>>>Combat Feedback<<<

[Norljus]

• Please improve the division management. Currently it takes way too many clicks to organize the divisions. Consider drag and drop for the ship cards at the bottom of the screen. And / or  standard rts controls.
• Add a way to change settings for a whole fleet or division instead of ship by ship.
• Make keybindings configurable
• Add a way to influemce the friendly ai. Currently it seems to recklessly optimize for gun damage. Let us set it to ie prioritize torpedoes or keep a minimum distance

Edited October 9, 2019 by Norljus
More wishes

[herrse]

One thing i would like to see is an accuracy penalty for beeing under fire. A major factor in the good accuracy of SMS Derfflinger during the "Run to the South" at Jutland was that it was left unengaged by the british Battlecruisers because of a targeting error. 

Also i think the time it takes for a ship to "get" the range is a bit short and it should be possible for a ship to "loose" the range if the target manouvers . 

[painless42]

First let me say that the Alpha is amazing. This is the kind of game that mixes detailed systems with beautiful visuals that I've been waiting for since I started playing Great Naval Battles of the North Atlantic by SSI back in 1992. So great job!  here is my feedback so far.

Torpedoes:

1. Torpedo Damage (Already been covered) I would say that they should cause a bit more structural damage to armored targets, and a lot more to lightly armored targets.

2. Does having a list prevent torpedo launches? I felt like I was torpedoed by a ship with a pretty significant list, but I could be wrong. It would be a valid mechanic to add if not. 

3. Seeing the reload of enemy weapons is fun, but should probably be disabled with a difficulty setting. Gives advanced notice of torpedo launches

4. I feel like torpedo aiming should be more accurate against stationary targets.  If I've closed to within 200 meters of a ship that is dead in the water, the hit rate should be close to 100%

Damage:

3. Ammo Explosions don't seem to knock out the guns that the ammo is tied to, this should probably happen most of the time.

4. Light craft feel too survivable against large caliber HE rounds.  The max damage seems right but the damage range feels too variable. If the shell doesn't over penetrate and actually explodes, the damage should be  pretty severe for >8" shell against something like a destroyer/torpedo boat. Light craft seem too survivable in general, I noticed in the Dreadnaught vs torpedo boat scenario, the torpedo boats had the maximum bulkhead setting, and I wonder if there should be a limit to the amount of compartmentalization on light craft. 

5. I feel like there needs to be more systems degradation as damage accrues, especially with weapon systems. too many instances of ships going down with "all the guns still firing"

 

Again, I am thoroughly enjoying the alpha and this is already an amazing achievement.

 

Edited October 10, 2019 by painless42

[Niomedes]

50 minutes ago, painless42 said:

4. Light craft feel too survivable against large caliber HE rounds.  The max damage seems right but the damage range feels too variable. If the shell doesn't over penetrate and actually explodes, the damage should be  pretty severe for >8" shell against something like a destroyer/torpedo boat. Light craft seem too survivable in general, I noticed in the Dreadnaught vs torpedo boat scenario, the torpedo boats had the maximum bulkhead setting, and I wonder if there should be a limit to the amount of compartmentalization on light craft. 

 

Can't confirm this. In my experience, light craft explode sufficiently when hit with a huge HE round.

[halfmanhalfsquidman]

I'm enjoying the combat, but have some suggestions. Many are probably repeated:

1) without a minimap, I too easily find that I lose situational awareness of my heading vs the enemy and mask my own guns, or find myself closing range when it needs to be opened.

2) HE seems to be far too effective, espcially against BBs

3) Damage modeling seems a little obscure at times.  I was pounding a BB that had 4% structure with 18 inch guns, seeing damage numbers in the hundreds with each hit, but did not see any change in teh damage state of the ship. Either damage needs to be distrubuted to adjacent cells or subsystems need to begin to degrade. It seems that very badly damaged ships fight far too effectivelly when in truth the casualties (both engineering and personnel) would begin to severly reduce the ability to the crew to fight the ship. Also it seems DC teams are just as good at putting out fires and manning pumps when the ship certainly has lost all its pumps from battle damage. Bascially damage should snowball, not plateau.

4) Secondary batteries need to be either assigned targets or have an AI deal with priorities like MTBs or DDs entering their range instead of just bouncing 3" shells off a dreadnoughts belt or wasting 12" shells trying to plug an MTB. Its the whole purpose of having these batteries. Without this option it seems like a waste.

Edited October 10, 2019 by halfmanhalfsquidman

[Skeksis]

"Independent Targets" feedback seems to be common theme but everyone is forgetting (or not mentioning) about independent targets for torpedo’s, essentially they too should have their only target.

Actually independent targeting structure should look sometime like this (ancestor to descendant).

Fleet Target (all ships).

Division Target.

Ship Target.

Modals :-

                Main Guns Target.

                Secondary Guns Target.

                Torpedo's Target.

All targets default or to be automatically assigned the Fleet Target (single auto-target) and then players (if they want too) assigns or micromanages independent targets from that, once a descendant losses its target it then should be assigned its ancestor target. Also there needs to be visual and visible targeting states for each targeting element. 

So developing this won’t be that simple but for overall gameplay it should be worthwhile.

 

PS, @Nick Thomadis is it too early to have a "suggestion" section for UAD?

 

Edited October 10, 2019 by Skeksis

[SwaggyB]

Large calibre high explosive rounds seem too effective against heavy ships to me. I just played the search and destroy mission with 2 BC's with 14" guns and had HE salvos regularly penetrating the enemy BB's decks (one salvo cause flooding) at long range. Whereas AP seemed to have little effect. At short range HE was more effective as well. In the game's current state there seems to be no point in having your ships fire AP. 

 

  

[halfmanhalfsquidman]

51 minutes ago, SwaggyB said:

 In the game's current state there seems to be no point in having your ships fire AP. 

Totally agree. There are times HE should be useful, such as against less armored ships where over penetration could be an issue. But plunging fire from AP through the decks should be much more effective than it is. Same goes for close in fire when you can overmatch the belts.

[TBRSIM]

HE of 3-7inch are not effective enough against TB/DD (at least early ones), this is notwithstanding that 10inch+ effectivenes against the same seems OK.

[CajunNavy]

I absolutely LOVE the game!  I know it will only get better! 😁😁

But please, PLEASE stop my flagship from automatically changing in mid battle!  My flagship will receive some damage and before you know it I have a new one.  It really severely effects a line ahead battle line!  I would much prefer to manually change flagships if it becomes necessary.  That way I can plan the transition.  It is the only thing I really hate.

Thank you again for all your hard work.  It is an amazing game already.

CajunNavy

 

 

[Jaymer]

If i split between two enemies. Shouldnt the casemates/side guns be able to shoot targets on both sides?

[admin]

11 minutes ago, Jaymer said:

If i split between two enemies. Shouldnt the casemates/side guns be able to shoot targets on both sides?

yes they should, but they do not right now. 
its on the top 10 priority list.

[Jaymer]

2 minutes ago, admin said:

yes they should, but they do not right now. 
its on the top 10 priority list.

Oh, ok thanks! 

[Nick Thomadis]

On 10/9/2019 at 1:15 PM, Norljus said:

• Please improve the division management. Currently it takes way too many clicks to organize the divisions. Consider drag and drop for the ship cards at the bottom of the screen. And / or  standard rts controls.
• Add a way to change settings for a whole fleet or division instead of ship by ship.
• Make keybindings configurable
• Add a way to influemce the friendly ai. Currently it seems to recklessly optimize for gun damage. Let us set it to ie prioritize torpedoes or keep a minimum distance

ΑΙ Division behavior will be improved in next patch.

Your orders are already given to the division level. You can select multiple divisions and make your orders accordingly.

22 hours ago, herrse said:

One thing i would like to see is an accuracy penalty for beeing under fire. A major factor in the good accuracy of SMS Derfflinger during the "Run to the South" at Jutland was that it was left unengaged by the british Battlecruisers because of a targeting error. 

Also i think the time it takes for a ship to "get" the range is a bit short and it should be possible for a ship to "loose" the range if the target manouvers . 

Pending to improve further.

19 hours ago, painless42 said:

2. Does having a list prevent torpedo launches? I felt like I was torpedoed by a ship with a pretty significant list, but I could be wrong. It would be a valid mechanic to add if not. 

Noted for a future improvement.

19 hours ago, painless42 said:

3. Ammo Explosions don't seem to knock out the guns that the ammo is tied to, this should probably happen most of the time.

Related improvement to the barbettes, that we will address in next patches.

19 hours ago, painless42 said:

4. Light craft feel too survivable against large caliber HE rounds.  The max damage seems right but the damage range feels too variable. If the shell doesn't over penetrate and actually explodes, the damage should be  pretty severe for >8" shell against something like a destroyer/torpedo boat. Light craft seem too survivable in general, I noticed in the Dreadnaught vs torpedo boat scenario, the torpedo boats had the maximum bulkhead setting, and I wonder if there should be a limit to the amount of compartmentalization on light craft. 

Next patch will have an overall better balance, concerning also this.

19 hours ago, painless42 said:

5. I feel like there needs to be more systems degradation as damage accrues, especially with weapon systems. too many instances of ships going down with "all the guns still firing"

This will be improved further when we introduce crew.

10 hours ago, CajunNavy said:

But please, PLEASE stop my flagship from automatically changing in mid battle!  My flagship will receive some damage and before you know it I have a new one.  It really severely effects a line ahead battle line!  I would much prefer to manually change flagships if it becomes necessary.  That way I can plan the transition.  It is the only thing I really hate.

The automatic switch of the lead ship in the division happens when the lead ship becomes severely damaged and loses much speed. If it kept leading the division, the other ships would stall behind and become ineffective. You can detach this ship, if you want.

17 hours ago, Skeksis said:

PS, @Nick Thomadis is it too early to have a "suggestion" section for UAD?

Not sure I understand, we already use the respective forum threads for suggestions.

[Norljus]

36 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:

Your orders are already given to the division level. You can select multiple divisions and make your orders accordingly.

Am I doing something wrong then ? I click a division card and select ie 'hold gun fire'. Then only the first ship will be set to hold fire.

[Nick Thomadis]

The fire modes were meant to be on the division level too, but we left them to be individually managed to check what players wanted for them. We will make them too in the division level, for consistency.

[akd]

8 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:

The fire modes were meant to be on the division level too, but we left them to be individually managed to check what players wanted for them. We will make them too in the division level, for consistency.

We really need options for both, especially when it comes to torpedo behavior.  Lead ship may be in a very good position for torpedo launch while trailing ship is in poor position.  Forcing change in torpedo fire control may lead to some torpedoes wasted.  But in other situations you may very well want the entire to division to launch to create a better spread.

[Norljus]

10 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:

The fire modes were meant to be on the division level too, but we left them to be individually managed to check what players wanted for them. We will make them too in the division level, for consistency.

Ah ok. What I would like to see tough is that my commands are applied to whatever is selected. The most annoying thing currently is that I can only activate smoke for a division and not a single ship.

[Squatter]

This is going to be a phenomenal game, already great in Alpha. UG Civil War was the best real-time wargame since the original Close Combat, and now UA Dreadnoughts and Age of Sail are going to reinforce the fact that Game Labs is the best studio for wargames at work today. I would recommend this already to anyone with any interest in 'realistic' strategy games. Kudos.

Much of this feedback may have been mentioned before, but here goes:

Fleet control:

- There's something amiss with the way divisions reorganise when a ship is disabled - often a whole division more or less comes to a halt or confused when the lead ship is damaged and pulls out of the line. Such a hit can essentially wreck a whole division of torpedo boats or DDs. Perhaps the damaged ship should auto detach from the division and have AI concentrate on it manoeuvring to avoid the oncoming ships left in the division? Obviously this can be done manually when it happens, but anything that reduces the need for micromanagement is a positive.

- It would be good if divisions could have several torpedo settings, ie target all ships/target cruisers and up/target only capital ships. Currently requires a lot of micro to avoid firing torps at unwanted targets, ie DDs or TPs.

- Perhaps there should there be an 'auto torpedo evade' option whereby the AI will manoeuvre player ships which spot incoming torpedoes. I believe Distant Guns/Jutland from Storm Eagle employed this feature. Again, manually having to do this increases micromanagement. Fine when you are controlling a few vessels, less so when fleets are involved. Or perhaps ships that spot incoming torpedoes should display a 'torpedoes spotted' alarm signal on screen to draw the player's attention?

- Having further options in the 'screen' order would be useful. ie 'screen to the south/west/north', or perhaps 'close screen' vs 'detach and engage enemy escorts'

- It's impossible at a glance to see which weapons are disabled on a friendly ship. Obviously they are coloured red on the ship diagram, but doesn't help when you've got 20 guns or so on a battleship. Perhaps where the weapons are listed by calibre and hit chance in the bottom right of the HUD, the number of functional vs damaged weapons could be displayed?

- AI should form battle lines more consistently with its larger ships. Would add greatly to immersion.

Visuals and immersion:

Already the game can look fantastic when zoomed in. The immersion created by the visuals/sounds are key to optimising the game's appeal. I'm sure improvements are in the works but my initial thoughts in any case:

- audio: currently really good but perhaps heavier calibre shells noise during flight should be more 'terrifying'. I have read first-hand accounts at Jutland describing the heavy shells as sounding like railway locomotive engines overhead. 

- audio: some shell impacts, especially large ones and detonations don't sound as catastrophic as they could. Heavy guns firing can sound more powerful than the explosions of their impact. Perhaps this is realistic, I don't know?

- Shockwave fx could be more prominent for both large calibre firing and large detonations. A big magazine detonation on a capital ship should make everyone on the battlefield stop and stare for a moment!

- In Storm Eagles' Distant Guns, the 'shell cam' was a great feature, any chance of that here?

- Are all the shells a little bit too much like glowing tracer? This is great for visibility, but reduces immersion a little.

- When ships are on fire they can look as if they are catastrophically burning up, only for fires to be promptly put out. Perhaps less fire fx and more smoke fx in general, unless fires are extreme?

- More ambient smoke from funnels/fires/explosions on the seascape would be great, and realistic.

Again, great work so far, this is going to be another classic.

 

 

 

[Niomedes]

25 minutes ago, Squatter said:

- There's something amiss with the way divisions reorganise when a ship is disabled - often a whole division more or less comes to a halt or confused when the lead ship is damaged and pulls out of the line. Such a hit can essentially wreck a whole division of torpedo boats or DDs. Perhaps the damaged ship should auto detach from the division and have AI concentrate on it manoeuvring to avoid the oncoming ships left in the division? Obviously this can be done manually when it happens, but anything that reduces the need for micromanagement is a positive.

Ships already do that, unless you order them to drive into each other.

26 minutes ago, Squatter said:

- It would be good if divisions could have several torpedo settings, ie target all ships/target cruisers and up/target only capital ships. Currently requires a lot of micro to avoid firing torps at unwanted targets, ie DDs or TPs.

Spend more attention to your fleet if you want to avoid that, you can disable torpedo fire for a ship by clicking on the torpedo Icon.

27 minutes ago, Squatter said:

- Perhaps there should there be an 'auto torpedo evade' option whereby the AI will manoeuvre player ships which spot incoming torpedoes. I believe Distant Guns/Jutland from Storm Eagle employed this feature. Again, manually having to do this increases micromanagement. Fine when you are controlling a few vessels, less so when fleets are involved. Or perhaps ships that spot incoming torpedoes should display a 'torpedoes spotted' alarm signal on screen to draw the player's attention?

You can give the AI control over a division by clicking on the small captain's cap on the left side of the orders bar. AI controlled ships automatically avoid torpedos, if they discover them that is.

29 minutes ago, Squatter said:

- Having further options in the 'screen' order would be useful. ie 'screen to the south/west/north', or perhaps 'close screen' vs 'detach and engage enemy escorts'

That wouldn't be usefull, it would be pointless. Your screen is automatically going to move against the closest hostile fleet no matter its position, and will automatically elect the enemy closest to your main fleet as its target. This usually already amounts to your screen attacking the enemy escorts, but you can obviously set targets for them manually if you don't like what they do.

33 minutes ago, Squatter said:

- Are all the shells a little bit too much like glowing tracer? This is great for visibility, but reduces immersion a little.

Well, I'd rather see what the enemy is shooting at and what my ships are shooting at then being "fully immersed", if you will. It's kinda crucial for a strategy game to have the information concerning what's actually happening.

34 minutes ago, Squatter said:

- When ships are on fire they can look as if they are catastrophically burning up, only for fires to be promptly put out. Perhaps less fire fx and more smoke fx in general, unless fires are extreme?

- More ambient smoke from funnels/fires/explosions on the seascape would be great, and realistic.

As a setting perhaps for high end Machines. But this is jus going to kill the framerate of most people.

Concerning your suggestions in general, most of them sound as if you'd like the game to basically play itself. Removing the need to watch out for and evade torpedos, automating the Screen option more than it already is, automating torpedo target selection etc. is just taking away the impact of player skill in favor of just having a pretty battle to look at over which one doesn't really have control anymore. If you'd like to play such a game, you should consider picking up Endless Space. I however, prefer this game just like it is, with all the micromanagement it requires. And it doesn't even require a lot of micromanagement in the first place.

[Squatter]

Thanks for your largely unhelpful reply Niomedes. Just so I am clear - are you anything to do with the development team, or are you a player? Either way I'm disappointed at the offhand and largely ignorant way you've engaged with my points.

1 hour ago, Niomedes said:

1 hour ago, Squatter said:

- There's something amiss with the way divisions reorganise when a ship is disabled - often a whole division more or less comes to a halt or confused when the lead ship is damaged and pulls out of the line. Such a hit can essentially wreck a whole division of torpedo boats or DDs. Perhaps the damaged ship should auto detach from the division and have AI concentrate on it manoeuvring to avoid the oncoming ships left in the division? Obviously this can be done manually when it happens, but anything that reduces the need for micromanagement is a positive.

Ships already do that, unless you order them to drive into each other.

I am suggesting ships detach themselves from divisions, not immediately attempt to rejoin them as they do currently. As it stands, damage to the lead ship of a division of DDs often wrecks the progress of entire division as damaged vessel clumsily tries to rejoin. Currently, it's much worse that the lead DD is damaged rather than destroyed, because if it's destroyed the rest of the div continues as before. If damaged, its clumsly efforts to turn and rejoin often turns the division into a mess.

 

1 hour ago, Niomedes said:

1 hour ago, Squatter said:

- It would be good if divisions could have several torpedo settings, ie target all ships/target cruisers and up/target only capital ships. Currently requires a lot of micro to avoid firing torps at unwanted targets, ie DDs or TPs.

Spend more attention to your fleet if you want to avoid that, you can disable torpedo fire for a ship by clicking on the torpedo Icon.

Very poor reply. Some of us would prefer better UI and AI resulting in more realistic ship behaviour rather than be condemned to permanent micro management. This would be a toggle, so if you prefer to micro every aspect of every ship then you can continue to do so.

 

1 hour ago, Niomedes said:

1 hour ago, Squatter said:

- Perhaps there should there be an 'auto torpedo evade' option whereby the AI will manoeuvre player ships which spot incoming torpedoes. I believe Distant Guns/Jutland from Storm Eagle employed this feature. Again, manually having to do this increases micromanagement. Fine when you are controlling a few vessels, less so when fleets are involved. Or perhaps ships that spot incoming torpedoes should display a 'torpedoes spotted' alarm signal on screen to draw the player's attention?

You can give the AI control over a division by clicking on the small captain's cap on the left side of the orders bar. AI controlled ships automatically avoid torpedos, if they discover them that is.

 I am aware of AI control of divisions, which is a different thing. Please re-read my point.

 

1 hour ago, Niomedes said:

1 hour ago, Squatter said:

- Having further options in the 'screen' order would be useful. ie 'screen to the south/west/north', or perhaps 'close screen' vs 'detach and engage enemy escorts'

That wouldn't be usefull, it would be pointless. Your screen is automatically going to move against the closest hostile fleet no matter its position, and will automatically elect the enemy closest to your main fleet as its target. This usually already amounts to your screen attacking the enemy escorts, but you can obviously set targets for them manually if you don't like what they do.

Again, very poor reply. I'm a little embarrassed for you. In what way is it pointless to specify to which compass direction a division should screen another? When the enemy fleet is undetected, but I am told 'smoke is spotted to the west', I don't want my screening divisions deployed to the East (as it may be at start of scenario), do I?

When I mention 'close screen' or 'detach and engage', what is it you don't understand about the difference between these postures? 

1 hour ago, Niomedes said:

1 hour ago, Squatter said:

- Are all the shells a little bit too much like glowing tracer? This is great for visibility, but reduces immersion a little.

Well, I'd rather see what the enemy is shooting at and what my ships are shooting at then being "fully immersed", if you will. It's kinda crucial for a strategy game to have the information concerning what's actually happening.

Fine. How about a toggle option - 'luminous tracer rounds' vs 'more realistic rounds'. Would that make you happy?

 

1 hour ago, Niomedes said:

1 hour ago, Squatter said:

- When ships are on fire they can look as if they are catastrophically burning up, only for fires to be promptly put out. Perhaps less fire fx and more smoke fx in general, unless fires are extreme?

- More ambient smoke from funnels/fires/explosions on the seascape would be great, and realistic.

As a setting perhaps for high end Machines. But this is jus going to kill the framerate of most people.

As you say, this could be a setting for higher end machines, thanks for your pointless input once again.

 

1 hour ago, Niomedes said:

Concerning your suggestions in general, most of them sound as if you'd like the game to basically play itself. Removing the need to watch out for and evade torpedos, automating the Screen option more than it already is, automating torpedo target selection etc. is just taking away the impact of player skill in favor of just having a pretty battle to look at over which one doesn't really have control anymore. If you'd like to play such a game, you should consider picking up Endless Space. I however, prefer this game just like it is, with all the micromanagement it requires. And it doesn't even require a lot of micromanagement in the first place.

Well your positions seems to be "I don't want any UI/AI improvements because I want a micro-management click-fest" which is fine, and toggles would enable both styles.

In some sense you are right - I would like to see increased options to reduce micromanagement so the game can be played more in a kind of 'admiral mode'. These would be toggleable modes so that those who wish to play click-fest micro-management such as you can do exactly that, and those who prefer more elegant and intelligent AI and UI such as me will also be pleased.

[Ikahime]

In speed basics 2, I scored some hits on the DD's rear 5 inch guns. I assumed this would prevent them from firing back at me, but while their forward turret was unable to rotate backwards, they had two magical 4 inch guns which appeared to be able to fire through the superstructure and funnels.

I also noticed that when I had done enough damage to them to allow me to catch up, my guns seemed to stop firing even though I was at point blank range. It wasn't until the enemy fixed the flooding and tried to run away again that my gunners decided to go back to shooting.

Both seem like bugs to me.

[Maachlan]

Sometimes it seems like it's possible to out run the rotation speed of your turrets. If an enemy ship is dead in the water and you're passing it at high speeds your guns can't rotate fast enough to keep on target.

[akd]

24 minutes ago, Ikahime said:

In speed basics 2, I scored some hits on the DD's rear 5 inch guns. I assumed this would prevent them from firing back at me, but while their forward turret was unable to rotate backwards, they had two magical 4 inch guns which appeared to be able to fire through the superstructure and funnels.

I also noticed that when I had done enough damage to them to allow me to catch up, my guns seemed to stop firing even though I was at point blank range. It wasn't until the enemy fixed the flooding and tried to run away again that my gunners decided to go back to shooting.

Both seem like bugs to me.

Currently, if the bridge tower on a destroyer hull is placed behind the forecastle rather than on it, weapons mounted on the forecastle will have unrestricted 360 degree firing arc (or rather, restricted only by other weapons mounted on the forecastle), including directly backwards through the bridge tower and funnels.  Has been reported.

 

[Ikahime]

It looked like the other 4 inch gun, mounted on the regular deck (not sure what that's called) was shooting through the funnels as well, but This could be my imagination.