>>>Core Patch 1.0 Feedback<<<

[T_the_ferret]

19 minutes ago, Cptbarney said:

Nah, ships were just that inaccurate in real life. Since you had to account for the enemy ships speed, position, potential position and speed, then also wind and how choppy the waves are, quality of barrels and powder for your own vessel. And then the same things for your own ship.

On stationary targets dreadnoughts got i think around 3-4%. Yes its that bad. Annoying, but realistic nonetheless.

I have to agree its frustrating as hell, but sadly just how boags were really. especially with their more primitive methods of gunnery.

Then gosh at least update the texts and help lists. I keep being told "range = accuracy is realistic" even if it is at least don't mislead players by saying on modules that reduce range that they're more accurate but have less range, because that's straight up a lie.

[Cptbarney]

1 minute ago, T_the_ferret said:

Then gosh at least update the texts and help lists. I keep being told "range = accuracy is realistic" even if it is at least don't mislead players by saying on modules that reduce range that they're more accurate but have less range, because that's straight up a lie.

Well the closer you get the more accurate the guns should be, unless its a really small and nippy ship. Although at ranges of 1km-2km and below it should be around 4-5% i imagine, and anything below 1km should start to climb pretty rapidly. 

But ships in the 1890's and 1900's were pretty inaccurate even at close ranges never mind precise and only got better past the battle of jutland, where they could extend the ranges out further, while still having somekind of ok accuracy and precision at those ranges.

Atm the gunnery system is mostly rng, rather than co-ordinates, prediction and aim adjust, so instead of accuracy building up slowly as you keep firing it's more of a predetermined list of numbers for both ships and their shells. Obviously depending on range and if the ships are damaged or not will also effect all of that as well.

But as you close in especially on less choppy waters, it should get more accurate regardless. I think the lack of visuals for the sea changing in frequency doesnt help either.

[T_the_ferret]

1 minute ago, Cptbarney said:

Well the closer you get the more accurate the guns should be, unless its a really small and nippy ship. Although at ranges of 1km-2km and below it should be around 4-5% i imagine, and anything below 1km should start to climb pretty rapidly. 

But ships in the 1890's and 1900's were pretty inaccurate even at close ranges never mind precise and only got better past the battle of jutland, where they could extend the ranges out further, while still having somekind of ok accuracy and precision at those ranges.

Atm the gunnery system is mostly rng, rather than co-ordinates, prediction and aim adjust, so instead of accuracy building up slowly as you keep firing it's more of a predetermined list of numbers for both ships and their shells. Obviously depending on range and if the ships are damaged or not will also effect all of that as well.

But as you close in especially on less choppy waters, it should get more accurate regardless. I think the lack of visuals for the sea changing in frequency doesnt help either.

It certainly doesn't show so in both the accuracy tooltip when building ships nor in battle, because for some reason range also affects accuracy at 1km no matter the gun. So the less range you have the less accuracy you have firing at point blank range. Been pointing this out for weeks but never got an answer on it beyond "you're such a WoWs player bro"

[Cptbarney]

2 minutes ago, T_the_ferret said:

It certainly doesn't show so in both the accuracy tooltip when building ships nor in battle, because for some reason range also affects accuracy at 1km no matter the gun. So the less range you have the less accuracy you have firing at point blank range. Been pointing this out for weeks but never got an answer on it beyond "you're such a WoWs player bro"

Hmm, must be a bug then since they would be inaccurate, but not that inaccurate. As when i played the previous patches it was the less range the more accuracy, so somethings wrong there. Reminds me of the turret armour bug where no matter what armour it had if your turret got hit it would detonate killing your ship or severely crippling it.

Yeah that will have to be looked at if your both around 1km and the accuracy isnt at least 10% or higher especially at point blank when it should just be 100% really.

[UltimateShipAdmiral]

Hello!
Can anyone help me with the bug I reported earlier?
The two patches so far have not brought any changes. I used to be able to play custom battles normally, but now I cannot get to the ship design screen.

I described more about bug in this post:

 

Edited November 30, 2021 by UltimateShipAdmiral

[T_the_ferret]

That's the other thing, i keep pointing it out to everyone that for some reason max range dictates 1km accuracy, but nobody's picking up on that either. Its frustrating

Edited November 30, 2021 by T_the_ferret

[Faolind]

57 minutes ago, T_the_ferret said:

That's the other thing, i keep pointing it out to everyone that for some reason max range dictates 1km accuracy, but nobody's picking up on that either. Its frustrating

wouldn't that be because the velocity involved makes it easier to aim down 1000 yds? (less lead required on aiming)

In other words, its not that Range is the determining factor on Accuracy- rather, they are linked by the reality of velocity.

So, 1k range is affected by velocity (which also affects range), but 1k accuracy is also affected by other things, like crew level, modules (some decrease it), and then also by aspect, speed, wind... etc

I don't know that I'm right, but it seems you are making a simple logic error here.

[T_the_ferret]

6 minutes ago, Faolind said:

wouldn't that be because the velocity involved makes it easier to aim down 1000 yds? (less lead required on aiming)

In other words, its not that Range is the determining factor on Accuracy- rather, they are linked by the reality of velocity.

So, 1k range is affected by velocity (which also affects range), but 1k accuracy is also affected by other things, like crew level, modules (some decrease it), and then also by aspect, speed, wind... etc

I don't know that I'm right, but it seems you are making a simple logic error here.

No i don't mean that, i mean the fact the tooltip and every information inside the game says that max range is not linked to close range accuracy, while it is and is an important factor no matter the gun

[o Barão]

8 minutes ago, T_the_ferret said:

No i don't mean that, i mean the fact the tooltip and every information inside the game says that max range is not linked to close range accuracy, while it is and is an important factor no matter the gun

I am trying to understand your issue.

You are saying that modifications that increase the gun range should not be allowed to increase the gun accuracy?

"i mean the fact the tooltip and every information inside the game says that max range is not linked to close range accuracy"

Can you share a print where this situation happens?

[T_the_ferret]

In my own personal opinion, range and accuracy should be separate as right now modification that reduce range but increase accuracy are useless, as accuracy ends up decreased by this.

In an objective view, having tooltips saying range and accuracy are separate is bad as its a lie, the higher your range the higher your accuracy. 

This tooltip, as well as many others (Cordite, Light Shells, Heavy Shells) imply range and accuracy are totally separate statistics, and that for example by taking Tube Powder as propellant you have less range but more accuracy. While that is completely false, taking Tube Powder instead decreases both your overall accuracy and range.

[o Barão]

29 minutes ago, T_the_ferret said:

10 minutes ago, T_the_ferret said:

In my own personal opinion, range and accuracy should be separate as right now modification that reduce range but increase accuracy are useless, as accuracy ends up decreased by this.

In an objective view, having tooltips saying range and accuracy are separate is bad as its a lie, the higher your range the higher your accuracy. 

This tooltip, as well as many others (Cordite, Light Shells, Heavy Shells) imply range and accuracy are totally separate statistics, and that for example by taking Tube Powder as propellant you have less range but more accuracy. While that is completely false, taking Tube Powder instead decreases both your overall accuracy and range.

 

 

Ok i am understanding what you are saying. I also got confused the 1st time when i compared shells and propellant. Well i am still am confused reading those stats to be fair.

The thing is you have two variables working there.

- One is shell muzzle velocity. The higher this number, more range you get , less lead you need to aim, better accuracy. 

- The other is the "Tube Powder I" will give you some benefits to accuracy due to lower barrel erosion.

However the thing is the benefits tube powder I gives you is not enough to compensate the lower shell velocity. So your gunners will still need to compensate more the target movement to hit so less accuracy.

But i do agree with you that this stats could be reworked to avoid this issues.

 

My issue with propellants is different. Why can a propellant that give the gun less range,  less shell velocity can also increase the penetration?

Maybe someone can explain this better.

[T_the_ferret]

Yeah that's another thing, a lot of modules seems useless, convoluted or downright bizarre in how they work. For example Dunnite is such a good explosive, its incredible, but its also obsolete very quickly and replaced by things that do not increase penetration? If anything it should stay a niche explosive all the way to the end of the game

[Nick Thomadis]

53 minutes ago, T_the_ferret said:

In my own personal opinion, range and accuracy should be separate as right now modification that reduce range but increase accuracy are useless, as accuracy ends up decreased by this.

In an objective view, having tooltips saying range and accuracy are separate is bad as its a lie, the higher your range the higher your accuracy. 

This tooltip, as well as many others (Cordite, Light Shells, Heavy Shells) imply range and accuracy are totally separate statistics, and that for example by taking Tube Powder as propellant you have less range but more accuracy. While that is completely false, taking Tube Powder instead decreases both your overall accuracy and range.

Some things should be self explanatory, of course bigger range affects accuracy, the text itself says that accuracy is high but at shorter ranges. Players can compare accuracy and penetration in gun tables, just by switching propellants and comparing the stats.

[Ink]

On 11/26/2021 at 4:50 AM, UltimateShipAdmiral said:

Hello!
I have a bug where since the last patch, custom battles are completely non-functional. After clicking "custom battle" the game freezes on the starting page. The change to the next page occurs only after another click on the "custom battle" button. The game then goes to a familiar window, but in which it is not possible to press any of the buttons visible below or to change any options, or to even go back to game start page. Everything seems get stuck and only closing game from task manager is possible.

I have the latest game patch, also used the game repair option (from launcher) and it has not had any effect, I have also removed the two previously mentioned files with saved ship designs - also did not fix this issue.

Admiral, please post such posts in the support section: https://forum.game-labs.net/forum/179-support/ 

Please try to fully reinstall the game by this guide:

1) Uninstall the game from launcher, then uninstall the launcher, after that make sure no temporary files remained:

2.1)

• Press Win+R then type: %HOMEPATH%\AppData\LocalLow\Game Labs\
• Right click on Ultimate Admiral Dreadnoughts folder and delete it

2.2)

• Open Windows Command Prompt (press Windows + R and type cmd, press enter afterwards)
  • type: regedit
• Go to HKEY_CURRENT_USER\SOFTWARE\Game Labs\Ultimate Admiral Dreadnoughts
• Right click on  Ultimate Admiral Dreadnoughts folder and delete it
• Close regedit

3) 

• Open Windows Command Prompt (press Windows + R), then type: %HOMEPATH%\AppData\Local\
• delete the folder Ultimate Admiral Dreadnoughts if it is there

4) Install the launcher and download the game

[DougToss]

13 hours ago, ArtifaX said:

Big ships sailing almost side by side within 1-2km should not be missing that much.

 

They should, you’d be surprised. I know this is very hard to accept, but it was considered extraordinary to hit beyond 1000 yards. 
 

13 hours ago, ArtifaX said:

Miss pattern is a joke.. I was chasing a ship for a long while (like 1h in-game time). It shot over 1000 shells as i was slowly approaching and got 10 hits (which is weird but fine). But all those hits are 10-30m to the left or right. Spot on. It look ridiculous to the point that it felt like the ship had some kind of deflector field just guiding all shell to really close misses.

This, I think might be on to something.

I don’t want to get too in the weed, because I spent a decade in the artillery, and there’s a lot going on here, but there are particular patterns and distributions to fall of shot I would like to see implemented instead of a dice roll determined at the muzzle (if that’s what’s determining distribution now)

Lots of info on gunnery errors here.

[T_the_ferret]

46 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:

Some things should be self explanatory, of course bigger range affects accuracy, the text itself says that accuracy is high but at shorter ranges. Players can compare accuracy and penetration in gun tables, just by switching propellants and comparing the stats.

Well yeah but this makes no sense because all this does is reduce accuracy at all ranges, making the text misleading. 

[DougToss]

11 hours ago, ColonelHenry said:

@Nick ThomadisI would be very careful in terms of AI running away feedback. I think AI running away when they determine the battle is not worth it, is good. But then it should not even put players in 1 v 1 battle if the AI could really just run away. I think it is better to tweak the map battle, rather than the AI.

A million times this!!

The AI preserving their force during the campaign is critical!

How many near-misses were there in the real North Sea Campaign? Heck! The Germans did turn and run for home at the main phase of Jutland.

For a smaller navy to preserve its force is a must.

 

Now, finding ways to exit a battle when the enemy has broken contact, rather than searching fruitlessly, would be nice.

[DougToss]

5 hours ago, ColonelHenry said:

Again, we have no idea how accurate guns can be at 500m for the discussed time period.

We do. There are Royal Naval Gunnery Tables published in Warrior to Dreadnought and The Grand Fleet. I just don’t have either in front of me right now, but yes we do have that information at pretty much all combat ranges for most calibres against a variety of target sizes including TB, and Royal Navy tests on the effectiveness of various calibres at sinking or disabling TB, also published in those same books. 
 

I know @arkhangelsk is familiar with them, he might be able to help.

[o Barão]

1 hour ago, T_the_ferret said:

Yeah that's another thing, a lot of modules seems useless, convoluted or downright bizarre in how they work. For example Dunnite is such a good explosive, its incredible, but its also obsolete very quickly and replaced by things that do not increase penetration? If anything it should stay a niche explosive all the way to the end of the game

To be fair it says the shell weight is heavier. That explains the better penetration values.

However if the shell is 33% heavier because we are using this propellant why is the reload time lower? Is this charge propellant so light weight that can compensate the heavier shell and so lower the reload times?

For comparison.

The super heavy shells increase the shell weight by 45% and it gives a 5% penalty in the reload times.

So it can only be a propellant charge dimension. However:

Tube Powder I: -3% gun reload time; +25% shell weight; -8% range

Tube Powder II: - 4% gun reload time; +29% shell weight; - 7% range

Tube Powder III: - 5% gun reload times; +33% shell weight; - 9% range

So the heavier the shell , quicker is to reload?

What is the progression relation with the range values? Shouldn't be  -%6 range for Tube Powder III?

@Nick Thomadis

 

Edited November 30, 2021 by o Barão

[akd]

11 minutes ago, o Barão said:

To be fair it says the shell weight is heavier. That explains the better penetration values.

However if the shell is 33% heavier because we are using this propellant why is the reload time lower? Is this charge propellant so light weight that can compensate the heavier shell and so lower the reload times?

For comparison.

The super heavy shells increase the shell weight by 45% and it gives a 5% penalty in the reload times.

So it can only be a propellant charge dimension. However:

Tube Powder I: -3% gun reload time; +25% shell weight; -8% range

Tube Powder II: - 4% gun reload time; +29% shell weight; - 7% range

Tube Powder III: - 5% gun reload times; +33% shell weight; - 9% range

So the heavier the shell , quicker is to reload?

What is the progression relation with the range values? Shouldn't be  -%6 range for Tube Powder III?

@Nick Thomadis

 

Sounds like they forgot to update this after separating explosives and propellant.  Propellant should not be affecting shell weight.  I guess in theory it could affect the weight of powder charges carried in the ship, but those don’t go out the barrel.

Edited November 30, 2021 by akd

[SiWi]

4 hours ago, TAKTCOM said:

It does not matter.  

So, the auto-fleet gives the player ships and money for a total of about 300 million. Now let's look at the option "Create Own"

You give player 1/4 or in best case 1/3 funds which receives auto-designer. We are building few ships because you are not giving the player enough money. It's all.

thank you for doing the math I was suspecting it given that even if I go for "medicore" ships and not the best current ships I could, I still end up with less then 5 ships...

[DougToss]

37 minutes ago, o Barão said:

However if the shell is 33% heavier because we are using this propellant why is the reload time lower? Is this charge propellant so light weight that can compensate the heavier shell and so lower the reload times?

You know I had just stopped to think about that and reread several times to see if I was reading it right.

 

Heavier shells are harder to work, and since the 1890 guns are firing bagged charges, a heavy projectile and light propellant is still slow - you have to wrestle to get the heavy projectile up to the breach and seated, even if you can lift the charge bag easily once it’s in.

[ColonelHenry]

1 hour ago, DougToss said:

We do. There are Royal Naval Gunnery Tables published in Warrior to Dreadnought and The Grand Fleet. I just don’t have either in front of me right now, but yes we do have that information at pretty much all combat ranges for most calibres against a variety of target sizes including TB, and Royal Navy tests on the effectiveness of various calibres at sinking or disabling TB, also published in those same books. 
 

I know @arkhangelsk is familiar with them, he might be able to help.

I'll get into them when I can, I'll see what I could find. Got them pdf files, don't ask me where

[ColonelHenry]

1 hour ago, DougToss said:

I don’t want to get too in the weed, because I spent a decade in the artillery, and there’s a lot going on here, but there are particular patterns and distributions to fall of shot I would like to see implemented instead of a dice roll determined at the muzzle (if that’s what’s determining distribution now)

Jesus, you said it better than I could ever have said it. Yes! The distribution looks very much just for show right now. If the devs have time, and can spend an amount of time just focus on just gunnery, and how it could be better represented... I think it would be MUCH better for this game. And remember, if you guys spend the time now to do the research, the problem solving, the coding, etc... you guys will not have to do it again from zero for the next installment.

[Nick Thomadis]

1 hour ago, o Barão said:

So the heavier the shell , quicker is to reload?

No, when you switch shell type, the bonuses update the overall stats. You can see what each component does by hovering on each shell type.