>>>Core Patch 1.0 Feedback<<<

[henfor04]

13 hours ago, Evil4Zerggin said:

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.

I see, will look into it more. Was closing in on the first campaign victory and I guess the blind truth was that I still sank more of the enemy's transports making them lose in a revolution.

[arkhangelsk]

1 hour ago, Nick Thomadis said:

- Aiming of guns fine tuning.

Was the @1000m jacked up? It is now much more difficult to get the torpedo off when they have firing ranges of only 900m and sometimes refuse to fire even when they should.

 

[DougToss]

32 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:

@Everybody else
I am sorry that I cannot reply to all, I notice your requests, we will improve anything possible, according to our priorities. 

You’re doing a great job. It makes me really happy to see you engage with us @Nick Thomadis. It’s noticed and appreciated, I think I can say that for all of us.

[The_Real_Hawkeye]

Ok, so I started a new campaign as Germany, manual building my fleet.

First engagement: 1 CL vs. 1 CL. Never got to see the enemy.

As others have stated, while I applaud the AI's "live to fight another day" attitude, how on earth did he brits know they were facing a CL that slightly outmassed them?

But that's not the reason for this post. The reason was the first engagement. Convoy. 

Two of my CL vs. one CA, two CL and a dozen transports

Ok, I advance towards the smoke, and only find the transports. Great, I think and close as fast as possible.

Now, the first surprise: Each transports packs three 4" guns. Outch, that's a lot of 10.5cm guns all together (and yes, the transports were pretty bunched up.

Still, I take out most of them with guns and torpedoes (though transports regularly surviving a single torp hit in 1890 is a bit much to swallow)

Then shells out of nowhere appear - ah, the British escorts have finally arrived.

My CLs are kinda banged up by now and most of their torps are gone, so I decide to call it a day and withdraw.

The "end battle" button shows up after a while and quite satisfied with myself I press it - only to be greeted with a "Defeat" screen.

Apparently, the transports I sunk didn't count one bit for the final score - in a CONVOY battle.

Sorry, what?

 

Update:

Next engagement, another Convoy Attack

Me: 1 x CA, 2 x CL

British: 1 x BB, 2 x CL, 6 x TR

I go in and spot one TR and the BB.

I try to close with the BB, but it turns away and starts running.

Ok, fine, I take care of the TRs for now (this time, they aren't armed). I sink one after the other and after the 5th? a message pops up "Mission accomplished, sink 70% of transports.

Hey, great, perhaps last time I should have hang around to sink one more TR.

I hunt down the last TR, end the battle and I get a victory - and 0 VP.

Edited November 30, 2021 by The_Real_Hawkeye

[SiWi]

I think the "revolution" mechanic is a bit over the top in the moment.

 

I just did a 1930 German campaign and after sinking 5 enemy ships there was a revolution and I "won" the war (on a side note: revolutions shouldn't automatically end wars)

[DaLaser]

Well that war was a bit short

 

One Battle and Brittain just surrendered

[Nick Thomadis]

5 minutes ago, SiWi said:

I think the "revolution" mechanic is a bit over the top in the moment.

 

I just did a 1930 German campaign and after sinking 5 enemy ships there was a revolution and I "won" the war (on a side note: revolutions shouldn't automatically end wars)

 

Just now, DaLaser said:

Well that war was a bit short

 

One Battle and Brittain just surrendered

Do you remember if the enemy had too few ships in their main fleet? We will fix this.

[SiWi]

Just now, Nick Thomadis said:

 

Do you remember if the enemy had too few ships in their main fleet? We will fix this.

I don't remember exact numbers but I had about 12 ships and the enemy after loses should have around 45.

[DaLaser]

6 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:

 

Do you remember if the enemy had too few ships in their main fleet? We will fix this.

When I won Brittain had 51 Ships compared to my 38 ships

[WiselessOwl]

When I unlock first rangefinders in 1890 campaign, they only become available in the designer as long as I choose to create a completely new ship. If I copy the existing class to update its design - then the button with "rangefinders" in equipment tab does not show up at all..

[Enigmato]

Additional information from v95

Some of the ship's base maintenance cost is erratically low. (Definitely Modern Battleship I / Moder Light Cruiser?)

Mission progress loss is probably from transition of user data from xml to json. Some of the players might skipped a few version, and lost their chance to convert old save data to new format, thus losing the mission progress.

[Diesel]

1 hour ago, Nick Thomadis said:

 

Do you remember if the enemy had too few ships in their main fleet? We will fix this.

Had the same issue in 1910, 1920 and 1930. Britain loses the first engagement, a heavy cruiser or two and some smaller stuff gets sunk and they sue for peace in turn 2 or 3 despite outnumbering me 2-1 in heavy units and 3-1 in cruisers and still being able to maintain the blockade.

 

Also repair costs are pretty ridiculous for the larger surface units. A one month repair to get some 5' paint scratches out of a Dreadnought currently cost 12kk bucks.

[Toby]

so ill aks again.

does anyone know why when i unlock a new hull type in the campaign can i not select said hull in the design ship? i have ships of equal or greater hull weight built already.

[Iuvenalis]

@Nick Thomadis

EDIT: I just restarted the game and saw there was another patch to update, but still can't select any other time period. Will play another campaign and see if it is still broken.

so I achieved a minor victory as both the british and germans in the 1890 campaign, but I didn't unlock the next time period for either. Both times it seemed a little wonky. As the british, the germans offered a peace treaty, I accepted and the war didn't end. A turn or two later they offered again and I accepted and then it ended. As the germans, the british offered a treaty and I selected fight to the end. The game ended saying they accepted peace. 

Edited November 30, 2021 by Iuvenalis

[SiWi]

2 minutes ago, Iuvenalis said:

@Nick Thomadis

so I achieved a minor victory as both the british and germans in the 1890 campaign, but I didn't unlock the next time period for either. Both times it seemed a little wonky. As the british, the germans offered a peace treaty, I accepted and the war didn't end. A turn or two later they offered again and I accepted and then it ended. As the germans, the british offered a treaty and I selected fight to the end. The game ended saying they accepted peace. 

the war not ending simulates that the government makes the decision not you the admiral of the fleet.

They listen to you and decided, "nah we want more out of this".

thou the game needs to make this more transparent (what the devs probably know) and tell players what likely happens depending on what they advise the gouverment.

[Iuvenalis]

1 minute ago, SiWi said:

the war not ending simulates that the government makes the decision not you the admiral of the fleet.

Ah, got it, thanks! Bug still exists about not unlocking the next time period though

[aradragoon]

Playing for quite a few number of hours as Germany in the campaign here are my thoughts:

1. Aggressiveness - I know its been brought up but the AI aggressiveness is just absolutely terrible. There have been convoy defense missions, that is the AI attacking my convoy, where  the enemy just runs away. Going further into this topic it doesn't seem or feel like winning the convoy missions, as the attacker, has any relevant impact. Does the number of transports destroyed lower the enemy transport by that much? I know that unless I destroy warships I get literally no victory points which also points to horrible design. Finally it seems my fights with the AI ALWAYS end up with the AI kiting away.
Fix: First make better decision making for the AI. Second make convoy missions have more impact. Third, and this is a bit more complex, I would use the weight system, so that if an attacking force is roughly equal or superior and they disengage it results in some loss of victory points. (Similar to losing morale at not being willing to fight.) I.E. 2 CAs 1 CL and 2 TB's attack 2 CA's 1 CL and 1TB and they disengage they have a negative impact. The flip side being if something like 3 TB's attack 1 BB, 1 CA, and 2 CL's a disengage has no negative impact.

2. Victory points - in my 1890 gameplay the British are just gaining VP's each turn. Why? even when no transports are sunk it seems to go up. We have roughly equal fleets and the only further problem is that over half the battles they simply run away.

3. AI - It seems that the AI cheats, that is that the AI knows where my ships are and if they choose to run away its directly away. I don't mean either that they know the general location but it always seems to be exact. Add in to this accuracy, I have noticed where I have shots with 40 - 60% accuracy and the AI has 10 - 20% with the same guns (say 7in). The AI will often end up getting 10 hits to my 2. I understand random chance but with the frequency it happens I have to question if the UI hit chance on the guns is wrong or if the AI has hidden bonus modifiers.

4. Player impact - Despite having most of my ships active the impact I, as a player, have on many of the facets in the game, like economy and often even losing transports, seems like its lower than it should be. Transport wise, as I have said, I have roughly an equally sized fleet but losing many with no convoy battles makes me feel like it often doesn't matter what I do. (tried having all ships on sea control, in being, and even splits just for testing.) I understand the realities of things but as its a game it would seem better to find a middle ground.

5. RESEARCH - The research system is trash. I am sorry because I love the game but what makes it trash, to me, is how poorly the priorities are handled. I know this has been said so I will leave it at that for complaining.
Suggested fix: I would either make it a 30 - 50% speed increase and a 2 - 5% speed decrease for everything else, that way it feels there is a positive gain to using priorities, or else just make it a lower 15% (ish) increase with no downsides.

6. Campaign start - When scrapping ships before campaign start it only gives a partial refund. It would be a nice QoL if it gave a full refund. Note: It goes without saying that this would only apply to before campaign start on custom fleet builds. It would just help if you misclick and build the wrong ship. I.E. You build BB's and then go to build CA's and accidently build more BB's or the wrong CA class if you have multiple classes.

7. Dockyard improvements - It doesn't seem like it makes sense for the current dockyard size increase. Its a linear growth in that 500 tons takes 6 months and 5m and 2000 tons takes 24 months and 20M. It becomes a clear benefit to go in 500 ton increments for immediate use, if needed. I think it would be better to give pro's and cons. I.E. do 4 projects of 500t increases at 6 months each, offering immediate benefits every 6 months, or a 2,000t increase but the benefit its say a 3 or 4M cost decrease and 2 - 4 month time decrease.

8. Enemy TB's - Almost forgot this one. This kind of ties in to if the AI has hidden bonuses, which they do they need to go, I don't understand how first off straight HE is overpenning from things like 4in guns. The enemy TB's take TONS of hits, almost flood then a few minutes later they are back to full float ability. Just to give an example of how ridiculous this is. I manage to get 2 flash fires back to back on the same TB.... it pulled off and didn't sink. Meanwhile my TB's, with an exact replica design, sinks 5 times more easily. So I am not sure which way the problem is but it has to be resolved. (Note: I have used CL's with 4in, 5in, and 6 in as well as CA's with 7 in and as many 4,3, and 2in as I can and no matter what the same issue occurs.)

I won't number this but I sometimes get weird issues where a ship will be maneuvering, sometimes only slight adjustments, and it will take a huge slowdown for no reason while other ships doing similar/same maneuvers don't.


Overall I appreciate your work and effort but wanted to give my feedback after many hours in the campaign.

 

Edited November 30, 2021 by aradragoon

[Faolind]

40 minutes ago, aradragoon said:

Fix: First make better decision making for the AI. Second make convoy missions have more impact. Third, and this is a bit more complex, I would use the weight system, so that if an attacking force is roughly equal or superior and they disengage it results in some loss of victory points.

Seconded. If the battle ended with less than X% ammo fired and less than X% Crew losses (both, to seal up edge cases of immediate detonations and long ironclad slugging matches), then give an amount of VP to the defender. Something like 250VP

[RedParadize]

4 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:

 

Do you remember if the enemy had too few ships in their main fleet? We will fix this.

I had a 1930 campaign where the British surrendered after losing a single BB and two CA. They were blockading me, had a force ratio in their favor by a factor of nearly 10.

[SpardaSon21]

10 hours ago, o Barão said:

 

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.

The issue is accuracy (hit vs. miss) is pre-calculated at firing with actual ballistics not being a thing in game.  This is why ships seem to have deflector screens that magically cause shells to miss in a perfect distribution around them.  As you can guess, "percentage of maximum range" is one of the inputs used for said hit calculations.  If you increase the maximum range of a gun from 5km to 6km, that means the accuracy at 3km goes up.  Yes, this means increasing the maximum gun elevation would increase your hit chances, and no that doesn't make any sense to me either.

@DougTossLong post I won't quote for obvious reasons, but if the devs are going to keep the current accuracy system, they should add something that takes IRL distributions into account.  As I'm sure you're aware, long-range shots have an uneven distribution along the axis of firing, so angle of approach should be taken into account, with a ship steaming right at you more likely to generate hits than one angled or broadside.

[baatsman]

6 hours ago, o Barão said:

"How the fck should we avoid torpedoes, ships, or anything? "

 Use the rudder slider.

Yes, rudder slider will make ships turn, but they still park themselves at 100% an ordered propulsion, sometimes even stopping dead in the water despite their mass and motion speed.

[baatsman]

6 hours ago, eraserr83 said:

Its utterly annoying, that if one of your ships gets close to another, then you cant control them, they wont turn either way, they just simply sail in one direction, regardless what orders you give. How the fck should we avoid torpedoes, ships, or anything? Fix this BS, and let us decide, how our ships turn and behave, and remove this nonsense 'close proximity' thingy, which immobilize your ships. Sad, that things like this have to be pointed out...

As replied, microing by using rudder control, negate directional control ordering, but the real culprit, not having any propulsion is still there. You can not tailchase, and spread to attack, because your ships will "park" at reduced speed behind the enemy, and not overtake and flank as intended.

[admiralsnackbar]

This is how a lot of my battles have been in the campaign:

1. Convoy Defense:
-> I am defending convoy, enemy is attacking convoy. I cannot see the enemy and the enemy cannot see me
-> I move my ships to where ever the game says the smoke is
-> I spot the enemy and try to engage
-> Enemy turns around and runs away

2. Attack

-> I am attacking a fleet, I cannot see the enemy and the enemy cannot see me
-> I move my ships to where ever the game says the smoke is

-> I spot the enemy and try to engage

-> Enemy turns around and runs away

Why does this matter? The end result of the above is that 75% of the game is spend controlling fleets, chasing invisible smoke enemies you can't see and who have no desire to fight you. I am *not* asking for more aggressive AI, what I do want is a battle AI whose decisions agrees with the campaign AI. 


 

Edited November 30, 2021 by admiralsnackbar

[Max_22]

Hi,

thanks for the updates.👍

I finished the 1890 campaign as Germany and England (minor victories).

However, this does not unlock a new campaign start year.

Hotfix v95 is installed.

Am I missing something or is it still a bug?

best regards

Max

[Faolind]

45 minutes ago, baatsman said:

As replied, microing by using rudder control, negate directional control ordering, but the real culprit, not having any propulsion is still there. You can not tailchase, and spread to attack, because your ships will "park" at reduced speed behind the enemy, and not overtake and flank as intended.

I.. do this all the time. I don't have the effect you are describing. I'd like to know what I'm doing differently. I can ram enemy ships quite easily as well, including by accident.

With friendly ships however, I do experience the dead stops you are describing, even at 100s of feet out. And it is annoying when I dead-stop and take a friendly broadside because the ship wont move even though *I got this* on the navigation.