>>>Core Patch 1.0 Feedback<<<

[DieHard_BR]

2 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:

Problems with money after 1920 should happen with the own fleet creation, right? If you choose to auto-generate fleet, the results should be mostly sufficient.

But then we would have a paper tiger fleet

[SiWi]

I just won the 1920 german campaign with 2 ships...

 

 

[SpardaSon21]

15 hours ago, TAKTCOM said:

Actually, no.
...early British 4" (10.2 cm) breech loader bag guns from the late 1800s. These guns shared common characteristics including weak design and few of them survived in active service after 1900.

4"/15 (10.2 cm) 13cwt Mark I...range was 5,500 yards (5,030 m) at a muzzle velocity of 1,180 fps (360 mps) and an elevation of 20 degrees with a 25 lbs. (11.3 kg) projectile.

4"/25 (10.2 cm) Mark I Muzzle velocity was 1,790 fps (546 mps) with a 25 lbs. (11.3 kg) projectile which gave a range of 7,200 yards (6,580 m) at maximum elevation.

Ah yes, 6.5km.  Which is how much compared to what it is now?  Oh, look, a full kilometer less using heavy shells.  So, congrats.  Even some of the worst guns have performance better than what it is now.  A 4" Mark 2 gun in game with white powder, guncotton, and heavy shells brings you to about 6km or marginally less than that 4"/25.  Not sure how or why considering in-game its an 18kg shell screaming out the barrel at 814 mps, or better performance than a WW1 era 4"/45 that had roughly double the range, but I guess gravity is more intense and the atmosphere thicker in this game than IRL.

Edited November 29, 2021 by SpardaSon21

[BionikSheep]

Can we please, please, PLEASE, get rid of the AI just running away immediately upon every battle?

My 1890 campaign the AI would actually fight, in my 1900 campaign, i have yet been able to fight a single battle, every enemy warship immediately flees upon start of battle, even when they have every advantage, more powerful ships, more ships and greater tonnage and they still flee. Sure i can build faster ships but i honestly have no interest in having to play 1.5 hours of real time for 3 light cruisers to be chased by a torpedo boat. This might be a product of the AI behavior being chosen for the campaign and being the cautious variant, if so, it needs to be toned down to make a decision based on relative fleet strengths, or (due to not having officers in yet) select one of the AI behaviors for each battle and not for the whole campaign. 

Point two. Why are my ships automatically reassigned to new ports when they are repaired? It is aggravating to have to reassign ships from the Baltic back to the north sea every turn after they take a paint chip on the bow.

Other then that, i'm finding it quite enjoyable, here's hoping we get diplomacy and the ability to play a campaign from start to end soon

[o Barão]

3 hours ago, Defaultface said:

To some extent you may be right.... but I am trying to build economically. Maybe I will post a screenshot of what I manage later, I'm still fiddling with designs. but after the first run of designs, and then a second set of more budget designs I'm still struggling to see how to stretch the money much further.

For example right now the cheapest BB design I have is about 14 million, and it's all around mediocre. Maybe I could rebuild the ones I used in the 1910 campaign (btw it would be nice to be able to save the designs from Campaigns as well) which were around 11-13 million IIRC and were good ships in that campaign but might be undergunned with only 12" guns in the 1920 campaign. so let's say I build 3 of these for 35 million.

Then building a CA around the 9" or 10" guns, 25 kts, lowest tonnage, medium bulkheads, medium range, No barbette citadel or torp protection upgrades, no engine upgrades, no reloading or ammo upgrades, the most basic rangefinder etc and you're still somewhere close to 10 million. Putting basic versions of some of the upgrades in brings it to maybe 11-11.5 mill. That also isnt even using up the tonnage limit of the smallest tonnage version of the hull. lets say I build 4 of these for 40 million.

Thats 75 of 90 million spent  for 3 BBs and 4 barebones CAs. That leaves 25 million for CLs and DDs. Maybe you can build equally barebones CLs for around 6 million and DDs for around 2.5 or 3 (right now my CLs are coming out to 8 and DDs at 4 but they could definitely be made cheaper). So that gives me some mix of maybe 2 or 3 CL's and 4 or 5 DD's. I also have built 0 BC's.

In summary building mostly very very basic ships: 3BB, 4 CA, 2 CL, 5 DD

That gives me those ships vs the AI's current 5 BB, 3 BC, 11 CA, 17 CL, & 24 DD

From my experience in the other campaigns the AIs ships while sometimes poorly built and sometimes not, usually cost more than my designs, and also come with trained crews which I don't get either.

Edit: I checked and in this campaign the AI's CL's cost 15.9 million. At 17 CL'S thats 272 million just in CL's...

DD's cost 4.4 mill each. x 24 = 106 mill

Not that the campaign isn't winnable, it just makes the gameplay fairly unrealistic. In the 1910 campaign I basically built a similar ratio of ships as above to the enemy (although in 1910 I could build budget, but still pretty decent ships) and quickly lost 60% of transports because I got blockaded and didnt have enough presence to protect convoys I guess. But I was able to defeat their ships in almost every single battle without losses due to weak AI designs and bad tactics until there was a revolt from all the negative prestige I guess. The AIs poor ship design was RNG as in a previous campaign they had built the same amount of  much more dangerous ships which would have made things more difficult.

If you are able to come up with cheaper designs that aren't just totally barebones Id be interested to know how.

I finally had the time to play the 1920 campaign and i must say you are 100% correct. Apart from my DD design which i could make a cheaper version, the other ones are basic designs. Not using fancy engines or the best armor quality, etc, etc.

I only managed to build this.

Cheap raiding CL.

My Graf Spee inspiration for CA

My 6 guns BB design.

3.7m for an universal DD design? And i am not using turbines engines.

I only have 11 ships and the enemy comes with 55. So exactly 5x times more.

@Nick Thomadiswell i like the challenge, but this is maybe too much.

[admiralsnackbar]

Questions and comments

1) Battles Who is the attacker and who is the defender here? I find myself being squared against... usually, individual unescorted battleships who have no desire to fight and are (due to the super low tech) out of my visual range. I only get the occasional updates about where they are relative to my ship so i never know whether i am getting closer or not since you can't know an enemy's ship speed without seeing the ship and identifying it first. 

A significant portion of my campaign battles consist in these 'chasing invisible enemy' things... Sometimes It's me chasing enemies that are faster than i am and have no desire to fight. In the context of a battle with no objectives being defended how can such a thing even occur? If the enemy doesn't want to fight me and has the speed to disengage, barring an ambush just don't have these battles occur. 

2) Also, i'm finding myself losing convoys in battles that i don't have any way to participate in, is this because i don't have enough of a particular warship? 

3) The light cruiser can field a pair of 7 inch guns on either side of the front and back, it looks rather silly, I would recommend having it so that for those light cruisers you can only get a single gun on the front and back. 


 

Edited November 30, 2021 by admiralsnackbar

[RedParadize]

11 hours ago, TAKTCOM said:

But this is not true. The most advanced, high-tech and original fleet before Dreadnought arrived  had two archetypes of cruisers. Not three, not five, not ten. Just two.
 

You see that's why you should not always look at history as absolute reference. They may have been a very small number of design in any given era, but what does that leave the player with? If we have no choice but to follow a predetermined path, then the game isn't about designing ship.

At that point what you are looking for is a simulator with premade ship. On my end I like designing stuff.

[ColonelHenry]

10 hours ago, o Barão said:

Drachinifel mentions that in the video if you didn't noticed, and same thing. The interesting part about the 1890 campaign starts at 9:00, the guns accuracy at ranges below 1000 yards, starts at 9:30. So 30 seconds later. Difficult to miss really unless for someone that don't want to watch the video.

Yea, except he just briefly mention an engagement just above 1000 yards. Come on man, stop that. Maybe watch the video a bit better? I watched this one already before you mentioned it. And at the start he literally said 500 yard is AoS battle range. Like...

The problem is that because it is purely percentage, some people might never see a 23% chance misses at 500m between two battleships, or entire salvo missing TBs that shouldn't even be alive with near misses like that from large caliber guns. For some, they simply get the hit that save them and shrug off when someone said something about it.

[ColonelHenry]

@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.

[ColonelHenry]

8 hours ago, Iuvenalis said:

If you're finding yourself frustrated by torpedo boats charging up against your helpless BBs, then you probably need better secondary batteries and even more importantly a better fleet screen of cruisers to detect the TBs and allow you to evade and destroy them. Also, if you have fleet screens engaging them they probably will dump their torpedoes at them who should stand a much better change of taking evasion actions.

I did not find my battleships helpless against TB, but TBs are annoying to fight against because small guns at close range (500m) is worse than AoS SOL cannons (I doubt they were THAT bad, else we would see HMS Victory steel version with 100 guns blasting in 1900s), while they can tank so many BB grade shells, which I have said the current problem is two folded: gunnery and damage model.

[henfor04]

Can someone tell me the math behind sinking transports, or is it all RNG? I've been trying out Germany and I'm constantly at 50% transports losing multiple a month regardless of what I do. Is it to with ship types deployed? regions? I know I have a lot of ships in the Baltic but can't move em because of **missing features**.

[o Barão]

@ColonelHenry

 

Well let's see. On one side we have a renowned naval historian, with a vast knowledge of naval battles, ship building, technological advances and what the impact is on tactics, etc, etc.

 

On the other side, we have you. A stubborn guy who can't admit that reality is very different from what he imagines it to be.

 

Hard choice.

[AdmER]

this kind of comment serve nothing, Colonelhenry assessment is ok.a TB is the size of a regular semi-truck. At 500m it is very hard to miss. Even without a good crew and equipment, it is obvious at this close distance accuracy was way better than what we have in the game.

Secondaries should be good to deal with 1 or 2 TB. Escort from CL would have been necessary again a fleet of TB.

 

Edited November 30, 2021 by AdmER

[MyTeitoku]

After winning the 1910 German scenario, I am still stuck at 1910. Fix when?

So it appears that winning through peace deal doesn't unlock the next decade of war. You need to force the enemy to have a revolution. Imo this needs to be changed.

Edited November 30, 2021 by MyTeitoku

[Evil4Zerggin]

1 hour ago, henfor04 said:

Can someone tell me the math behind sinking transports, or is it all RNG? I've been trying out Germany and I'm constantly at 50% transports losing multiple a month regardless of what I do. Is it to with ship types deployed? regions? I know I have a lot of ships in the Baltic but can't move em because of **missing features**.

There is some RNG involved, but on average it is determined by power projection ratio. In turn power projection is primarily determined by heavy ships and op range.

[RedParadize]

Look at these two ship, I made them to be roughly equal in cost:



They have the same armour, main gun, and exept for torpedo protection have the same perk. The cruiser has two more sets of 5"er but in the grand scheme of thing it wont matter much. Because of its tower the cruiser will be slightly more accurate, but again it will not be a stellar difference.

On the other hand, the battle cruiser weight 28,500 t, that mean that in term of transport defense and force projection it weight much more. Why Cruiser cost as much as a roughly equal Battlecruiser? its simple, its tower cost more. And to make it worst this is the cheapest tower that CA hull has.

This lead to a very odd balance. A nation equipped with 1910 ships would win vs a 1930 one. Not only in term of transport protection and force projection, but also in combat. This is a serious issue.

Edited November 30, 2021 by RedParadize

[RedParadize]

accidental double post...

Edited November 30, 2021 by RedParadize

[neph]

13 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:

Admirals,

an important hotfix has just become available.

Hotfix Update v94 (29/11/2021) READ HERE
- Added movement of ships between ports. You can now select ships from each port and move them to other friendly ports (Work in Progress).
- Added mouse sensitivity options in the controls. Players who had issues scrolling the map can adjust this new setting to suit their needs.
- Improved Auto-Design to not accept ships with side instability. 
- Adjusted further the aiming of ships to be more consistent when focusing on a target persistently, especially at close range.
- You can now unlock the initial campaign years up to 1930 (fixed also a bug which caused the campaign years to unlock without winning).
- Increased AI aggressiveness in battle.
- Decreased average ship distance in divisions with Loose Spread (ships could have a very stretched out formation, reducing the cohesion needed for effective formations).
- Increased Germany Base income (often Germany started too weak).
- Slightly increased crew regeneration capacity, to support the construction of new ships for both player and AI.
- Slightly increased the XP bonus from ship combat performance.
- Power projection calculations improved so that the stronger fleet properly triggers a blockade.

Awesome!!

[SodaBit]

7 hours ago, SiWi said:

I just won the 1920 german campaign with 2 ships...

 

 

Had the same problem earlier. Defeated a British squadron with no losses of my own, His Majesty's head served to the people on a silver platter and the first Sea Lord thrown out on his a** and told to never return.
Kinda makes you wonder how an AI USN would react to the Raid on Pearl Harbor.

[Kane]

13 minutes ago, SodaBit said:

Had the same problem earlier. Defeated a British squadron with no losses of my own, His Majesty's head served to the people on a silver platter and the first Sea Lord thrown out on his a** and told to never return.
Kinda makes you wonder how an AI USN would react to the Raid on Pearl Harbor.

I'm guessing crucifixion.  Just had similar happen in my 1930's campaign.  Won in 2 turns.  Turn - 1, nothing eventful.  Turn - 2, sink a battleship with destroyer on a convoy raid, then on convoy defense wipe out several cruisers with a battleship of my own.  Lord Beatty is sent into exile and the war ends.  Didn't think to screen-cap it I was laughing so hard.  I think it might be related to something with victory points, where a big win early on puts you so far ahead of the enemy they tank and that's it.

[Speglord]

5 hours ago, MyTeitoku said:

After winning the 1910 German scenario, I am still stuck at 1910. Fix when?

The campaign currently does not go past 1910.

EDIT: Nevermind, just checked the hotfix patch notes lmao

Edited November 30, 2021 by Speglord

[RedParadize]

<-Left: 10"             Right:9"->



Yep...

[ColonelHenry]

5 hours ago, o Barão said:

Well let's see. On one side we have a renowned naval historian, with a vast knowledge of naval battles, ship building, technological advances and what the impact is on tactics, etc, etc.

 

On the other side, we have you. A stubborn guy who can't admit that reality is very different from what he imagines it to be.

 

Hard choice.

Hard choice, when you put words into people mouth like it's your daily business. Really. Watch the video again. And tell me. Where in the video did Drachinifel said anything about combat range below 1000 yards being inaccurate for pre-dreadnought era. None. He mentioned range that is about 500 or 400 yards being easier for a human to judge distance and ballistic. But it was a general statement.

Really. All of my argument with your had been YOU straw manning people argument. Aka Lying about what other people said. Really. It is embarrassing.

And I am willing to change my stance on this if someone could really give me any statistic or even anecdotal evidence. Again, we have no idea how accurate guns can be at 500m for the discussed time period.

Edited November 30, 2021 by ColonelHenry

[Cptbarney]

9 hours ago, ArtifaX said:

Is it just me or the accuracy is completely busted... I'm not gonna argue how accurate guns were in 1890s (probably not that accurate), BUT:

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

2. 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.

That 2nd one is killing immersion.. shells should be landing randomly in an area and not all be directed to immediate vicinity if rng calculated them as a miss.. 

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.

[TAKTCOM]

12 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:

Can you show what you manage to build for a first turn, with Germans, in your custom fleet?

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.