to Aiming Progress -73% (while sailing in a straght line at cruising speed) at 52:07 -I do some wild maneuvering trying to make it reset, but it doesn't work. -Switch to HE to not waste AP while not having any accuracy -Accuracy back to normal at 54:15 -Aiming progress down to -71% again at 56:24 (happened while I was inspecting enemy ship) -Then back to normal again at 1:00:12 As Munro said, if you're in a battle with multiple enemy ships, you can reset this by selecting another target, and then going back to targeting the first ship. Seeing as switching from one target to another, and then back again, is a quicker way of regaining the Aimed bonus than just staying on one target, this very much seems to be a bug.

Not to mention it would take months or years to actually finish the ship, and there might not be any enemies preventing delivery by that time. Also I get this error some times when trying to sell old mothballed ships, during peace time.

3: Someone gave me a great tip here - just write down the names of the regions you want on a wishlist, I just wrote it on an old electrical bill (I did pay it first). Although I did end up getting 15 territories out of one single peace treaty once, which was far more than I had written down... 6: Yeah, some times they just start attacking against bad odds, which sapps army logistics (at least it seems that way) and ruin the progress you're making where you want to make progress... Other times they sit idly by next to an enemy territory, despite outnumbering the enemy forces 10-1 6a: There are some techs that improve the effectiveness of shore bombardments though, which help with naval invasions at least. 7: Yes, at least minor nations that are allied with enemy major nations - technically they're also enemies.

The game also needs an option to have ships never return to port unless specifically ordered to by the player. I (Germany) just had a rather large task force return home from the Med automatically after dealing with a single Spanish light cruiser. My ships took no damage. Zero. Not even a hit that scratched the paint. As a result I had zero ships in the Med, and lost a bunch of transports there the next turn. It's kind of annoying when it happens. Also, imagine how much cooler it would be to have a force of damaged ships returning manually, maybe escorted by undamaged ships, trying to get home for repairs without being engaged and sunk by enemy ships? Narratively it would add a lot, I think.

Getting that too. It some times seems as if I'm getting smoke reports from ships I've already sunk.

There's no setting for that, but there was a poll in the game client where you could vote (once) on wether you wanted subs/mines to become optional, be removed entirely, or remain in game as they currently are.

No, that sounds disastrous. Especially as spotting distances up until the midt 1910's are very short when paired with poor weather/night. You would have enemy DD/CL's basically spawning right next to your task force with no time or room to maneuver. I would like the Overcast weather graphics to be reduced a bit though. It's still hard to see your own ships and where they are heading when not zoomed all the way in. The green line indicating course is also obscured, which is quite annoying.

1. I agree, I know you can copy refit designs and build those, but it's an unnessescary extra step for something you'd think would be easy to implement. 3. Currently that works by mothballing a ship, but as long as you have the Add Crew option enabled, you can't really mothball anything as crew gets automatically added back. So this needs to be looked into, I think.

Are your battleships in range of where there would be fighting? I get multiple BB/BC fights per turn, playing as Germany and being at war with Britain.

You basically choose that yourself when selecting difficulty. Higher difficulty setting = more money for the AI. But I'd also like to see more options there when generating a campaign. So while difficulty regulates how much money the AI gets relative to the player, a separate funds setting could regulate how much money everyone gets. So selecting Low Funds would multiply everyone's GDP by 0.5 (half), Normal Funds is the regular we have now, High Funds multiplied GDP by 1.5, and Legendary Funds multiplies everyone's GDP by 2. So Legendary Funds + Legendary Difficulty would result in absolutely huge AI navies, while Low Funds and Easy would make things more manageable for newer players. So there's something for those who would want smaller navies and fewer ships overall, and something for those who would want giant navies and more big battles with potentially a hundred ships per side (task force sizes could also be adjusted), and something in between. I do kind of miss the huge 100+ ship battles we had prior to task force limits being introduced some times, but I realize not everyone wants that or even has a PC that can run that.

Some of my shared designs have seemingly edited themselves (?) by changing displacement, which shrinks the hull down so guns no longer fit. Both of these ships as originally designed and saved were one hull size larger. However, when the AI builds them in the campaign, they look right, so I'm wondering if this is just an issue with how the ships are displayed in the shipyard. At least the Aurora class CA looks and works correctly, I have not yet encountered any of the other faulty shared design ships in the campaign. This issue does not affect all ships I designed, just some of them.

Currently, playing a campaign where the AI uses shared design ships, the AI will often do such a poor job refitting those ships that they might as well have been AI designs in the first place. The AI will replace Krupp III armor with Harvey armor, and replace a well layed out uniform main battery on a dreadnought with a mixed battery with terrible angles. Suggestion to limit what the AI is allowed to do when refitting shared design ships: When refitting a shared design ship, the AI should only be allowed to replace technology with newer technology, so they can upgrade from Krupp II to Krupp III, but not downgrade to Krupp I or Harvey. Similarly with other modules, so they can go from Coincidence III to Coinc. IV, but not down to Coinc. I or II. The AI should not be allowed to remove, replace, or move any turrets. If the refit includes going from Mk. IV to Mk. V turrets, and the new turrets no longer fit, the AI should not refit the ship. The AI could still be free to refit its own designs however they see fit (though restricting it from downgrading tech might be a good idea), but there should be some hard limits in place regarding what the AI can do to shared design ships.

QoL change: When designing a ship, if the player does anything that would delete the current unfinished design, like accidentally click another hull or something, have a pop up asking if he wants to save or discard the current project.

2 is a good point, I would also like to have the ability to deploy ships in the formations I like before the battle starts, similar to how it works in Total War.

Apparently the save file converter is only there to convert new .bin saves to the old .json format for players who like to edit their saves, and then convert them back to .bin Old campaign saves are forever dead it seems.

It's a bit too hard to see when the weather is bad (stormy, etc), as in you can't even see the green lines showing where your ships are headed unless you zoom in close.

I converted my old campaign save (not even 8 hours old...), and I can see it saved as save_0.bin in the save folder, but when I try to load campaign it can't find the file. After trying to load, the save file is gone (I still have a backup though). I tried starting a new campaign, saved in slot 3 as save_2.bin, and it shows up in the save folder and can be loaded just fine.

So I've noticed recently that when I take land through major offensives (an army matter out of my control), my unrest goes up. Is that intentional? I haven't noticed it before. I know we get +15 unrest whenever a naval invasion fails, but why unrest when a major offensive succeeds? It's very consistent, so I don't think there's anything else that is causing it. +15 whenever my army grabs some land - meanwhile the nation I take the land from gets no added unrest level.

Yeah, that target fast speed negative modifier ramps up at around 37 knots and really makes ships almost impossible to hit without really good accuracy to begin with.

Yes, you can wipe out nations through naval invasions and/or land based major offensives. Often the targeted nation will dissolve with one or two core provinces left, these will then become ungoverned territories. The dissolved nation can then come back later (in my campaign France came back after 1 year or so, China after 15+ years), but will then be really really weak. Once a nation dissolves, all over seas territories like islands and African colonies will become ungoverned territory, which you can't personally initiate naval invasions against. So it's a good idea to scoop up what you can before that happens. In the case of France, after they re-emerged, they only had Western France (which had been ungoverned, the rest was in German hands for years), and Germany promptly started land based major offensives against them. I myself (Japan) initiated a naval invasion hoping to get some territory out of this, but Germany was too fast and steam rolled them in only 4 months - never seen it done that quickly before. Why does it some times fail and some times go that fast? I don't know. I'm pretty sure army logistics has something to do with it, but then again I've failed with 100% logistics and overwhelming numbers VS Soviet Union and their tiny army and 7% logistics, so there's probably more to it. Short answer; yes you can completely remove a nation through invasions/major offensives, but I don't really know why it some times just doesn't work.

Also, and actually especially so, when you are attacking another nation, by naval and/or land invasions, and they dissolve. Suddenly your attacks stop, and you can't start new attacks either. Wouldn't it make sense for your attacking armies to just roll in and assume control once the government and central command structure of the defenders dissolve? I would assume it would just make it easier. Or at least give you a chance to get the territories you were attacking - so for example if your land major offensive was 90% done when the enemy dissolved, you have a 90% chance of getting that territory. If the major offensive was stalled at 0%, you have a 0% chance.