Search the Community

Not sure if this has been suggested before, but : When starting a campaign, the setup and initial fleet autodesign should start immediately. This would shorten the wait for the campaign to start, especially if it could work in the background as i design my own initial fleet. Maybe spawning campaign setup as a separate thread. Create some kind of incentive to keep your active gun sizes as few as possible. This to simulate the benefits of standardization and to reduce the amount of weird gun diameters that appear in campaign. Especially with smaller guns. Make gun stats linear from the base model towards the gun they are scaling towards of the same mark. eg 4.1" MK1 has the stats (4" mk1 + 10% of delta Stats 4"mk1/Stats 5" mk1). This to avoid any weirdness.

For the next patches, I would love to see some fundamental changes to the campaign. You will notice that many of these changes are similar to how Hoi4 manages naval control. Say what you like about that game, but the campaign setup for naval zones works well and reasonably emulates the decisions the admiralty would need to make during a global conflict (supply line protection, resource management, sea control , fuel rationing, etc). If I had one wish I would take Hoi4's campaign map (including fleet control, research, resource management, etc) and fuse it with UA:D's ship designer and battle screen. Some suggestions to get us there: Create Scenario campaigns in addition to the freeform campaign with set start dates, war goals, and consistent end dates. Let me relive WWI, WWII from the admiralty's perspective. Politics are VERY restrictive currently. Even with the various options, it still feels as though the player is just "bucking the current," and you can't really influence politics due to the high rate of failures, and restrictions. Give us more direct control in the freeform campaign. Permit the creation of dedicated task forces and allow the user to specify rules for how they are permitted to go to sea (i.e. - can they deploy without some screens, or does the whole fleet need to go out together)? Change the map style to sea "zones" similar to how Hoi4 works. Task forces can be assigned to various roles within a zone or connecting series of zones. The effectiveness of their coverage is based on the quantity ships and task forces in a particular zone, and is influenced by the zone's size and by technology (reconnaissance, spotting, etc). Ship range influences the zones they can occupy and how effective they are in those zones. Create dedicated jobs for each fleet. I.e. - minelaying, minesweeping, ASW/patrol, convoy raiding, convoy escort, sea control, strike force (only deploys when a comparable task force is spotted in the zone), etc. Change the merchant marine/transport function to ships which must be built and count towards the shipbuilding maximum every month. Allow the player to select which zones convoys/merchants may sail through (and whether they should force a passage if the zone is dangerous or poorly controlled). This will naturally lead to losses which must be replenished, and will influence the supplies coming into the nation which will influence the course of a conflict. Create rationing and supply lines for fuel and precious resources. If you start creating all oil-fired ships, then the player has to maintain supply lines to oil-rich countries. Various task force roles are more fuel intensive (i.e. - sea control is more intensive than strike force), and if fuel runs low, the player must choose how to manage the dwindling resources.

Project Stolasea Proposal Post I'm interested in doing a little modding to my game to change quite a few things about the starting conditions for the campaign, and I was wondering how much of this is possible, and what the best method of achieving it may be? - Change the list of ship names for each country - Change the flags and names of the countries - Change the starting budgets of each country, and their GDP - Add or change existing peace time events, and their effects - Change who starts with what ports - Change the map to a fictional one - Add the US, Russia, and Spanish hull designs to the Campaign if Possible I've put these in order of what I presume to be easiest to hardest based on the way the engine works, and my experience with modding in the past, as well as general development. The plan with this is to essentially make a 'total conversion' of UAD to the fictional world I've been writing for almost a decade now, and play out conflicts from that world. Much like UAD's current setting, I'd primarily be focusing on the Europe analogue rather than a totally global map, but I'm pretty sure this is all possible, given some time. So, does anyone have experience with Unity or modding Unity games? Any experience modding your local UAD files, and just want to help? Or are you maybe just interested in the concept, or the possibility to watch me fail spectacularly? Let me know in the posts below, and maybe I'll start to organise a little community for this.

I do enjoy the "open" or "sandbox" campaigns that we currently have. I would be a very fun and challenging experience to have "Historical" or "Scenario" campaigns. Three suggestions: Historical WWI: Start the game in 1909, ends around 1918 with some randomness. Alliances are pre-determined, and allied entry into the war are more or less historically timed. You get to choose a nation, and an initial set of technology (like in the scenarios, you can choose between various tech focuses, additional funds, etc to start with). War starts AROUND August 1914 (with some randomness), so you have ~5 years to research critical technologies and build up the fleet to your liking. Option to have the fleets be more or less historical at war outbreak (subs would be substituted for now) OR a toggle option to let the AI build the fleet. Historical WWII: Start the game in 1934, ends around 1945 with some randomness. Alliances are pre-determined, and allied entry into the war are more or less historically timed. You get to choose an initial set of technology (like in the scenarios, you can choose between various tech focuses, additional funds, etc to start with). Historical treaty limitations and escalator clauses. Historical cheaters on the treaty (Italy can build slightly larger ships than permitted, Germany can more or less ignore the treaties after 1937). Option to have the fleets be more or less historical at war outbreak (subs would be substituted for now) OR a toggle option to let the AI build the fleet. Ahistorical 1930: The Washington Naval Treaty never occurred. The former allied powers continue the battleship arms race, eyeing each other suspiciously. In 1929 (or thereabouts) President Herbert Hoover takes the United States off the gold standard to combat the growing depression, infuriating the world's banking center: Britain. As tensions rise, Britain places high tariffs on American goods and vilifies the reckless president, attempt to cut the United States out of the world market. Hoover instructs the navy to enforce free passage of the seas, The Anglo-American War has begun! Starts in 1925, ends in ~1935 (somewhat random), war breaks out in ~1930. No treaty limitations. America and Britain will be adversaries. France is neutral and can be influenced by campaign events. One side or the other must maintain control of the Atlantic to permit the movement and landing of troop transports to defeat the other side, otherwise the war ends in a draw. Option for historical or AI created fleets at the beginning. Options for various tech boosts to affect starting technologies, or economy boost to help GDP.

To start things off, how is the result of a battle decided when you end the battle in the middle of the action (i.e. before the "end battle" button pops up) or when you hit auto-resolve? What factors does it take into account? Gun/torpedo size? Displacement? Speed? Armor Values? Modules/components on your ships? The alignment of the stars and the phase of the moon? Purely RNG? I had to end a battle a few days ago in the middle of the action (life happens, I had an unexpected event come up) and I would argue I was winning: enemy CLs were either sunk, heavily damaged or out of ammo, one BC sunk and two DDs sunk compared to one of my CLs sunk and a CA moderately damaged. I end the battle and the screen that pops up immediately afterwards says it's a draw/undecided...but then once it gets to the world map and pops up the list of ships for each side, it says that I lost and I suddenly have more ships sunk than I did when the battle ended, but so does the enemy. So...what exactly is the deal here? One screen says it was a stalemate, one screen says I lost and I've got more ships sunk than should be, according to where the battle left off. I'd appreciate some answers. Next, peace treaties and the end of wars. Playing as the Brits, I force a war with the Germans to end in 6 months. I get the pop up during a loading screen (after a battle) that Germany wants peace, so I happily accept. Well, when it gets back to the world map, it throws me right into the next "unskippable" encounter, and then when I end the turn...war continues between British Empire and German Empire. Did I miss something? They were asking for peace, but since it asked for peace before an "unskippable" encounter...now that offer no longer stands or it fell through and the war drags on for another four months? I feel like the option for peace should either come at the end of your turn, or after all "unskippable" encounters have been resolved. Now, lets talk about gun and torpedo launcher rotation speed. I check the stats of the various weapons and such in the designer: gun rotation speed--8.95 degrees/sec, ship turning rate--4.3 degrees/sec. Ok, so my guns rotate twice as fast as my ship turns, which means even if I have my DD go hard over, my guns should still stay on target. Go to war, and my DDs or CLs go hard over to avoid torpedoes...Tokyo Drift Music starts playing. My guns and torpedoes, literally, LOCK UP and don't move at all as my ship kinda drifts around it's turn (it's still a smooth turn, but the stern of the ship is kicked out to the side) and they don't start rotating again until my ship is on a straight ahead course or the turn goes from hard over to a more gentle, wide and sweeping curve. Why on Earth does this happen? It's frustrating to be in a close-range DD brawl only to lose it because the enemy DD hit that "magical radius" where their weapons can rotate first, and I end up eating 12 torpedoes from a torpedo sled or take a full broadside of 4" and 5" shells that leave my DD dead in the water just waiting for the inevitable torpedoes that didn't turn around in time. If my guns can rotate faster than my ship turns, why aren't they? Or perhaps the better question: why are only DDs and CLs plagued by locking turrets and launchers because they have a tight turn radius? Finally, whenever you gain an enemy ship as reparations, why is their tech not transferred to your navy, if their tech is better? For example, if my navy only has 15" Mk 1 guns but an enemy ship I gain as a war prize has 15" Mk 2 guns, why is the better technology not immediately unlocked and available to use? As it stands right now, unless that enemy AI design is just phenomenal, the only thing I do with a captured ship is scrap it for the cash because even if it has better tech, it does nothing to benefit me because it only works on that specific ship...so I'd rather just take the money to funnel into my own research. IDK if anyone else has experienced similar things or has had any similar thoughts, but I hope I'm not the only one who has noticed some of these things. I hope to get some answers...so I guess, here's hoping somebody who knows the answers responds.

I started a campaign in 1890 with Italy. I've been playing for a while and had 2 wars with France. I took Corsica after the first of those wars. It's now November 1918. For the past 5 in-game years I've had my entire navy sitting outside all the French ports to try to generate tension. The French navy consists of one single TB, and they don't seem to be building anything new. I've been choosing all the options on the random events to harm relations with the French. Every time I get the relations down to -99, it just pops back up to -94 or something similar, with no event showing in the bottom left that would indicate that the French chose to defuse tensions. The AI Germans and Austrians (the British are bankrupt and dissolved) managed to start a war with France. I haven't been able to join the war, despite having -99 relations with France and good relations with the Germans and Austrians. What do I have to do to get into a war with France? The first two times it happened this campaign it was the French that acted to start it, and now that I'm trying to start a war I can't figure out how to do it. Is there a big red "Declare War" button which I've missed? I wouldn't be surprised tbh, I'm not the brightest bulb. Thanks in advance for any help!

Essentially, I was fighting France and everything was fine. Then I went to end the turn and the war simply stopped. The UI on my side, on the right, no longer indicated our VP and that we were fighting. I noticed immediately because I got an event popup saying France was close to declaring war on us.... Even odder, next turn my Unrest went from <10 to 100, and my Renown from <100 to over 1200. Obviously something very bugged happened. I would attach my save, but even compressed it is to large for my "150 kB limit."

It's 1940 French campaign and I have 32kts battleships, 37kts battlecruisers, and 35kts heavy cruisers. Whereas the Austro-Hungary has only destroyers above 32kts and everything else is slower than that. My entire Mediterranean fleet (4 battleships, 5 battlecruisers, 3 heavy cruisers) was chasing a Austro-Hungarian task force consist of a battleship (23.5kts), 2 heavy cruiser (32kts), 2 light cruisers (31kts), and 9 destroyer from Sicily to south of Toulon then to Gibraltar and as shown in the picture back to north of Tunisia. The 4 turns I was chasing them the mission didn't pop up but then somehow the Convoy mission showed up at Pula despite those ships were still at the south. You should also be able to notice that sometime you can only use a portion of your task force to do something despite you have substantially more force over there. The game has a mechanic where, if your side has more than twice the tonnage of the enemy side the fight will never happen or happen with your force reduced. This idea is beyond stupid. What's the point of having control of your fleet when some of them will magically disappear before the fight? What kind of idiot would go into the fight only if they had a chance to lose and will never pick a fight that is guarantee to win? Instead making sure the fight is a win before it start?

After clicking the next month button the game freezes and then crashes. This issue only happens after ***1 Feb ( example: 1891, 1901, 1911, 1921, 1931 and 1941 Feb.).

Welcome back. First i want to thank the ppl who read and liked my posts for their moral support.😃 Second i want to create a collection thread for all our feedback to give us and the devs an easy overview about what are the hot topics around the game. My idea was as follows: I will shorten down my feedback points to a few words, maximum a sentence. the goal is that one Talking Point does not take up more than one line of text. When i created my original post, i was aware that it was to much of a wall of text to be properly readable. thx again for those who still did it Edit 19.01.2022: since there is already a "Big List" of feedback for the ship designer itself, i will cut on my points that were already made in the past and link the feedback list for the shipdesigner under the segment "Shipdesigner". I wonder though, why are there no own threads for the other gameplay parts of the game like the battles or for the recently added campaign? I think, that overviews and summaries of frequently disussed feedback topics are nessarry to keep track of things, but it seems, that apart from a few ppl beeing concerned with the ship designer thats not the case for many other ppl? What i wonder the most is, that the devs themselves havent installed such threads, since they would profit the most from a time efficient scanning of an overview list of all the feedback to a certain topic (or the whole game). Maybe we should split up the feedback gathered here on multiple threads too? Anyone else can post feedback in this thread my original list does not cover and i will implement them in the first post of this thread. The last Step would be to create a permanent poll about all Talking Points wich shall indicate, wich topics are the hottest, the ones that the player base are most concerned with. Im looking forward to ur participation and ur feedback on my proposal. Make Ultimate Admiral great Again... or... for the first time! 😜 I also propose to create pinned threads for certain topics like ... Torpedoes! to gather and focus all our feedback and opinions there giving us and the devs a better grip on the pressing issues. End of Introduction. More Detailed Feedback / thoughts to my points can be found here: Feedback-List. Beeing updated with your Posts in this thread. Graphics - Increase ship size / object size in relation to the players perspective to match realworld size scaling ( no toys in giant bath tubes anymore pls) Ship Designer an already big list of ship designer feedback can be found here: - Pls Remove any Requirements regarding Hulls / Roles about Towers/Armament etc. to allow complete freedom for the players design choices / ideas - pls remove obstructions for placing superfiring barbettes on certain hulls / positions etc. - in general pls remove as much restrictions as possible to give them players teh freedom to express their design ideas - Pls switch out the displacement slider by sliders for the key dimensions of a ship (length, width. height) - Pls make Towers / Superstructure sie and weight scale with the Size and weight of a Hull - Pls give equipment absolute weight and cost values instead of relative ones bound to the Tower stats - Pls introduce real / possible ahistoric engines instead of just engine types. That creates more Research possiblities and provides more educational content. - if u decide to stick to the current layout, pls fix up the values of the engine typs, cause they are not quiet right atm (18.01.2022, patch 1.03) - Pls overwork Funnel Capacities. The Capacity per Weight of a Funnel should always increase with the size of a Funnel, not decrease or suddenly jump up high - Pls Correct the Barbette tooltip and add either add "superfiring" to the barbette section or switch out barbette with superfiring position/mount - Pls fix weight and weight of armour of casemate / underwater torpedo-systems. atm they are to heavy( 18.01.2022, patch 1.03) Battles - (BUG) ships ignore movement orders when to close to each other resulting in collision instead of preventing it - pls give the player the full control over speeding up time over all battle distances (maybe except for x30 since that maybe unbearable for most machines / game engine) - bigger ships should have also a horizontal bulkhead sceme (otherwise listing to sides wont make much sense in the game) - pls correct the tooltip/ loading screen tip about flooding - pls overhaul / overwork flooding so it actually matches realworld experiences and therefore the players(or just mine??) expectations - shooting / targeting should be affected by listing of the ship. a gun thats pointing into the ocean or up high should not be able to land hits on its target in usual combat situations - pls introduce abandoning ships / ships going silent, when for example beeing on fire over the whole lenght of the ship etc. - pls introduce taking ships as prize / the need of towing them to port incase of severe dmg/ engines out - maybe introduce the rescuing of humans from sinking ships if the ship leaves any survivors - AI is still incompetent at calculating fleet strength and situational awareness leading to easy and huge victories in battles making campaigns extremely short due to VPs - pls let torpedos be fired freely / at will at any range and angle to allow for a correct use of that weapons system and the creating of proper torpedo fans over all ranges - pls fix torpedo-ranges. The Torpedo-Range determines its maximum travel distance due to fuel/air(gas mixture)/power storage and not an aiming range - pls also fix torpedo ranges regarding their propulsion system and speed - pls overwork torpedodmg and the dmg calculation of said dmg regarding the existence of torpedoprotection and the kind of T-Protection - pls make ships automatically dodge / attempt to dodge torpedoes - and or constantly highlight spotted torpedoes so the player busy commanding multiple ships doesnt miss those and can actually react without pausing the game every 10 secs - pls fix the detach / attach behavior when multiple ships are select ( detach shall always mean and result in detachment, not random attachment) - pls add a shortcut for "select all ships by type" - pls add control groups (CTRL+Number) asap - pls reduce the amount of information about enemy ships and their status regarding ammo/ reload / dmg etc. that is available to the player. Especially the information bout torpedo reloading leads to the possible abuse of "detecting" torpedoes without beeing able to do so - Ammunition explosions shall increase in dmg potential so that actually the magazine explosion of a main turret rips apart a ship and becomes the significant and terrible even that it is in reality - pls give indication of the reload of the indiviudal turrets / torpedo racks - pls show the penetrating capability of HE-Grenades instead of just saying "Minimum-penetration" - pls clearify what kind of HE-Grenades are fired. Atm they seem to be Bottom-fused, to make sure they explode after a penetration/ partial pen. if thats so, they should also richochet on high angles instead of exploding on hit like a head fused grenade would do almost regardless of the impact angle - edit(always forget that): ships high/slow speed should be depending on actual speed in knots instead of the Throttle/ Lever Position of the targeted ship. A ship with a constructional top speed of 17 knots is not moving at high speeds ... 😕 - edit: CPU target priority should be overhauled. Instead of trying to attack / sink a dmg ship of the player it should focus on the ships closest to its own ships aka best hit chance and than wich poses the highest threat, than wich is easierst / fastes to kill. Battle / Designer - pls introduce projectiles as ingame objects and make them really penetrate and dmg internals instead of calculating that in excel tables - pls introduce all major components of a battleship as objects in a game so they can actually be hit / dmg after a penetration / by fire / flooding - maybe introduce the distinction between bottom and head fused grenades to give player the choice of maximixing dmg after a penetration with less penetration power or with explosion on hit capabilities to inflict atleast a bit dmg instead of none due to richochet / non pen. Campaign - pls remove the display of all enemy ships participating in a battle before that battle and before them beeing identified - pls reduces the amount of missions / battles taking place and / or switch from monthly to 3 monthly turns ( so we can actually research, create new designs and build those too) - pls overhaull the distribution of VPs according to the actual overall fleet size, funds and building capacity of a Nation / State - pls add goals to campaigns and those shall affect the effort a Nation / State is willing to make and how much losses to take - creating flotillas / groups of ships and setting them up for regions / mission types has to be a thing - pls give Mothballing its own button instead of hiding it behind the "set the crew" function - Increase shipyard building speed according to other changes u make to the campaign so building bigger warships later one actually becomes a thing - why does peace time in a campaign does not exist from the beginning? - BUG? the game peaces me out after turning done the ask for peace several times. Is that intentional? - Give more informations in the Campaign screen about what is going on; - how much transports are 100% ? - permanently display the tonnages and power projection of the own and the enemies fleets and not only when a blocade is taking place - Make Naval Intelligence a thing so we have atleast a rough estimate of how effective ecomonic warfare is or what the capabilities of the enemies are - there needs to be a tab where information bout identified / known enemy ships is stored - Research should be diviced stronger in sections and each section should have its focus points - Seperate between private Research and State Research - BUG ? why are ships moved to random harbours in the baltic Sea ( furthest away from the enemy? ) turn that off pls. - pls add the feature to slow down / speed up / hault repairs to control the repair costs / process - ships beeing repaired shall not take part in operations unless the CPU / Player dliberatly decides to do so - damaged and ships in repair shall not add to the power projection / Blocade tonnage or, if they do, only to a certain degree that needs to be determined - pls vastly increase the size of the eventlog and allow the player top back track it ( store the info in its own tab for example) - pls overwork the tooltip for ships within the designer and campaign screens so all the campaign and combat important information are shown (e.g. RANGE! TURNING CIRLCE, E.EFF,..) - the most vital campaign informations shall be displayed on all campaign tabs all the time - Why is economic growth not a thing yet? (18.01.2022 patch 1.03) - the economic effect of a blocade musst be delayed and musst build up over time - make repairing transports a thing so dmg them in a battle has an effect Battle / Campaign - when a ship was identified in a battle, in shall be identified quicker in future battles. Best Regards, Kraut

I just cant win... I managed victory for Britain 1890 and Germany 1890, 1900, and 1910, but I have tried maybe 6-8 G1920 campaigns and they all fail, mostly from a lack of funds... Last game the British blockaded me on the FIRST TURN and the war was over by may 1921... I've tried using only computer generated ships, thinking that maybe I'm just a lousy architect. but it made no difference. I sink twice as many tons and crews, but still lose.

Hi All, I don't personally enjoy the 1890 start date, and want to be able to start a campaign in 1900, or preferably 1910. I'm sure somewhere in the files there is probably a rather simple line of code saying if it is unlocked or not. Is anyone aware of the location of this, or an easy way to modify it? Or is there a console I can use? Thanks, Lyev

I saw somewhere a request for how to build a campaign and I thought I'd try my best to come up with one suggestion. I searched for the correct place for the post - but hopefully a moderator will move it if necesary. I would like the option to run a single semi-historical campaign spanning through the time periods of the game. I know other people want more options/freedom but I think it's a choice and the campaign need to be structured accordingly and so I hope my suggestion makes sense for what I would like to see. I suggest the campaign will be built after a master semi-historical timeline with historical navy conflicts fitting the timelines of the game. The suggestion limits a players sandbox, but makes it easier to balance and secure the player experience while still having the option to be rather flexible. This is a very good way to make sure a campaign will be able to follow a somewhat accurate picture of history, but at the same time prevents a lot of random or chaotic campaigns some other players might like. If necesary it's possible to script necesary peace deals or conflicts when historical situations are difficult to find. The player should select 1 player nation from a handfull of great naval nations - some of them perhaps limited in their starting period if necesary. Minor nations will play a part but not as a main nation. To narrate the experience I find it usefull for you as an admiral to not be the commander of your nation but a subject of a government, but also an important advisor allowing you to take some decissions, but also be forced along the timeline for participation in further conflict. The player will start in the timeline he/she decides and as time progress will either be involved in conflict with his own nation - or as an "advisor" on behalf of other major or minor nations. This makes sure that no matter your choice of nation you will be able to participate. Basically splitting the campaign up into several small mini campaigns linked together. As an example starting as germany you could fight your own wars in the proper timelines and at other times you could "Supervise" and play as minor nations or other major nations. Perhaps even be able to supervise in 3 different levels: a) entire command basically taking over as it was your own nation (but returning to your own nation later) b) Help designing ships - perhaps using tech from both nations but not playing the battles c) Just give them tech and money (maybe earn some foreign ship designs) but let them handle themselves This means France should be able to play even in the part of time where they are occupied or in peace either from foreign ports or supervising some or part of the british, us or chinese fleet. And in the times of european peace participate in conflict in other parts of the world... This also - depending on the conflicts in which you are an advisor - could give you faster research in some areas, better own economy and the ability to build some ship hulls from other nations? Would also be cool to play as England but advising either Russia or Japan in that conflict and both being able to build your own designs and bring home some of the foreign designs when moving on... Maybe some nations should have more options for who to support and others be restricted. Apart from this raw sketch I have a few issues witht eh current mini campaign: Its over way too fast To get more variation perhaps the enemy AI should develope more than 1 design for each shiptype at a time. The transport slider makes very little sense Torpedos are king in the early campaign timeline - You can build a lot of torpedo boats and even though you get blockaded without bigger ships you will turn around pretty fast. I would advise looking into either shorter range (600m), duds and/or make the torpedoes more inaccurate... The map and port system I think is pretty cool. Ships should be organised into fleets/armadas - ships not in fleets should be in a reserve pool. Fleets/armadas should have a restricted tonnage or number decided by the admiralty or nation leadership which could be modified during the game Ships should be sailed to and operate from a port You need to have better control of your fleets behavior like being able to set allowed range from port, behavior and tasks like Coastal patrol, Coastal defense, Convoy guard, Raiding, Combat patrol, Harbor/fleet assault. Maybe even have a fleet operate in a specific area. More than 1 fleet could engage at a time, but if you have a fleet with plenty screening ships it should be difficult to catch that battleship alone. You should look into the balance when talking ships and economy. Players should not spam large ships (perhaps from restrictions made by his national leadership?) - at the same time its also important that a player is not always able to sink large enemy ships at will but maybe thats an AI problem? PinkyDK

I thought quite alot about functions and other stuff as I was trying to do some 1:1 IJN builds, so it would be a waste to just let them sit around in my brain and not share them. Maybe its somewhat interesting or inspiring for one of the devs! 1. Multiplayer Of course every game needs a Multiplayer, well not every, but fun games like UAD would have quite alot of Multiplayer potential. Custom battles against each other with customizable rules, Multiplayer designed Missions where teamwork is essential. For a start it can also run over GameRanger since introducing a friend system and such is a good amount of work ... I think. 2. AA Gunnery Being able to build AA batteries was something I wanted to do from day one. Having this lovely modern BB with a impressive AA Battery would be a sight to behold indeed. As of now there wouldn't be much use for small caliber AA guns like 20's or 37's and so much more, but it really would be a nice Addition for shipbuilding itself. Aswell if you want to get out a use for them, a Mission where you, for instance, have to protect a Convoy from an Airstrike with a CL (Light Cruiser), or something along the line of the battle of Midway where wave after wave of Torpedo-; Bombers came along and tried their hardest to make a hit that would be devastating. I see this point as having alot of potential, but I can already see that this would be quite a bit of work. Either way I'd be marveled to see something along those lines in-game one day. 3. More HULLS! As I was doing 1:1 builds of real life ships I noticed just how little unique hulls there are for DDs and CLs/CAs, which is quite the shame as they are also a big part of naval combat. I know that this is also alot of work, modelling the Hulls as accurately as possible, but having Cruiser hulls like for instance for the Cleveland-Class or K-Class and so on, would be quite worthwhile. 4. More Ship customization Something I also noticed when doing the 1:1 replicas. As it is now, ship building is quite fun, but when using Barbettes it's always this fight of wanting it in the right position but there aren't any placement slots (A bit infuriating when building a Fusō-Class on the Japanese Dreadnaught II hull). Having more control over the Barbettes would be otherworldly, like being able to change their height and width (instead of always having to choose from 20 variants of 1 Barbette), integrating them into the ship hull (as mentioned when building a Fusō-Class on the Dreadnaught II hull. If you aren't sure what i'm implying, search for the IJN Fusō and look at Main Battery Turret 5's Barbette) and just having free placement options with them. Though this point is alot more Customization oriented and not as heavily gameplay important, it's a dream one wishes for. 5. Carriers Though I have already seen somewhere that introducing CVs isn't planned, it would be marvelous anyways. It also would make Point 2 more valid, since after all, the biggest weakness of a Carrier is AA. But being able to build your own Carriers like for instance a Kaga-Type CV on the Tosa-Class hull, or a Shinano-Type on the Yamato-Class hull. There would be so many options to choose from, but after all, it's alot of troublesome work. 6. Conquest idea Though I've yet to see anything from the Campaign and how it's gonna play out, i'm just making this point so I don't forget about it. Basically what about a Conquest-like gamemode where you take over the seas? Capture important Military sectors or ports, destroy your enemy fleets and so on. Produce your own ship designs and let them take over the world. Advance your Technology by having Naval Military institutions research over the years for better equipment, armor-types and hulls (kind of like the HoI4 research tree). With different types of conquest goals and being free to choose the country you wish to play. Something along those lines atleast, having a world domination mode like in Hearts of Iron or Star Wars: Empire at War (weird comparison, I know) would be a treat. But let's see what the campaign is first and maybe this point is nullified by then. 7. File sharing and steam workshop. Something I saw from the user @Skeksisin the comments, which I also wholeheartedly agree to. Though of course the game still has to be released on Steam, it's something that would be nice to look forward to. Aswell I feel as though it could take some weight of the Devs shoulders, as there are probably a few enthusiastic people who would like to model some hulls and other ship parts themselves, on which the devs could also do something similar like Gaijin and do a paid partnership program if the Model is well received and makes it into the base game. Anyways thats all I have for now. If you have any feedback or ideas to these points, feel free to tell. Thanks for reading and have luck on your future naval endeavors!

We sink one and capture four during the opening battle of the Barbary War Campaign.

Greetings All! (Feel free to skip text wall to Tl;Dr at bottom) Long time lurker, I have been playing since the game dropped...wow almost a year or more ago? It's been a long time. Mostly, my concerns are voiced by others and so I usually don't have much otherwise to say, but I had some thoughts and suggestions. The major one on my mind for this post is focused on the ship builder and its' implementation in the upcoming campaign. I do understand that a rework of the builder is (is?) in the works for the future, these are things to just perhaps bear in mind: How does the game team intend to allow for potential major rebuilds or refits in the designer? I'm talking full on Conte Di Cavour style facelifts that can completely change the performance, armament, and appearance on what is otherwise an older hull. This is very important because historically EVERY navy of this time period did major refits and rebuilds, to some extent, on their more expensive investments. This saved cost obviously on building a new hull, and it also extended the lifespan of older designs in a period of technological explosion. However, we should also be able to conduct smaller refits and refinements as well. Things like new more efficient boilers of the same type, or more accurate turrets of a similar design to those equipped. Potentially shipping this game without some sort of answer for this, I think, misses a very BIG element of naval management. As it exists, the current shipbuilder is very limiting in this aspect. For example, I can't potentially refit a ship with a straight stem to a clipper bow. Big "L". You can't custom build superstructures or redesign machinery spaces, other than choosing the next big number or the better pre-designed set (which might not even fit) so ships will be arbitrarily made impossible to refit or rebuild. What about adding torpedo bulges to an older ship with a somewhat obsolete torpedo defense system, an old battlecruiser for example? Sure it may already be a secondary or reserve capital ship already, but it is still worth a lot of money. Cheaper to add those bulges than to build a new battlecruiser for the same role, right? Maybe you have a huge number of aging destroyers. Do you sell them for a severely depreciated scrap value, or perhaps refit them to be coastal patrol craft or dedicated escort ships? Armament even too! Your ship just need to replace old barrels? Can do, maybe a few months moored at home station and done. No need to redesign or build an entirely new hull. Or, want to rearm it with your shiny new 15 inchers from the old 12 inchers? That’s cool, you’ll have to deal with a reduction in barrels for sure, and less ammo. But now you got bigger guns on an older hull without coughing up the dough for an entirely new design and study board. Tl;Dr: I think a much more custom ship designer (similar to the features 1MajorKoenig has on his list of suggestions) would make this sort of feature a trifle to implement. Other games have it as well and present simple cost and benefit. It adds depth. Do you spend significant money to refit an older battleship, or spend more money and time building a new one? Strategy right there, and real decisions real naval boards would have to digest. It also allows the smaller, more monetarily disadvantaged navies to make the most of their existing fleet. As an Italian main in a certain other game of this flavor, I certainly rely heavily on my rebuilds to keep my battleship numbers up since I cannot always afford to build new ones constantly. Please let me know all your thoughts on this!

Now that the dust that was Alpha 9 has died down and we await news on Alpha 10 like the mad lads/ladies we are I thought Id make a thread about some confirmed features of the campaign along with some major/minor features that I think would make the game more enjoyable. I do wanna keep this thread mainly about the campaign so please refrain from designer suggestions of hulls/balance changes to guns and hulls. Confirmed Political Intrigue/Alliance Building Blockade Features Minor Nations Naval Invasion Economic/rebellion stability due to presence of forces abroad or lack of in a region Technological development by allocating funds Crew training/ Progression of Officers Industry Building (For shipyards) Naval Mines Peace Treaties/ Versailles Treaties Map Resources (confirmed) Submarine's Unconfirmed/Wish List Economy Building- While economy will be in the game how will we build our economy of our country up? Will it be tied into a resource system or an infrastructure system were we invest parts of our budget into the economy of our country to grow it by a set percentage each turn? Cut off Naval Regions- I had seen this idea awhile ago while naval blockading is an awesome feature it doesn't make sense to let's say put your whole fleet on the atlantic coast and leave the mid atlantic open. There should be a penalty from being cut off from main supply by interlocked regions. In the example above If my fleet is wholly cut off it should suffer extreme debuffs which would make it a valid tactic to cut fleet supply routes. As naval commanders in the game we should be responsible for keeping supply lines open other than just putting a set number of ships on convoy escort as in RTW2 which allows the player to just death stack their own navy. Espionage system- We should be able to steal tech's from nations along with ship designs. We could then build said ship design or just use it as knowledge about enemy capabilities. I would also like to tie this into a monetary system just to provide an increase/decrease to effectiveness due to funding. Minor Nation Expansion- Minor nations will obviously be a stepping stone for players in the game because well they are minor. But how can we improve the minor situation? Allow them access to an diplomacy system so they can create their own alliances among minors while also allowing them to ally majors (Majors/minors might need an alliance cap to stop them from allying everyone). An confederation of smaller states might actually put up a fight late game instead of just taking up space. It might also allow them to become stronger power later on. Allow AI conflicts- Conflicts between AI to allow growth/decline between AI nations. Allow player to take advantage of the situation with opportunistic wars Spheres of influence- Different from alliances, think Monroe Doctrine. Also a good example would be Vicky 2. If a major interferes could lead to war. Also wanna include some gunboat diplomacy to force minors into your sphere. More diplo actions- Allow the player to threaten war on nations to force into sphere or in the case of a major or a nation with more regions threaten for land. CAn be used opportunistically instead of a full war declare Allow Treaties to set tonnage limits in specific regions- Same as the title. Allow the player to force Great Britain for example to only have a tonnage limit of 20k in a specific region. This could help the player gain early advantages in a war. Also the AI can break this for example re starting the war if the player finds out via espionage. Designer- I know I said no designer suggestions but I would like the game to save designs from your previous campaigns or active ones and allow the AI to use them against the player. Museum- This where you can preserve ships instead of scraping them once they are pass they're service life. Could be brought back sooner than a ship in extreme mothball. But there can be downsides to losing famous ships in battle. Crews on other ships could lose moral and you would lose points towards capitulation as well. We could also fit in a pride of the fleet system. Where those ships require more upkeep but have an more expert crew/moral buff to surrounding ships. But can have a debuff when destroyed. (Think hood) Interment- Just as it says. Random events or player action that can lead your ship to becoming interned in a neutral port. Maybe provide diplo options to internments within your sphere like studying the ship design and tech on the ship or the risk of it happening to you. Could lead to war in other circumstances. CO OP campaign- I'm a very big believer in a coop experience. This would be different than a multiplayer experience just in the way that it provides so much replayability to the campaign. Empire Formation- Maybe no empire formation but allow minors/majors to have formable nations based on real world names based on location. Also if the player grows they could have the option of renaming their own faction. Natural Disaster Events- This is very RNG based but could be a nice feature. As history has showed us some people can somehow manage to do it twice. Ship Scrapping- This could be used to gain intel and technology about ships after a battle either between you and an AI or two seperate AI factions. Logistical Rework- Suggestion by Skeksis More to be added if the thread is active. Comment feature you want to see and try to come up with other features!

So with the campaign coming up I just wanted to know if we'll have Captains (hopefully historical ones) with skills that we can customize and pick for them. Something similar to what World of Warships have.

So other day I was making a Bismarck replica and when I finished I was checking the info boxes on the right of the screen. The very top one has all the basic info but one stood out to me. It said that it will take 43 months to build the battleship. So my question is how will time be managed in the campaign. Will one day be every minute or what because 43 months is almost four years and don't think would want to wait too long for their battleship. I know its still early too be talking about the campaign but is just out of curiosity. Thank you if you answer.

As we get closer to a true campaign I must ask, how will a war actually work? Will we be able to see our boarder that changes as we lose and win wars, or will it be like what RtW2 do and just have a map dotted with areas that are naval bases that you take. Are we going to be able to see the land conflict when a war start? During a war I really doubt that the land forces will sit on their asses during a war and not try and attack pushing the enemy. To also add on to this point how will a war between two nations like Germany and Russia will go, as its really hard to see Germany winning this type of war by just killing Russian ships. What are yalls thought on this? And what do you hope to see during the campaign.

Now, forgive me if I overlooked various announcements, I don't frequent the forms least not lately but hopefully more now, I was however curious about the upcoming campaign. I already asked about AI Wars but now I was wondering about the possibility of naval treaties and the mechanics behind them. What I want to know and explore are how will they work, and how should they? Will it be simplistic in that "A Convention in Hague has determined that all future ships will be limited to {Random Number} tonnes of displacement and a gun a caliber of no more than {Number} of inches." which yes it works, but this I feel we can develop so much more, by say looking at the treaties of the 1920's. Example: In our timeline, the British had no 16 inch gunned battleship, where the American's had the Colorados and the Japanese had the Nagatos. so they argued that they should have at least a couple and were allowed so. They tuned down the G3 design and made the Nelsons. Also how much player interaction is available? Yes it is most an affair with the politicians but I think the more the player can influence, the better for the enjoyment of the game, like arguing what the nation should have. Another thing is would this mean the ships that don't fit this requirement but are still on the dockyards would be scraped? As above, could one argue that as these ships are only a few months out from completion, that should be finished and it's up to chance for the politicians to make the case? Maybe the chance is based on the nation's current power stance in both ship tonnage, economic power and the span of the empire? Could we even see some more nuance in the terms, like no submarines, or that the total tonnage is limited, perhaps to a percent of the major naval power, like how the Brits had the highest limit, followed by the Americans and Japanese? Maybe you can be allowed a certain number of battleships and heavy cursiers as a minimum? Just some ideas to make treaties more dynamic.

As of right now, outside of torpedoes smaller ships do not have much of a use, this is because any time a cruiser is put against a BC or BB, it will lose, and so on. But smaller ships are very necessary for power projection, coastal defense, escort, etc... If it wasn't necessary to have so many ships in so many places at once, then you would just end up building a super Yamato and calling it a day. So the campaign will need to simulate the feeling of always needing to be a step ahead of the curb, the need to have many ships doing many different things at once, and budget constrictions to actually make TB, DD, and CL useful.

Something I have been thinking about is in similar games, namely Rule the Waves 1&2, wars only exist between the player, AI allies and one or more AI nations. Tensions between nations are only tracked with the player, with an illusion of tensions with nations being from events, being: "You ally {NATION NAME} has reach a boiling point with their enemy {NATION NAME}, what is your course of action?" This only really leaves the world to revolve around your nation of choice with no other wars happening and the AI to build up navies that can only be used on the player. Now, I can understand that simulating a battle between multiple AIs with no player participation can be more than necessary. However RTW1&2 have events to represent a battle between an AI ally and an AI opponent without the player. Just an event reading: "In battle, your ally {NATION NAME} lost {SHIP CLASS AND NAME} and your enemy {NATION} lost {SHIP}" or some variation where the ally lost a ship but not the other or vise versa. Also when a ship intercepts a raider or blockade runner in a one on one, you can choose to auto resolve, ended with one ship sinking the other or the raider/runner out running the interceptor. This seems based one the ships involved, as a battlecruiser will reliably sink an armored or light cruiser, and a faster ship is more capable to escape the battle. Now, the idea for AI wars was demanded enough that a user made mod that tracks tensions between AIs in a separate window and somehow tracks battles with losses, I never got it to work so I can't say how it works, but it leaves me to ask for this game, is it possible that we could see conflicts between the AIs, even in a simplistic fashion? Something that makes the world a bit more 'alive' and 'real' by not being centered on the player?

At least where I am things have been pretty gloomy lately and this forum has been quite divided as well, so why not a simple topic? What school of thought will you follow in the campaign? Decisive battle? Trade indirection? Fleet in being (if AI allows Fleet In Being to be a viable tactic) Torpedos? (Like what Japan did with the Long Lance) or guns? Large long range ships where you can. Face the enemy ships on your terms, or shorter range smaller ships with less flexibility but you can build more? Ships with many turrets so it's harder to knock out all of your guns, or ships with fewer turrets with more guns per turret for better weight dispersion? Basically what types of ships will you design and what is the thought process behind your naval strategy?

So I have a question/observation. I was recently doing a custom battle British vs. Japan. Just to warm up 1940's tech was gonna build the biggest battleship I could, But then I noticed that the biggest battleship The Brits could get are the Dreadnought IV and the N3/G3 hulls which top out at 62k displacement. That got me thinking does Britain actually have the smallest size battleship displacement in the game? All Displacements are max French 93k Germany 130k Japan 125k USA 109k Spain 69k Russia 69k Italy 65k Austro 90.5k China 87k British 62k Spain and Russia share the same hull but it begs the question of balance late game. Obviously not all of these nations designed ships with high displacements but the problem is that how are the devs going to balance these hulls out? Britain tops out at 62k but Germany for example has 4 battleship hulls that hit a max of 62k and up. Some hulls will inevitably be shared across nations like how I noticed in Spain and Russia with the modern battleship 69k hull but I thought I'd post this here for the community to brainstorm ideas for the devs or maybe share historical designs for nations they can find of specifically capital ships. One Idea I had was for if this game has an espionage system (I haven't seen anything confirmed yet) is that your spies could actually steal hull types that you could then build in your own faction. This would stop specific nations having a hull advantage. But ideally I'd hope us the community could find some examples the devs could look at and see if they want to eventually include into the game!