Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

>>>Core Patch 1.0 Feedback<<<


Nick Thomadis

Recommended Posts

The AI still needs work in target selection. I have had many engagements where I fought CA versus CA. However, the moment there are some easier targets to penetrate available (DDs, and CLs) the AI CA seems to focus only on these easier target. Eventhough my controlled CA is only a couple of km off (hence easy to hit as very close by), the hostile AI CA still keeps on shooting at retreating DDs over 8 km away. This is probably due to the fact that the chance for the AI to penetrate my CA was only around 20%. However, here I believe it would still be better for the AI to not ignore my CA at this close distance. Eventhough the chance of penetration might be low, there is still a chance and at nearly 50% chance to hit, any succesful hit is likely to hurt.

Furthermore, I find that the switch to HE mechanic could be improved. I personally switch to forced HE if the penetration chance is too low and switch back to auto or AP if it increases again. Doing some HE damage to the superstructure is still better than doing no damage. Perhaps the AI should be better programmed to exploit this as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Tycondero said:

The AI still needs work in target selection. I have had many engagements where I fought CA versus CA. However, the moment there are some easier targets to penetrate available (DDs, and CLs) the AI CA seems to focus only on these easier target. Eventhough my controlled CA is only a couple of km off (hence easy to hit as very close by), the hostile AI CA still keeps on shooting at retreating DDs over 8 km away. This is probably due to the fact that the chance for the AI to penetrate my CA was only around 20%. However, here I believe it would still be better for the AI to not ignore my CA at this close distance. Eventhough the chance of penetration might be low, there is still a chance and at nearly 50% chance to hit, any succesful hit is likely to hurt.

Furthermore, I find that the switch to HE mechanic could be improved. I personally switch to forced HE if the penetration chance is too low and switch back to auto or AP if it increases again. Doing some HE damage to the superstructure is still better than doing no damage. Perhaps the AI should be better programmed to exploit this as well.

Please try the new beta for the AI targeting improvement. Regarding HE switch because of target angling, it needs a new feature, it will be made.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 час назад Ник Томадис сказал:

Пожалуйста, попробуйте новую бета-версию для улучшения таргетинга ИИ. Что касается переключения ВО из-за целевой рыбалки, то ему нужна новая функция, она будет сделана.

Как попробовать его для тех, кому вы не отправили ключи?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, akd said:

These were not mounted in enclosed turrets but in a barbette position with an open shield

Irrelevant if are enclosed or open. Is the caliber what matters.

Esmeralda is definitely more in line with the starting Armored Cruisers than the early Light Cruisers. 

File:Japanese protected cruiser Izumi left elevation plan.jpg

Again irrelevant your opinion about if esmeralda is X or Y. What matter is there was no limits to what was possible in that time period. And with this we return to the same point before. The issue you got with that AI design is not the gun size since there was no limits in that time period. Is the way the Ai is using them in the layout that is far from perfect.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, o Barão said:

 

There were limits, thus no turrets on early light cruisers (i.e. 2nd and 3rd class protected cruisers that preceded what later became light cruisers).  I wasn’t talking about gun caliber; you changed subject to that after not reading what I wrote correctly and assuming I was talking about gun caliber.  A turret versus an open / shielded position is completely different system of protection, crew operation, ammo feeding, etc. and the weight demands for the former are much higher.  It matters very much, and having them in the wrong places and wrong types of ships looks wrong and works incorrectly.

 

Anyways, it’s an easy visual fix (which hopefully comes with appropriate weights), at least for 5- and 6-inch guns as the Mark II models would be fine for Mark I versions on light cruisers. Early 7-inch guns for light cruisers need something like the 8-inch guns on Elswick cruisers (and indeed single 8-inch guns should also probably be an option, but with much less protection than a full turret):

8inqf.jpg

Edited by akd
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, DougToss said:

Is there a changelog? Maybe in the Steam News page?

This was on Steam so I guess we won't get anything for awhile: "Changelog will be changed inside the build. Since it is a very active procedure, we cannot also maintain the forums so frequently."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could there be a way to autoresolve a battle after having started it, or still putting the game at 10x or 30x time compression? I'm doing a 1900 campaign and I'm basically just sitting here hour after hour fighting battles where a cruiser torpedoes my battleship (knocking out my engines) and then just circles me for ages. It's boring and frustrating, and being locked at 3x or 5x time compression still means I have to sit here watching the timer count down for 30 minutes or more.

I really enjoy this game and how far it's come (and really look forward to where it's going in the future), but stuff like this drives me insane.

Edited by Speglord
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Torpedo boats are absurdly resilient to gunfire.  Just had a seemingly unending battle to attempt to finish off a force of 1x CL and 2x 200-ton TBs vs. my CL.  Circled the last TB repeatedly pouring fire into until it had taken 31x 4" HE and 5x 6" HE hits and was reduced to single digit hull and flotation.  Decided to stop firing to see if it was actually doomed at that point (surely it must be).  Nope! Continued to fight its 2" guns and started to recover both hull and flotation, then moments later destroyed my forward 6" turret with a flash fire following a 2" hit.  Well now,  guess I'm not finished yet! Took at least 6 more hits to finally put it beneath the waves.  Never stopped fighting its guns and continued to spin stationary in place constantly pointing its stern at me (the bow was where the miraculous flotation reserve was located).  This was all HE ammo, but every hit over-penetrated, even if shooting down the length of the ship.

IIRC, British tests in the early 1900s (I believe, would need to look up the reference) indicated that a single 4" hit would be sufficient to knock a TB out of action.  Shells bursting in these ships would have nothing to stop splinters from passing through a good portion of the boat.  A hit just about anywhere would tear holes in the hull and probably kill multiple exposed crew members and wreck equipment.

Edited by akd
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, akd said:

Torpedo boats are absurdly resilient to gunfire.  Just had a seemingly unending battle to attempt to finish off a force of 1x CL and 2x 200-ton TBs vs. my CL.  Circled the last TB repeatedly pouring fire into until it had taken 31x 4" HE and 5x 6" HE hits and was reduced to single digit hull and flotation.  Decided to stop firing to see if it was actually doomed at that point (surely it must be).  Nope! Continued to fight its 2" guns and started to recover both hull and flotation, then moments later destroyed my forward 6" turret with a flash fire following a 2" hit.  Well now,  guess I'm not finished yet! Took at least 6 more hits to finally put it beneath the waves.  Never stopped fighting its guns and continued to spin stationary in place constantly pointing its stern at me (the bow was where the miraculous flotation reserve was located).  This was all HE ammo, but every hit over-penetrated, even if shooting down the length of the ship.

IIRC, British tests in the early 1900s (I believe, would need to look up the reference) indicated that a single 4" hit would be sufficient to knock a TB out of action.  Shells bursting in these ships would have nothing to stop splinters from passing through a good portion of the boat.  A hit just about anywhere would tear holes in the hull and probably kill multiple exposed crew members and wreck equipment.

The real problem seems to be crew resiliency. I have seen vessels with multiple magazine detonations loose 20-30 crew overall. In reality half or more would be dead from various causes: splinters, shrapnel, burns, concussive force, secondary explosions, flooding from the resulting holes, etc.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, akd said:

indicated that a single 4" hit would be sufficient to knock a TB out of action.

If I remember correctly from the book @DougTossmentioned to me earlier in this thread, the 4inch hit would have to be on the engine compartment in order to get a TB out of action, otherwise hits elsewhere would not stop it or larger shells at the time would not be able to detonate due to the thin armor. But I do agree that the current damage damage is just too fantastical (aka assuming every single component would work even when everything surrounding it is shot to hell).

And like I have said, beside the somewhat fantasy damage model, even if the damage model is accurate, we still have crews fighting to the death and magic repair wands.

So what I think should really happen is that beside giving ships accurate damage models, the repair mechanic need to be nerf according to the revised damage models. Especially, flooded ships should not be able to pump water out like it's nothing after taking multiple hits. At best they could keep it partially flooded. Fire should be a real threat throughout the entire campaign from 1890 to 1940. Right now, crews after 1910 with all hull upgrades can just basically ignore fire. This is absurd, unrealistic, and in terms of gameplay unbalanced.

Crews need to be actual people instead of a number. Again, we should have crew morale and officers simulated. A ship losing most of its engine, and flooded heavily should be scuttled/abandoned, and if you want some fun/gamey aspect to the mechanic, add an extreme rare chance of a ship being scuttled but not sink, allowing for capture (higher chance if the crew is less experienced?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...