>>>Patch 1.03-1.04 Feedback<<

[RetiredGysgt]

Is there a bug with campaign? I completed 1890 and started next then quit and started over now I cant continue when I win.

[SodaBit]

More auto-designer feedback here.
I think there really needs to be a "minimum requirements" mechanic for the AI's campaign and custom battle ships. While the AI's designs I've been fighting in campaign have gotten better, there's still some outliers that really mess with game balance.
Example for today: A 1940's RN destroyer with an amazing top speed of 26.6 knots.

Even as one of the slowest modern battleships in WW2, Yamato can outrun this lil guy. This design is especially bad in campaign, as one of the most common missions for destroyers is intercepting lone capital ships, i.e. using high speed and powerful torpedos to take out key enemy targets. This mission profile is impossible with out having a significantly higher top speed than the enemy capital ship, and even with a significant speed advantage, it is still incredibly risky and requires a fair bit of both luck, and skill. So when a flotilla of destroyers has a top speed significantly lower than their opponent, this sort of mission is paramount to mass-suicide. 
That's just one of the issues that might be solved by setting minimum requirements for AI ship designs. There's also the issues of light cruisers with less than an inch of belt armor, 1940's battleships and battlecruisers using guns that were deemed too small back in 1920, and other questionable designs that crop up from time to time. I still want to see creative, and sometimes outrageous designs from the AI, but there comes a point where the designs are so lacking that it messes with game balance, turning enemy sailors into cannon fodder, and making the campaign a cakewalk.

Edited February 2, 2022 by SodaBit

[The PC Collector]

Okay, after doing some research, I have some historical feedback to give... Germany in the campaign currently has acgess to three Brandenburg like hulls, and only one Kaiser Friedrich III hull, towards the very end of the pre dreadnought time... Since the Brandenburg saw no further developement, and all of the remaining german pre dreadnoughts were based on the Kaiser friedrich, maybe this should be revised.

[Andvarus]

 

7 hours ago, The PC Collector said:

Okay, after doing some research, I have some historical feedback to give... Germany in the campaign currently has acgess to three Brandenburg like hulls, and only one Kaiser Friedrich III hull, towards the very end of the pre dreadnought time... Since the Brandenburg saw no further developement, and all of the remaining german pre dreadnoughts were based on the Kaiser friedrich, maybe this should be revised.

Yeah talking of revisiting german hulls, there is no Hull that really resambles the Kaiser or König-Class Battleships. Furthermore we NEED more Superstructures. 

I mean common this is the closed you can cum to building a Nassau-Class Battleship. I wont even try Kaiser/König or Baden cause it aint possible.

[raysin bisket]

20 hours ago, SodaBit said:

More auto-designer feedback here.
I think there really needs to be a "minimum requirements" mechanic for the AI's campaign and custom battle ships. While the AI's designs I've been fighting in campaign have gotten better, there's still some outliers that really mess with game balance.

Indeed, at a simple level you could at least add: given year x and tech y the minimum stats of the ship should be z

Although ultimately I'd prefer to make it dynamic.

I presume the campaign will have some elements of intel possibly later down the line where you can spend a percentage of your budget to discover the plans of new enemy ship classes and stats similar to RTW2. As such, the AI can be assumed to do the same and thus can have Intel on you (and other AI nations) to determine what the specifications of the ships of a given class ideally need to be to compete. Thus the minimum requirement for an AI auto-generated can be based off their intel to ensure that the AIs DDs have the appropriate speed over you BBs as used in SodaBit's example.

Expanding on it even more, you could perhaps have different flavours of AI 'personality' so some will try to counter your designs whereas others will try to beat your designs at their own game.

 

 

[Norbert Sattler]

The en-echelon turrets are hard to pull off, but not entirely impossible. Well, not impossible to make work at least.

The things with them is, that the turrets much not only be the same distance from the center of the front-to-back axis, but also on the center of the left-to-right axis... that is equidistant to the center of mass on said axis.

If the two offset wing turrets have different distances from the center of mass, the side-weight-offset will skyrocket.

Edit: I stand corrected. In the past it was as I discribed it, but now the side-offset no longer skyrockets when you move en-echelon turrets further from the center of mass. It still causes side-offset to rise, but at a rather low level.

Though it is still a bit annoying that you have to set down a pair of side-turrets and then remove one of them by picking it up and then deleting it "mid-air".

If you delete a put-down turrets, it will delete the pair, instead of just one.

 

Edited February 2, 2022 by Norbert Sattler

[Panzergraf]

Maybe add a harder difficulty to the campaign? The AI is a bit of a pushover now, and even if I want to fight to the end they find some way to give up like having a revolution or something.

Just letting them "cheat" a bit more by getting new ships for free now and then would be a quick fix, I think.

[The PC Collector]

1 hour ago, Norbert Sattler said:

Though it is still a bit annoying that you have to set down a pair of side-turrets and then remove one of them by picking it up and then deleting it "mid-air".

If you delete a put-down turrets, it will delete the pair, instead of just one.

 

The auto mirror option can be disabled, precisely to allow that kind of things

[aznfoo]

On 1/22/2022 at 8:18 AM, Bishop120 said:

New mechanic/algorithm that stops friendlies from firing torpedos that hits friendlies is a big win..  Several times in the last patch I had ships to the rear of a line which would shoot torpedos when the lead ship was turning and it would hit them.. So this is a very welcomed fix.

That being said.. Ship AI is still buggered to all hell.. AI/Screen/Scout ships still running off and doing nothing.  Ships which are literally sitting back at spawn point and just spinning.. not moving.. just spinning circles.  Screen and Scout ships still go straight off in the OPPOSITE direction of the enemy.  AI controlled ships sitting at the edge of viewable range to the enemy and not doing anything because they are out of range.

AI Ship design is still... wonky.. to say the least.  Placing items that no one can place them if they designed manually (ergo turrets/torpedoes to close). Armor with no rhyme or reason. Drastically under cutting funnels.  Using massive barbettes for 2in guns.  Late 1940s CLs with 4in guns as the largest size and swarms of 2in guns.

Finally.. The enemy AI's anti-flood ability.  This is the most annoying thing I've ever seen.  We are talking early CLs with no anti-flooding, no aux pumps, single hull, standard bulkheads; going from 1% float to 100% in a matter of mins.  I couldnt believe it.  I'd always suspected that AI had some flooding cheat but this is over the top.

Just about as wonky as the game autodesigning battlecruisers to have 20 inch guns, no secondaries, and no armor. 

[AurumCorvus]

I'm not sure if this is an issue with this patch or something holding over but:

The AI seems to be stealing player designs for use in custom battles, even if you leave design to the AI. This is a problem when it takes an incomplete design or a test ship, and it gets quickly blown up.

For example, I was playing an AH BC, and opponent was to be a Russian BB. I had "built" a Russian BB before, but I had never completed it and it had no armor (key point; the AI wouldn't do this). Russian BB was exactly that same ship, down to having no armor.

[Captain Meow]

8 hours ago, AurumCorvus said:

I'm not sure if this is an issue with this patch or something holding over but:

The AI seems to be stealing player designs for use in custom battles, even if you leave design to the AI. This is a problem when it takes an incomplete design or a test ship, and it gets quickly blown up.

For example, I was playing an AH BC, and opponent was to be a Russian BB. I had "built" a Russian BB before, but I had never completed it and it had no armor (key point; the AI wouldn't do this). Russian BB was exactly that same ship, down to having no armor.

I though that's what came with earlier patches. By default your design will be used if you did build it for such type/country/year - either fully finished, or finished by AI because you already have something to start with. Fully AI-created ones if you don't have anything for that type/year/country.

[AurumCorvus]

Just now, Captain Meow said:

I though that's what came with earlier patches. By default your design will be used if you did build it for such type/country/year - either fully finished, or finished by AI because you already have something to start with. Fully AI-created ones if you don't have anything for that type/year/country.

That's kinda what surprised me though, as I thought it was the somewhat same logic you just stated if we didn't touch the AI side. However, the AI not "completing" a ship.

Lacking armor (with some tonnage to spare) isn't "finishing a ship". Sure, it had a brilliant 4x2 20", with 6 5" guns, but it didn't put armor on it.

Even more ridiculously this morning, the AI chose a German 130k super BB I made... that had 2x1 9" guns (it was a design to test differing armor schemes). That was a horrible design. The AI made no attempt to put on more guns, secondaries, or anything. It just shipped that wholesale.

Either this is a bug (which needs to be fixed) or the AI chosing incomplete/bad designs is an oversight by the devs (which I respectfully suggest they fix).

 

[Captain Meow]

Might be that if you have something to start with, the AI will just make the design playable (no red error warnings) as is, even without armor since you didn't put any.

[Andvarus]

18 hours ago, Panzergraf said:

Maybe add a harder difficulty to the campaign? The AI is a bit of a pushover now, and even if I want to fight to the end they find some way to give up like having a revolution or something.

Just letting them "cheat" a bit more by getting new ships for free now and then would be a quick fix, I think.

try using Hard AI + Random AI, this really turned it up to 11 in 1920 for me. I never had any difficulties but with random AI the designs turned out to be totally random which cause me to get hello kittyed by unusual designs 

[Panzergraf]

2 hours ago, Andvarus said:

try using Hard AI + Random AI, this really turned it up to 11 in 1920 for me. I never had any difficulties but with random AI the designs turned out to be totally random which cause me to get hello kittyed by unusual designs 

That's how I've been playing. I guess the difficulty will somewhat depend on what the AI ends up designing for itself. Typically they will have one or two decent designs, and a few classes of barely floating trash barges.

[neph]

Formations do not listen to speed commands at all or at least very rarely.

[Andvarus]

1 hour ago, neph said:

Formations do not listen to speed commands at all or at least very rarely.

they mostly dont work at all..........I've got formations were the Leading ship is overtaken by the third ship in line and block from turning cause of that -.-'

[SodaBit]

Even more AI feed back here, this time on targeting.
The AI seems to still be struggling with target prioritization, especially with regard to threat level and distance.
Today's examples are as follows,

A cruiser division selecting an enemy CA 14km away as their target for both guns and torpedos, despite 2 battleships and a CA being within half that range and actively firing on the division.
And,

A BB that has only now shifted its fire to the same cruiser, because the transports it spent the last 20 minutes trying to kill without success are now out of gun range. Of the 6 ships of the convoy, only 1 has been destroyed by this ship, and in doing so, this BB has ignored every other target on the field, despite coming under fire from 2 enemy battleships and the chance of hitting the transports it was shooting at being less than 1%. 
The result, my forces have been able to inflict significant damage to one of the enemy's most powerful units for free, and the damage enemy cruisers inflicted upon my own ships has been minimal. Had AI targeting been more in line with battlefield realities and allowed the AI to take significant opportunities to inflict major damage, the story would be entirely different. None of my cruisers can withstand 457mm AP, and would probably be withdrawing at this point in the battle due to damage from those guns, leaving my BB's even more vulnerable than they already are to torpedo attacks from enemy cruisers. (Provided that the cruisers actually targeted my BB's in the first place.)
Because of poor targeting, this battle, which should have been an even fight, has turned into a one-sided slaughter.

Edited February 5, 2022 by SodaBit

[BionikSheep]

Not sure if its a bug or intentional, but i have damaged ships spawning into battles, ships that were damaged the previous turn, and i would have thought, locked in drydock for repairs. But instead are sallying out to fight despite many other cruisers stationed at the same port that are completely undamaged, just, staying home?

[The PC Collector]

10 hours ago, BionikSheep said:

Not sure if its a bug or intentional, but i have damaged ships spawning into battles, ships that were damaged the previous turn, and i would have thought, locked in drydock for repairs. But instead are sallying out to fight despite many other cruisers stationed at the same port that are completely undamaged, just, staying home?

There is a mission which is precisely that. Your ships get ambushed while going back to the port for repairs.

[RCgothic]

I'd like to add to the comments on formations and collision avoidance.

It just took me three days to complete "Jeune Ecole has failed" because large numbers of friendly ships are completely uncontrollable. They get in each others' way, fail to sort out their formations, and refuse to respond to navigation commands. They frequently get locked into sailing in entirely the wrong direction.

Edited February 7, 2022 by RCgothic

[SodaBit]

On 2/4/2022 at 8:43 PM, SodaBit said:

Even more AI feed back here, this time on targeting.
The AI seems to still be struggling with target prioritization, especially with regard to threat level and distance.
Today's examples are as follows,

A cruiser division selecting an enemy CA 14km away as their target for both guns and torpedos, despite 2 battleships and a CA being within half that range and actively firing on the division.
And,

A BB that has only now shifted its fire to the same cruiser, because the transports it spent the last 20 minutes trying to kill without success are now out of gun range. Of the 6 ships of the convoy, only 1 has been destroyed by this ship, and in doing so, this BB has ignored every other target on the field, despite coming under fire from 2 enemy battleships and the chance of hitting the transports it was shooting at being less than 1%. 
The result, my forces have been able to inflict significant damage to one of the enemy's most powerful units for free, and the damage enemy cruisers inflicted upon my own ships has been minimal. Had AI targeting been more in line with battlefield realities and allowed the AI to take significant opportunities to inflict major damage, the story would be entirely different. None of my cruisers can withstand 457mm AP, and would probably be withdrawing at this point in the battle due to damage from those guns, leaving my BB's even more vulnerable than they already are to torpedo attacks from enemy cruisers. (Provided that the cruisers actually targeted my BB's in the first place.)
Because of poor targeting, this battle, which should have been an even fight, has turned into a one-sided slaughter.

Quick update to this post, because the BB targeting issue happened again, this time with a BC.

I feel this image does a much better job at displaying the issue.
As you can see, this battlecruiser started off the engagement by targeting the un-armed civilian ships rather than any of my capital ships, despite having double the firepower of any one of my BBs/BCs. After 30 minutes of watching its escort get slaughtered, the enemy BC is STILL trying to eliminate my transports, and has suffered greatly because of this. Now, with its escort either dead, disabled, or in retreat, the BC has 3 enemy capital ships firing on it simultaneously from less than 6 km away, but refuses to fire on its own assailants, instead continuing to fire on my convoy 20 km away, despite having only scored 3 hits on these targets since the start of the engagement.

[Captain Basilone]

Having issues with AIs. any group larger than 3 is prone to having the flagship follow orders and the rest of the group screwing around. If I don't keep an eye on things, I end up with just the flagship with the rest of the group 50 KM away.

[SodaBit]

On 2/9/2022 at 4:36 AM, SodaBit said:

Quick update to this post, because the BB targeting issue happened again, this time with a BC.

I feel this image does a much better job at displaying the issue.
As you can see, this battlecruiser started off the engagement by targeting the un-armed civilian ships rather than any of my capital ships, despite having double the firepower of any one of my BBs/BCs. After 30 minutes of watching its escort get slaughtered, the enemy BC is STILL trying to eliminate my transports, and has suffered greatly because of this. Now, with its escort either dead, disabled, or in retreat, the BC has 3 enemy capital ships firing on it simultaneously from less than 6 km away, but refuses to fire on its own assailants, instead continuing to fire on my convoy 20 km away, despite having only scored 3 hits on these targets since the start of the engagement.

I ain't even going to comment on this one. Picture speaks for itself.

[The PC Collector]

Okay. About the incorrect spanish flag, I've noticed that the masts on the tower now show the correct flag. The ones in the bow and stern of the ships is still the incorrect 1982 one.