Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

>>>Core Patch 1.0 Feedback<<<


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, o Barão said:

Doesn't work. In fact is the opposite.

Imagine you have a flawless victory in a battle against 1 dd. You sunk the enemy dd.

Now you have a minor victory in a huge battle, Jutland style, where many ships where sunk but you managed to sink more tonnage than the enemy.  So is your flawless victory against a lonely DD scoring more points?

The VP system is much more accurate leaving no margin for errors. It just needs a few tweaks to make it clear to the player.

As in with the VP's, its just a title that appears depending on what kind of victory or defeat you got. Makes it less bland as well than just saying one or the other.

The titles themselves shouldn't add anything they should be the result of whatever you achieved in that fight along with the points accumulated depending on what happened.

So if the player wins, and they get 800 VP compared to the persons 500 VP that would be a Minor victory, Another example if a player got 4432VP and the enemy got 1023VP then that would be a major or great victory (depends on whatever factors are used to calculate VP's in the first place really.)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The new update which includes the early test campaign is finally available! Read a brief guide on how to play and all the details of the patch in our official blog: https://www.dreadnoughts.ult

@Skeksis@DougToss @Steeltrap @Airzerg @HusariuS @Marshall99 @IronKaputt @Shiki @Bluishdoor76 @Aceituna @CapnAvont1015 @Commander Reed @T_the_ferret @Admiral Lütjens @BuckleUpBones @roachbeef @Schirüno

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 th

Posted Images

10 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:

Victory points are used in the campaign but the interface is not showing them in battle result. It is a work in progress UI, which we will fix.

I saw these VP numbers on the battle results screen.

But the point is, the evaluation of a battle needs to be more... realistic? Sensible?
The first step should be generating more realistic objectives for a battle, even if this "won or lost" mechanic stays. For example - in a random convoy raid, I don't see how only 100% of enemy transport sank is the only positive outcome. A lower percentage should be enough for any sensible admiral :)

And even then the evaluation is not all right now. Example: second battle - defend my convoy. Objective: protect at least 50% of transports. It's a sensible objective.
The enemy turned and run, never even saw them. Not a single shot fired, all transport safe and sound.
Evaluation: draw.
Come on! :)

I don't mean to bash the game, I understand that these things, that are easy for the human mind, are quite the challenge for the AI. Just want to provide some feedback, because this campaign can be great!

Link to post
Share on other sites

So i was hopeful with the latest patch, but even with comparative numbers the AI is still running from my ships. i had a couple BB duels, it was a 1930's game and playing as the Germans. The enemy took one shell and decided they would withdraw, the ships were 17 kilometers away. i was faster but it took me forever to chase them down and sink them.

 

another one was My BC vrs there BB, again they decided to withdraw after taking little damage and again a stern chase ensued.

I have noticed that the battles are a little more balanced. i like to build tough expensive ships. Is it taking into consideration the equipment the enemy ships have when they decide to run? Overall a good fix my 1930's game has gone on for several months, and i managed to break the blockade of Germany with out them surrendering, so definitely heading in the right direction 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, o Barão said:

Doesn't work. In fact is the opposite.

Imagine you have a flawless victory in a battle against 1 dd. You sunk the enemy dd.

Now you have a minor victory in a huge battle, Jutland style, where many ships where sunk but you managed to sink more tonnage than the enemy.  So is your flawless victory against a lonely DD scoring more points?

The VP system is much more accurate leaving no margin for errors. It just needs a few tweaks to make it clear to the player.

I had written up a lengthy paragraph about the use of multipliers according to the grades of victory/defeat, but the more I thought about it, the more I realized that something like this is probably not needed.

If I win the battle, I get more victory points and lost less ships than the enemy - no need to give me even _more_ of a prize

And if I lose, well, I lost a bunch of ships _and_ the enemy got more VP than I did, no need to punish me even more.

 

Edit: @Cptbarneyresponded while I was typing - and his reply makes a lot of sense, I like it.

Edited by The_Real_Hawkeye
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, o Barão said:

No need to be a tab since what is important is notify the player of possible important encounters in the beginning of a new turn. Also i don't expect the player to be bombarded with multiple intelligence reports each turn but only a few at most to keep the flow with the game pace. Could be a simple message log in lower left corner with a number icon so the player could read in an instance if there are important messages to read or not.

My memory isn't as good as the computer's! I would need to reference the info from time to time, at least 50 reports into the past if not more. There's going to be reports from 9 other nations plus your own notifications. 

But also there's our intelligence to setup and manage, more to do than what the 'world tab' UI can canvas - there might be to much cutter.

Edited by Skeksis
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Skeksis said:

My memory isn't as good as the computer's! I would need to reference the info from time to time, at least 50 reports into the past if not more. There's going to be reports from 9 other nations plus your own notifications. 

But also there's our intelligence to setup and manage, more to do than what the 'world tab' UI can canvas - there might be to much cutter.

I was thinking the mechanic about the reports to what could be important for the player in that turn. Not in the past or what is possible in the future. So in essence just a few messages. As a possibility "Large fleet lift anchor from X in direction to area Y" the player could in that turn have the option to send a fleet in that area to try to intercept. In the next turn what happened in the past doens't matter anymore. That is why imo is not needed a specific tab just for the inteligence reports.

But maybe you have an idea to inform the player about many other things.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:

Hello again admirals,

A new update is ready for you to play. Please update your game clients.

Hotfix Update v96 (3/12/2021)
- Fixed issue with wars ending too soon in late years of the campaign, due to very large VP given to the winner. VP now scales properly according to the technology era.
- Campaign mission generation should create more balanced missions, so that AI will not be prone to withdraw from them.
- Reduced the repair costs for ships in campaign, as they could overwhelm the economy of player and AI.
- Fixed AI issue making it too defensive in campaign.
- Auto-Design further optimization.
- Fixed bug that caused "Rebuild" to erase previous designs.
- Fixed bug with Battle Icons appearing too small in 4K monitors.
- Fixed small bugs related with the mission list of campaign.
- Fixed Torpedo Protection V stats not applying correctly to the component.
- Fixed major errors in crew losses calculations in battle stats.
- Fixed a minor error for a German Destroyer tower.
- Stalled ships issue due to evasion logic should happen less often (known bug we will fix better in future updates).
- Other minor bug fixes.
- Hulls that cannot be used due to low shipyard size are now viewable.

Has the old campaign been disable? My menu only wants to start a 'New Campaign'.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, VarangianGarde said:

Did the most recent update delete our campaign progress? The campaign wasn't half bad, but I don't want to keep replaying 1890 every time there's an update.

@Nick ThomadisHow about making a few save slots so we can have multiple playthroughs  going?

I find any unlocked campaigns still available but you still have to keep re-clicking 'New Campaign' until the UI response. 

It appears that our current campaign progress has been wiped (oh no not that word again!!!). The 'save_0' file has been erased during the update and any previously saved 'save_0' files won't work thereafter. 

Don't know if it is a bug yet.  

Edited by Skeksis
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The real test of a scoring system would be Jutland - the British lost more ships, but the blockade held, the Germans stayed in port, starved, mutinied and surrendered.

 

So scoring should be part tactical factors, part operational, and part strategic. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DougToss said:

The real test of a scoring system would be Jutland - the British lost more ships, but the blockade held, the Germans stayed in port, starved, mutinied and surrendered.

 

So scoring should be part tactical factors, part operational, and part strategic. 

I agree. Britain can afford to lose a few dreadnoughts and battlecruisers while Germany can't. As long as one nation is still easily able to control the seas they shouldn't surrender easily. On the other hand Jutland was  a pretty bad propagandistic blow to the British for a while, so it would make sense that Britain would be unable to take three Jutlands in a row without suing for peace even if they are able to sill maintain a blockade.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Gamebook said:

Are we meant to be able to field monstrosities like this? This thing has all the tech maxed and all the torps and 14.1 inches of belt and turret armour as well. And it's exactly balanced.

Untitled.thumb.jpg.3f9d0c1560867a48069bbd3ba9129886.jpg

Oh god I hope so. One of the appeals of this game is being able to realize my demented fever dreams of a ship.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/1/2021 at 8:59 PM, Kevinsteve79 said:

don't show what types and how many ships the enemy got so you'll get the suprise effect and make decisions from there

I think something that obscures this in the strategic map would add meaning to the ship identification process.

Theres several things that make the ship identifty process meaningless at current:

- The strategy map tells us what we are facing

- the tactical instance environment allows us to zoom to the enemy ship and personally "pre identify" it the second it is visible. Especially if we have prior experience with that enemy ship class.

 

There are a few solutions to this diver in the rule structure:

-ignoring the issue is possible. There is an additional relevant effect already (displayed enemy ship detailed stats), so you can see the identity process as roleplay as opposed to rules. 

- obviously, changing the ship identification visual process to something different that is more in line with the "open information" policy carried through the rest of the design is another simple solution. Something lile displaying the actual ship class, Then the identification process, like: (BB, identified as Warship), or, (DD, identified as CL), or, (CA, Identified) for full recognition.

-If we want to keep the ship identification game as current, and bring the game into greater coherence, then changes should be made to other systems, making ship numbers and total tonnage available on the strategy screen, but not the individual classes, for example, as well as restricting the WASD zoom of the player to a certain distance around their own ships, 2km, for instance (essentially imitating a spyglass from the deck of said ship). This also would have tr he side effect of making scouting more interactive and "real" feeling, but would also garner heavy complaints, as games that have done this in the past have experienced. In those instances, a request for a checkbox in the options menu was the most common and well accepted solution.

Other solutions for the strategy page will exist in different versions of the overworld, whochbis not yet done. If we have visible fleets, showing a list of "possible enemy fleet in region" would allow stratheads the possibility Of playing the identification game while cross checking said "possible fleets" list on scratch paper, hoping to identify the specific fleet they are facing and thus devise the appropriate tactical response. This would be amazing.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Noticed I cannot place small barbettes behind the integrated barbette, ahead of the superstructure, on the French experimental hulls.

This is on top of the fact that, despite explicitely stating that the Yamato hull was introduced to allow more accurate replicas, it still cannot mount it's historical 127mm guns on it's superstructure. Only the superbattleship can do so.

Now, with each patch, I find more and more situations where guns aren't fitting on mount points that once held them, or have no fire arc when mounted, or have a tiny arc without any obstruction to justify it.

It gets worse with each patch.

You guys need to perform a dedicated review mounting points and weapon firing arcs.

Maybe investigate as to what makes it grow worse from patch to patch?

Also, greebles are completely out of control. They go spastic when changing displacement, and hang off the hull like crazy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:

Hello again admirals,

A new update is ready for you to play. Please update your game clients.

Hotfix Update v96 (3/12/2021)
- Fixed issue with wars ending too soon in late years of the campaign, due to very large VP given to the winner. VP now scales properly according to the technology era.
- Campaign mission generation should create more balanced missions, so that AI will not be prone to withdraw from them.
- Reduced the repair costs for ships in campaign, as they could overwhelm the economy of player and AI.
- Fixed AI issue making it too defensive in campaign.
- Auto-Design further optimization.
- Fixed bug that caused "Rebuild" to erase previous designs.
- Fixed bug with Battle Icons appearing too small in 4K monitors.
- Fixed small bugs related with the mission list of campaign.
- Fixed Torpedo Protection V stats not applying correctly to the component.
- Fixed major errors in crew losses calculations in battle stats.
- Fixed a minor error for a German Destroyer tower.
- Stalled ships issue due to evasion logic should happen less often (known bug we will fix better in future updates).
- Other minor bug fixes.
- Hulls that cannot be used due to low shipyard size are now viewable.

This patch has broken a couple of things...

  • After loading battles/missions don't re-list anymore. Battle icon in map ok.
  • Ships that aren't damage not returning to original port after battle. If you don't keep an eye on it, ships end up all over the place! a bit of mess moving them back to original port all the time.

On the positive, enemy seems more aggressive. Large icons seems to give a 'fresher' look about the map. 

Edited by Skeksis
Link to post
Share on other sites

Assigning ships to ports doesn't really work, currently.

Shown is 1 DD at Liverpool, 1 DD at Barry, 2 DDs at Plymouth, no other DDs bordering the Irish Sea. Plymouth ships assigned to the English Channel, Barry to the North Atlantic and Liverpool to the Irish Sea, so actually a total of 1 DD for the Irish Sea. Also on top of that all those DDs are a mix of "In being' and 'In Control' i.e. at different ranges or chance's of battle.

But somehow we can muster 5 DDs into the Irish sea/area and all within range.

tjGIiPM.png

On one hand, if ports aren't going to matter why have ships assigned to them? On the other, if ports and there corresponding areas do matter, then the battle generator is not working properly. 

I think the game could go in either direction from this point.

  1. Ports would become less important for deploying ships to areas and also it is the way the battle generator is setup now, i.e. regional RTW2 battle format only.
  2. Ports and their ships correspond to their area. The beginnings of a new battle format, one we partially have now but the battle generator does not completely support it (as of above).

IMO, making ports and their ships correspond to their area is exactly the way the game should go. It will matter more with captured ports in different areas and regions and deploying ships to them. Vice-versa with losing ports. Overall it would be a much more of a complex system than RTW2 but more importantly, it won't be RTW2! Also more plausible in representing RL, i.e. representing admiral command. 

Edited by Skeksis
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well here we go again

HCT0Kze.jpg

7cyzeJ9.jpg

Again, the auto designer has more money than the player, this time "only" twice.

The British are kind of OK with their 60 million for the player versus 80 for the auto-designer. It's just a little wierd.

hnJMHYy.jpg

IIJgxIi.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the bright side, AI finally have embraced the power of torpedo CA:
RVblA9T.png
On the wrong side, I this should not be allowed:
DJN8OhN.png?1
(I am the german)

Edit: Another thing that should not happen:
OfnwOcM.png
A fleet strong enough to put a fight is leaving, and doing so abandoning all the cargo to me.

Edited by RedParadize
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Skeksis said:

Has the old campaign been disable? My menu only wants to start a 'New Campaign'.

 

15 hours ago, VarangianGarde said:

Did the most recent update delete our campaign progress? The campaign wasn't half bad, but I don't want to keep replaying 1890 every time there's an update.

@Nick ThomadisHow about making a few save slots so we can have multiple playthroughs  going?

 

14 hours ago, Skeksis said:

I find any unlocked campaigns still available but you still have to keep re-clicking 'New Campaign' until the UI response. 

It appears that our current campaign progress has been wiped (oh no not that word again!!!). The 'save_0' file has been erased during the update and any previously saved 'save_0' files won't work thereafter. 

Don't know if it is a bug yet.  

Saves erase should not have happened. Maybe there was a save conflict and caused an undesirable delete. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Skeksis said:

This patch has broken a couple of things...

  • After loading battles/missions don't re-list anymore. Battle icon in map ok.
  • Ships that aren't damage not returning to original port after battle. If you don't keep an eye on it, ships end up all over the place! a bit of mess moving them back to original port all the time.

On the positive, enemy seems more aggressive. Large icons seems to give a 'fresher' look about the map. 

We will check to fix those, thanks.

Regarding ships returning to ports, they should go to nearest, most suitable ports for them, not the initial. It would be a problem if the port they want to return is too far away or the port capacity is almost full and they still desire to enter it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...