>>>Core Patch 1.0 Feedback<<<

[Kane]

Just now, The_Real_Hawkeye said:

I have seen the "withdraw" button active twice, I think, and used it (successful) once.

 

So it does actually work?  Good to know.

[Tycondero]

1 hour ago, Skeksis said:

I'm finding the same thing, it looks like a saturation problem. Maybe damage not allowed to past when adjacent cells already saturated. Ships can adsorb an absurd amount of damage if hits keep hitting saturated cells (something like that). Mostly lighter units, CLs, DDs. Can be frustrating. 

Yes, encountered the same issue. DDs and CLs seem to be able to tank absurd amounts of damage. Even if 12-14 inch guns hit these targets, it takes quite some time to flood/sink them. Either something is wrong (bug) or their ability to absorb damage should be reviewed.

[o Barão]

"Some of our destroyers...."

Well all of them.  And coming from different places. A high level of coordination.

Not an issue since we still don't have ship movement, but funny to see.

[Lakel]

3 hours ago, Kane said:

So it does actually work?  Good to know.

I've clicked it a few times, of them I know one succeeded at delaying, not that it helped my odds any at all when more ships arrived.

Point being it did work, and you do need a certain amount of relative speed for it to likely succeed

[SpardaSon21]

On 12/6/2021 at 1:40 AM, Cptbarney said:

Well it would be impossible, should have a turning radius minimum of about 570 metres. Quite funny to see the AI do on the spot spins with a turning radius of like 5 metres lol.

Thats a bug that needs sorting out, also causes issues with some issues when the AI can just spin and give you the finger, when you need to hit another portion of it to take out the vessel.

Sadly the AI ships are notorious for their unnatural turning performance.  You'd think with multiple knocked out engines and a damaged rudder a 1900-era CL would struggle to turn... but apparently not since it somehow managed to turn inside a ship several knots faster to keep its stern pointed at me.

[The_Real_Hawkeye]

"Minor Victory" huh?

I wonder what is required for a Major one, lol.

 

 

 

[SiWi]

4 hours ago, The_Real_Hawkeye said:

I have seen the "withdraw" button active twice, I think, and used it (successful) once.

 

I see it more often but only once (when I was clear faster) did it successful.

The problem is often that while the enemy capital ship is slow enough to avoid an enemy TB or DD is not.

[ColonelHenry]

Will the spotting mechanics be reworked in the near future? Will screening for the fleet get a rework in starting position at the beginning of a battle? I am serious. The spotting is so bad that it should not stay in the game as it is. Again, I tried to play a 1910 campaign and somehow, a BB can't see a 1100t DD at less than 5km during the evening, well within the range of its torpedoes. Meanwhile the fleet of DD can just use magic smoke to approach and avoid hits while still aiming perfect torpedo shots all the while my supposed screening CL is on the other side of the fleet. This is ridiculous. And I'm tired of writing walls of text explaining how these are terrible designs in terms of gameplay and realism. I want to like this game, I do like many things that it's trying to do but they are either not finished yet, or half-baked.

More questions:
Will the AI stop turning away forever during stern chases that it cannot escape?
Will rudder destroyed actually means something for the AI other than a slight disagreement in turning for them while they can still evade broadsides of torpedoes?
Will the game stop telling my ship what to do and what not to do while I'm trying to manage my fleet? (Like suddenly switching targets when I'm trying to destroy a particular bunched up destroyers? Or perhaps stop telling my ship to NOT turn when clearly the player input will not result in a collision while the AI just keep the ships from doing anything that will in fact lead to a collision?)
Will... you get point. There are some terrible designs that still plague this game since the very first Alpha. And I hope coming to Steam doesn't mean it gets flooded with negative reviews.

Edited December 7, 2021 by ColonelHenry

[SiWi]

short feedback:

enemy ships still seem to have unrealistic truing circles but they don't dodge torpedoes 100% anymore.

In a 2 vs 3 DD engagement my 2 DD's landed 4 torpedo hits with 22inch Oxygen torpedoes. Often hitting not the aimed the DD but the one behind it.

Hits were roughly in 7+ km range.

Enemy DD's were 33.1 knots fast and had a truning circle of 297m.

[RedParadize]

I think that to make the campaign more enjoyable what is the most needed is a cost balancing pass. Atm there is very weird cost inequality. A good example would be the cost difference between a single vs 5x torpedo tube, it cost 10 times more. Tower perk, cost and mass also need a big pass.

[DougToss]

On 12/5/2021 at 10:53 PM, Danelin Aruna said:

So I'm not sure how the unrest mechanic works, but it seems to tick up awfully fast. I forgot to screen cap my results, but a war in 1930 lasted for maybe a year and a half. The British Empire has 900K tons of shipping to my 270K i whittled the number down, i sank around 250K tons of enemy shipping, with out loosing a single ship, they still had me under blockade but i was doing alright. My unrest hovered around 14 but i had new ships coming in a couple of months.

well I guess I sank a little to much the peace deal thing came up and i said to fight to the end, but the campaign ended. I can see loosing ships impact national morale, but i think RTW did this a little better, it was hard to get them to sue for peace in that game, i would have to send almost there entire fleet to the bottom before they would go along with it.

Don't get me wrong i love playing this game its fun and trying out ship ideas is entertaining. Im enjoying it but when you your the under dog i want to be able to break the British blockade and come back from behind. not have the war end prematurely.

On the one hand, the blockade forced Germany’s collapse and surrender, but on the other it took four years to happen.

[SiWi]

37 minutes ago, DougToss said:

On the one hand, the blockade forced Germany’s collapse and surrender, but on the other it took four years to happen.

and massive loses on land

[Littorio]

13 hours ago, Kane said:

Out of curiosity, are the delay and withdraw options for the fleet currently disabled?  I have yet to actually have one of either option succeed, even when my ships are considerably faster than the enemy.  Has anyone else managed to get either of these options to work?

 

10 hours ago, Kane said:

So it does actually work?  Good to know.

 

I have tried both and never seen it work myself.

 

7 hours ago, o Barão said:

"Some of our destroyers...."

Well all of them.  And coming from different places. A high level of coordination.

Not an issue since we still don't have ship movement, but funny to see.

 

This to me is a big issue. Currently, as things stand, their is an UNREAL level of operational coordination between totally random units from very different bases. I expect we will see changes when units are finally visible on patrol (and not just moving between bases), and hopefully this can all be clarified. It's quiet jarring to see ships from Pillau and Emden casually sortie together into the Irish Sea on a regular basis until of each watching their own sectors.

 

4 hours ago, ColonelHenry said:

Will the spotting mechanics be reworked in the near future? Will screening for the fleet get a rework in starting position at the beginning of a battle? I am serious. The spotting is so bad that it should not stay in the game as it is. Again, I tried to play a 1910 campaign and somehow, a BB can't see a 1100t DD at less than 5km during the evening, well within the range of its torpedoes. Meanwhile the fleet of DD can just use magic smoke to approach and avoid hits while still aiming perfect torpedo shots all the while my supposed screening CL is on the other side of the fleet. This is ridiculous. And I'm tired of writing walls of text explaining how these are terrible designs in terms of gameplay and realism. I want to like this game, I do like many things that it's trying to do but they are either not finished yet, or half-baked.

More questions:
Will the AI stop turning away forever during stern chases that it cannot escape?
Will rudder destroyed actually means something for the AI other than a slight disagreement in turning for them while they can still evade broadsides of torpedoes?
Will the game stop telling my ship what to do and what not to do while I'm trying to manage my fleet? (Like suddenly switching targets when I'm trying to destroy a particular bunched up destroyers? Or perhaps stop telling my ship to NOT turn when clearly the player input will not result in a collision while the AI just keep the ships from doing anything that will in fact lead to a collision?)
Will... you get point. There are some terrible designs that still plague this game since the very first Alpha. And I hope coming to Steam doesn't mean it gets flooded with negative reviews.

They did acknowledge the stalled ships as an AI logic bug regarding formations and collision avoidance, so that should be en route soon, perhaps this week.

 

Edited December 7, 2021 by Littorio

[Skeksis]

9 hours ago, Tycondero said:

Yes, encountered the same issue. DDs and CLs seem to be able to tank absurd amounts of damage. Even if 12-14 inch guns hit these targets, it takes quite some time to flood/sink them. Either something is wrong (bug) or their ability to absorb damage should be reviewed.

Larger units have cells that are not completely destroyed so they get the impact allocated but more often lighter units can have cells completely destroyed, so damage is muted. But not exclusive to either larger or lighter units – it can happen anywhere if conditions are right.

This has to be the clue.

If shells hit saturated cells, then there should a chance that the shell will past through and into an un-saturated cell based on caliber verses bulkheads/reinforced, hull form & resistant.

Edited December 7, 2021 by Skeksis

[o Barão]

"This to me is a big issue. Currently, as things stand, their is an UNREAL level of operational coordination between totally random units from very different bases."

The current battle generator is only temporary solution until we have ship movement implemented in game. It seems the engine will check what ships are available and with range to get that location and choose base on that parameters. In the final release version i expect the players to move fleets to where they want them to go, so what you get in battle is exactly what you send to that sector or could be available according to patrol routes set by the player. So is not an issue.

However to be fair, next turn, my DDS had another secret meeting in sea

@Littorio

[Littorio]

Just now, o Barão said:

"This to me is a big issue. Currently, as things stand, their is an UNREAL level of operational coordination between totally random units from very different bases."

The current battle generator is only temporary solution until we have ship movement implemented in game. It seems the engine will check what ships are available and with range to get that location and choose base on that parameters. In the final release version i expect the players to move fleets to where they want them to go, so what you get in battle is exactly what you send to that sector or could be available according to patrol routes set by the player. So is not an issue.

However to be fair, next turn, my DDS had another secret meeting in sea

@Littorio

LOL I observed much the same myself before. The same ships from different ports covering vast distances together, quiet unusual.

[SiWi]

for me more annoying is that often only the same ships are fighting. Not just same type or class but the exact same ship

[Tycondero]

21 minutes ago, o Barão said:

"This to me is a big issue. Currently, as things stand, their is an UNREAL level of operational coordination between totally random units from very different bases."

The current battle generator is only temporary solution until we have ship movement implemented in game. It seems the engine will check what ships are available and with range to get that location and choose base on that parameters. In the final release version i expect the players to move fleets to where they want them to go, so what you get in battle is exactly what you send to that sector or could be available according to patrol routes set by the player. So is not an issue.

However to be fair, next turn, my DDS had another secret meeting in sea

@Littorio

Is this true? I surely hope so! Would be great to be able to compose task forces/fleets.

[Skeksis]

8 hours ago, The_Real_Hawkeye said:

"Minor Victory" huh?

I wonder what is required for a Major one, lol.

 

 

 

There’s no way you should have lost that, unless your finances was in red for 1y 4m?

Or as an outside chance, maybe crew revolt? Did you lower crew accommodations for every ship? If so then maybe the 'end reason' messaging isn't clear enough, there's no way to tell (if you eliminate everything else, what remains is the answer - maybe) . Or just could be bugged crew revolts.

Edited December 7, 2021 by Skeksis

[o Barão]

5 minutes ago, Tycondero said:

Is this true? I surely hope so! Would be great to be able to compose task forces/fleets.

It seems a natural mechanic to have in game.  And from the campaign introduction we can read:

"The Map is limited graphically and in functionality, while the ship movement mechanics are disabled. However, a mission generation system will assess various strategic aspects, data from your active ships and their sea control orders, and will automatically create battles in the various sea regions. Some battles can be avoided, for example defending a small convoy against enemy ships and this would only cost you the loss of some transports - if you choose to not risk your valuable ships. But some key battles will require you to take a mandatory action."

But of course take with a grain of salt what i am saying and ask or wait from a confirmation by the devs.

[The_Real_Hawkeye]

2 hours ago, Skeksis said:

There’s no way you should have lost that, unless your finances was in red for 1y 4m?

Or as an outside chance, maybe crew revolt? Did you lower crew accommodations for every ship? If so then maybe the 'end reason' messaging isn't clear enough, there's no way to tell (if you eliminate everything else, what remains is the answer - maybe) . Or just could be bugged crew revolts.

No, no, I did win. I was just laughing at the Minor victory I got, when I effectively sunk the entire Royal Navy.

[Skeksis]

20 minutes ago, The_Real_Hawkeye said:

No, no, I did win. I was just laughing at the Minor victory I got, when I effectively sunk the entire Royal Navy.

oh lol.

[Iuvenalis]

So some general feedback after playing through the British campaigns through the 1920 period:

1. Research feels too slow. I get that we're trying to represent realistic development times and also that if it is too fast your ships just become obsolete before you're done building them (though that was a reality!) but in each campaign with research maxed I was only able to unlock few techs each time. I think this may be in part because you spend so much time in so many battles fighting with the same ships, against the same ships, it feels like I never get anywhere. Perhaps the answer is fewer battles to allow the campaign to progress more?

2. Ships feel repetitive and I think we need refits. I often find myself unlocking new techs and yet not employing them because it means building entirely new ships and then often scrapping the old ones. Instead, I just fight battles over and over with the same ships. I understand that certain techs should not be able to be refit, but if for example I unlock new rangefinders, or MK2 guns, I should be able to refit the ship without replacing.

3. I'm still confused by the campaign mechanics. I don't know why I have a ship in one port vs another. I don't know why I'm setting them to in being vs sea control. I also don't know if the techs around mines and subs are doing anything at all. 

[Littorio]

3 minutes ago, Iuvenalis said:

So some general feedback after playing through the British campaigns through the 1920 period:

1. Research feels too slow. I get that we're trying to represent realistic development times and also that if it is too fast your ships just become obsolete before you're done building them (though that was a reality!) but in each campaign with research maxed I was only able to unlock few techs each time. I think this may be in part because you spend so much time in so many battles fighting with the same ships, against the same ships, it feels like I never get anywhere. Perhaps the answer is fewer battles to allow the campaign to progress more?

2. Ships feel repetitive and I think we need refits. I often find myself unlocking new techs and yet not employing them because it means building entirely new ships and then often scrapping the old ones. Instead, I just fight battles over and over with the same ships. I understand that certain techs should not be able to be refit, but if for example I unlock new rangefinders, or MK2 guns, I should be able to refit the ship without replacing.

3. I'm still confused by the campaign mechanics. I don't know why I have a ship in one port vs another. I don't know why I'm setting them to in being vs sea control. I also don't know if the techs around mines and subs are doing anything at all. 

Subs and mines aren't implemented at all yet. The techs are placeholders hence the "WIP" next to them. Refits are a must for secondary armaments, fire control, radios, and auxiliary equipment etc. I'm sure tech speeds will be balanced overall once the whole tree is finished. As it stands now, large portions aren't active so it's hard to do any balancing for how long things take.

Edited December 7, 2021 by Littorio

[SiWi]

refits will be needed because quite frankly, building a new cruiser because you can't change the ammo of an existing one is ridiculous.