>>> Update v1.05 Feedback<<<

[Gangut]

Finished my last session as France in 1890 and so far I've established that HE is the go to ammunition. I'm not even joking. I've fought most battles with and against every type of ship in this period and HE is the best go to ammunition type. AP can work against medium - heavily armoured targets, but it needs a flatish surface to be whithin like +-30 degrees for it to have any hope of doing what it needs to do.

The fleet layout is often wierd with ships being connected to squadrons on the opposite side of another, thus it turns into a giant mess when I need to organise everything, as ships slow down and turn away from one ship and go into the path of another.

As for campaign compsition I still maintain quality over quantity, especially in capital ships is still my go to design principle as good skill mixed with raw quality will win almost any battle, even ones where I'm outnumbered 2 fold on battleships alone.

[SodaBit]

Got some more Auto-designer/Campaign feedback here
(Seems like I'm posting something here every day, lemme know if it gets annoying for y'all)
Started up a new campaign, France, 1940, Legendary w/ historic AI, and this is the BB the Germans are fielding:

6 13" guns. Armor might seem tough with 530mm max, but it really isn't as tough as it looks, only has a 362mm belt, 137mm main deck, 530/200 on the turrets. Top speed is only 27.7 knots. ~42,000 tons, the AI can build bigger, and should be on Legendary difficulty. Iirc, the limit shipyard size limit for Germany is ~82,000 tons, with 2 BB hulls available that can reach this weight, as well as a BC hull that can reach 49,000 tons. With those options available, they should be fielding at least something akin to the H-39 design for BB's, and the BC can almost reach the capabilities of Bismarck, with that design being ~51,000 tons. I've not seen the BC that was supposed to be in this engagement, pretty sure it arrived damaged and has been retreating for almost an hour now, but if this BB's design is anything to go by, it's probably not great news for the Kriegsmarine.

I'll go into detail about what I would build in the AI's situation if asked, but I think I've contributed a bit much to this thread, so I'll leave it to your imagination what the AI could be capable of building for this campaign.
TL:DR This BB design is hardly cut out for an Easy difficulty mode, let alone Legendary.
 

Edit: Update on this design
This design is so bad that it's started messing with campaign matchmaking. I've fought the same bloody BB 5 F***ing Times and never killed it, because the matchmaker always puts it up against cruiser formations. There's 4, soon to be 6 capital ships operating in the same area that can easily grind this thing into dust, but I'm not allowed to use my BB's/BC's because the matchmaker doesn't think it'd be a fair fight.
The AI Has Created A Battleship That's So Bad That It Refuses To Put It Up Against Other Battleships.
This is the first time I've ever seen this happen. I'm really hoping it's the last.

Edited May 3, 2022 by SodaBit

[JellyCo.]

On 5/2/2022 at 5:15 AM, slightlytreasonous said:

You already can, just form a fleet at a port and then send them out

 

I find that my ships, supposedly tucked up nice and safe in Rosyth while I build up the fleet, are apparently ranging far and wide on missions of their own, in messy little ad hoc formations.

If they're going to get bored and go out, I'd rather they did so as organised squadrons.

[Mike L]

Just fought a UK 1940 campaign.  The Germans surrendered first then several months later the Austro-Hungarians collapsed.  I did not think this was in place yet.

The reason the BC # was so high was that I used minimum displacement, beam and draft for type IV with 2 triple 17 in. turrets with lots of 24 in oxygen torpedos about 69 million each. Then made destroyers once the game started.  Minimum price for 38 knots and 2 double launchers.  But they never really saw any combat.

[Dave P.]

Honestly, what I'd really like to see is a "restart battle" button, at least at lower difficulty levels.

Also, I started a battle last night with two enemy destroyers in the middle of my formation. Never seen that before. Sank 'em but not before they torp-spammed me. (Sank a destroyer, crippled two more, a CA and a BB.)

These observations are not completely unrelated. But there have been a number of blunders on my part which I wouldn't mind having a chance to retry.

[smoothpop]

i started a french 1900 campaign last night and the first engagement was just wrong on so many levels. it was a convoy defence with British allied fleet. 27 TR to defend, french fleet 4 BB 8 CL, british fleet 3 CA 5 CL, German Fleet 5 BB 7 CA 5 CL 12 DD 7 TB.

first issue was the divisioning, all the TR were in 1-3 ship divisions that clogged the entire bar, i couldnt even expand to see specific ship cards and the allocation was irrational more below, the attach detach buttons completely unresponsive for every selected division.  im assuming they were all related.

second issue was deployment. my force excluding TR consisted of 3 columns, middle was the 3 british CA leading the 4BB with the outer 2 columns being the light cruisers which wouldve been fine but for two issues first the divisions were completely irrational eg one CL division being 1st and 6th position ships of the starboard and 4th of the port columns. and second was the fact that a 7 DD division started between the port CL and the centre columns with 3 of them being within 400m of 2 of my BBs. needless to say i lost the manoeuvrability of 2 BBs as a result which had consequences later.

the DDs got dispatched quickly and then through concentrated firepower and the enemy AI issuing suicide charges of individual ships into the mass of mine, the battle progressed to me having sunk their entire fleet bar 4 CAs that never showed their faces and a single heavily crippled TB with a cloaking device for only the loss of a single CL but most of my ships badly damaged. for some reason throughout the entire battle i was unable to issue orders to sail to somewhere except to my BB division, all the others were just following even when i tried to issue orders, they changed heading but immediately returned to "follow" BB division. the issue came when i wanted to hunt down the fleeing CAs and the TB. the TB was close enough to limit my game speed to 5x but i had only 3 CL that wernt engine damaged and very slow and all of them were just sitting still "following" a crippled BB and refused to change orders. 

not wanting to waste an hour watching a timer tick down, i assumed i had done enough to win even though the victory conditions were "protect TR" and "sink 100% of enemy ships" so i left the battle early and this is where the real joke happened. when i exited the battle the summary screen clearly showed i had most of my ships badly damaged but alive except the 1 CL and the AI had everything in Black except 4 CA in green and 1 TB in red but when i returned to the campaign map the results were completely different, id apparently lost 3 BBs 4 CAs and all bar one of my light cruisers and somehow the germas had resurected all bar one of their BBs 2 CAs and 1 TB .....

that was an alt f4 moment right there, how can it make such a massive mismatch between the match results and the campaign results?

[Dave P.]

12 hours ago, smoothpop said:

i started a french 1900 campaign last night and the first engagement was just wrong on so many levels. it was a convoy defence with British allied fleet. 27 TR to defend, french fleet 4 BB 8 CL, british fleet 3 CA 5 CL, German Fleet 5 BB 7 CA 5 CL 12 DD 7 TB.

first issue was the divisioning, all the TR were in 1-3 ship divisions that clogged the entire bar, i couldnt even expand to see specific ship cards and the allocation was irrational more below, the attach detach buttons completely unresponsive for every selected division.  im assuming they were all related.

second issue was deployment. my force excluding TR consisted of 3 columns, middle was the 3 british CA leading the 4BB with the outer 2 columns being the light cruisers which wouldve been fine but for two issues first the divisions were completely irrational eg one CL division being 1st and 6th position ships of the starboard and 4th of the port columns. and second was the fact that a 7 DD division started between the port CL and the centre columns with 3 of them being within 400m of 2 of my BBs. needless to say i lost the manoeuvrability of 2 BBs as a result which had consequences later.

the DDs got dispatched quickly and then through concentrated firepower and the enemy AI issuing suicide charges of individual ships into the mass of mine, the battle progressed to me having sunk their entire fleet bar 4 CAs that never showed their faces and a single heavily crippled TB with a cloaking device for only the loss of a single CL but most of my ships badly damaged. for some reason throughout the entire battle i was unable to issue orders to sail to somewhere except to my BB division, all the others were just following even when i tried to issue orders, they changed heading but immediately returned to "follow" BB division. the issue came when i wanted to hunt down the fleeing CAs and the TB. the TB was close enough to limit my game speed to 5x but i had only 3 CL that wernt engine damaged and very slow and all of them were just sitting still "following" a crippled BB and refused to change orders. 

not wanting to waste an hour watching a timer tick down, i assumed i had done enough to win even though the victory conditions were "protect TR" and "sink 100% of enemy ships" so i left the battle early and this is where the real joke happened. when i exited the battle the summary screen clearly showed i had most of my ships badly damaged but alive except the 1 CL and the AI had everything in Black except 4 CA in green and 1 TB in red but when i returned to the campaign map the results were completely different, id apparently lost 3 BBs 4 CAs and all bar one of my light cruisers and somehow the germas had resurected all bar one of their BBs 2 CAs and 1 TB .....

that was an alt f4 moment right there, how can it make such a massive mismatch between the match results and the campaign results?

I've complained about this a lot too. I'm pretty sure "Leave Battle" undoes everything and uses the Auto Resolve instead.

[Cryadis]

19 hours ago, Dave P. said:

Honestly, what I'd really like to see is a "restart battle" button, at least at lower difficulty levels.

That exists in some way:

you can alt + F4 out of the combat and restart the game / reload and you have the same battle again. However the initial settings will be different (weather, starting positions and in the case of TR beeing involved they also have different stats and possibly guns)

[havaduck]

I know the long campaign is comming, so please you gotta take a look at initial 1890s engine efficiency:

The BB is just fine, because you can cram 2 smokestaks in the center where they obviously are intended to go.

 

However ...... the armored cruiser already is not:  It does 16 knts! and yet it barely scrapes at 2/3 engine efficiency which means it will crawl around more like 12 knts during a game. That however is the speed of a 1850! screew/sail ship of the line like Napoleon.

 

Now, you can get 100 % EE but the second smokestack needs to go in the grey circle aft of the aft tower, resulting in hideous weight distribution, and looks and loss of 50 % of main battery firepower.

 

Obviously I dont have any more advanced tech or modules if the game just started that I could put there instead ......

Edited May 7, 2022 by havaduck

[slightlytreasonous]

On 5/7/2022 at 7:41 AM, havaduck said:

I know the long campaign is comming, so please you gotta take a look at initial 1890s engine efficiency:

The BB is just fine, because you can cram 2 smokestaks in the center where they obviously are intended to go.

 

However ...... the armored cruiser already is not:  It does 16 knts! and yet it barely scrapes at 2/3 engine efficiency which means it will crawl around more like 12 knts during a game. That however is the speed of a 1850! screew/sail ship of the line like Napoleon.

 

Now, you can get 100 % EE but the second smokestack needs to go in the grey circle aft of the aft tower, resulting in hideous weight distribution, and looks and loss of 50 % of main battery firepower.

 

Obviously I dont have any more advanced tech or modules if the game just started that I could put there instead ......

Can't you make it longer but decrease beam and draft so you don't go over the displacement limit?

[Rancor]

6 hours ago, slightlytreasonous said:

Can't you make it longer but decrease beam and draft so you don't go over the displacement limit?

Came here to post the same thing as havaduck, but went and tried your suggestion first. Sadly same issue, only one funnel fits and it really limits this hull.

 

 

[havaduck]

11 hours ago, slightlytreasonous said:

Can't you make it longer but decrease beam and draft so you don't go over the displacement limit?

I get where you are comming from, but it doesnt do nearly enough to solve the issue ...... also you do want to put equipment onto the ship too. Anyway, this is the smallest, (relativly) longest variant one can built which then needs less machinery and therefore less exhaust capacity .......

........ and its still not enough to go over 70 % efficiency. Enjoy your 800 ts of equipment too if 4 torp tubes set you back 100 ts allready .....

 

I actually found a solution: The BB is "fine" because you can place 2 smokestacks there. Here you cant place the biggest and you cant place 2 of the smallest ....... or can you? Sometimes I tend to forget about the feature, that if you hold the shift key, you can place stuff freely and you are not restricted to these sorta magnetising hard points the equipment snaps onto.

 

I still think its broken because new players wont know about this, and its still questionable at best:

This thing barely gets the 100 % at 16 knts ....... which is not enough to outrun even a BB ....

 

... but lets assume it would be "tolerable" for the starting ship (like in reality soon to be outdated) and we move on to the light cruiser.

The slowest smalest light cruiser with 2 smokestacsk the with normal hardpoints is again below 100 %.

 

Dare I ask my CL is capable of outrunning a predreadnought battleship of the 1890s, I will even use the "shift" key to place 3 funnels ........

= Nope not gonna happen o'clock.

 

And from my understanding, light ships even this early did have at least 20 knts of speed. I truly dont think its an outrageous amount of speed.

Edited May 9, 2022 by havaduck

[Plazma]

@havaduck from my expierence and knowedgle you can easy ignore the fact that engine is less than 50% efficiency in 1890. 

What I look about ships etc. this is inaccurate, but the ships have a few issue in 1890 and before, looking on the technology we can assume that this ships is around 1880-1890 and simply is not perfect.

The efficiency of Engine provide mainly the range and acceleration. Is nice to have, but not crucial, the range you can adjust. The efficiency not provide the speed! Don't think like you have 2/3 speed, think like you have 2/3 fuel(range) and poor acceleration.

 

Here is my 24 kn BB in 1890 with 2x12inch gun with 100% Engine efficiency. But myself I prefer making 25.8 kn BB with 24% Engine efficiency or even 21 kn BB with 21,5%. 

Also important to notice is that adding even 1kn for BB in early years have huge impact on ships, but in gameplay not always/overrated. 

The more important parameter is smok Interference, what impact accuracy. 

 

Also is important to notice that some funnels are more effective (capacity/weight) than others.

Anyway the BB from Austria-Hungary are slow...  Is barely possible to have 23kn for this hull and the best results are 19-20kn for this. Below fast made 21kn, but lack of guns are main issue. 

Edited May 9, 2022 by Plazma

[Dave P.]

Apart from all the torp spam hate, I'd also like it if my escorts wouldn't try to shoot torpedoes at the enemy through my battle line.

I know I could just disable torpedoes (I mean, mostly the DDs are just there to attract attention and be bullet sponges) but occasionally they do get lucky.

[Gangut]

One issue I've constantly had throughout my 1890-1930 French mega campaign is the ai will in some battles constantly be in the turning phase, but instead will continue to move forward/ try to avoid other ships in its own squadron which somehow applies to the whole squadron. This in turn means that if left to its own devices it will essentially end up 20km + behind the squadron doing its "thing". This continues until I break up the entire squadron.

Another interesting thing is that in the peace treaty I will try to take ships from the defeated nation, but instead when the treaty is signed I will get cash instead.

[Skeksis]

Lifeboats on the 'Italian' hull "Scout Cruiser" 1910 not giving up there space!

[Skeksis]

Germany "Light Cruiser V" hull rear lifeboat arc conflict...

[Dave P.]

In keeping with the "what if this crazy thing hadn't been limited by either treaty or engineering reality" nature of the game, how about dual casemate mounts? Something like an over/under shotgun. Would turn some of those early CL hulls into little dakka-factories.

[Skeksis]

It's quite possible all the new hulls in this update should be checked for lifeboat conflicts.

1910 Russian Scout Cruiser 

Edited May 20, 2022 by Skeksis

[Mutsu]

Not sure about anyone else but I find the funds for campaign on creating your own fleet are really really limited. especially for the later dates where its hard to pump on more then maybe two battleships and one battlecruiser 

[Nagato]

3 hours ago, Mutsu said:

Not sure about anyone else but I find the funds for campaign on creating your own fleet are really really limited. especially for the later dates where its hard to pump on more then maybe two battleships and one battlecruiser 

I agree, especially later camapigns (1930-1940) couldnt have more then few battleships and battlecruisers, so everytime i lack behind Ai in large ships. There should be larger budget or limit how much you can build ships of each type and having money for each type of ship to build decent starting fleet, or you get overhelmed by enemy quickly.

By the way, is that you Mutsu Onee-sama???

[Mutsu]

15 hours ago, Nagato said:

By the way, is that you Mutsu Onee-sama???

Yes, yes it is xD

[CommodoreWesley]

So, here's at least my "meta" for Alpha 1.05, though it is essentially the same as previous builds. What I mean by "meta" is that the easiest way to play the game.  Therefore, I am only really proposing the fewest number of designs needed.  There are quite a few things that I think should be debated about here, but there are some major balance issues that I bring up that are being addressed (torpedoes) but also some others.

1890: Battleships and Torpedo boats - Cruisers are pointless due to awful engine efficency.  Fire will be the easiest way to knock out enemy vessels with guns, though it is best to use fire with concentrated main caliber battleship guns on one target than trying to add secondaries.  In general, aiming is heavily based off of pitch and roll, therefore having fewer guns is typically far better than quantity.  Torpedo boats should also only be armed with 51 mm guns, due to their rate of fire for torpedo boat vs torpedo boat actions.  AI torpedo boats however are hardly a threat to player battleships, as they are too shy to get close, allowing for the BB to usually take them out extremely easily.

1900: Battleships and Torpedo boats - Relatively the same as 1890, though torpedoes are more effective due to increased range and damage, putting more favor to them than in 1890.  Cruisers finally sort of catch up, but the battleships are typically faster, therefore are still largely a waste of valuable starting money.

1910: Battlecruisers only (Destroyers optional) - Probably the most fun era currently in my opinion, though once you play it with only Battlecruisers, that's really the only way to play it.  Destroyers are really only there to help protect your own transports from other destroyers in raiding actions.  Battlecruisers however should be essentially built as fast battleships from here on out.  Keep the number of guns limited, typically three sets of twin turrets.  Don't bother with casemates as all they do is increase roll, and honestly don't really have weight savings over turrets and make the hull more likely to be penetrated due to armor thickness limitations.  Make a few turreted secondaries.  Typically, I do one twin turret on each side, with one superfiring over the rear main turret.  Destroyers however should be kept out of fleet actions, as they tend to get targeted, and their torpedo range isn't far enough.  Cruisers are absolutely pointless in this era due to heavily restricted hulls and funnels and high costs.  Fire can still be an extremely effective way to knock out enemy ships, therefore stock up on HE still.

1920: Battlecruisers and Destroyers - Similar to 1910, though this is where the game starts becoming less fun for me due to how dangerous torpedoes can become.  While cruiser design has greatly improved by this era, light cruisers are so extremely weak against torpedoes that they are really not worth it at all due to their lack of torpedo defense (seriously, destroyers can take a torpedo better than a light cruiser for some reason...).  There are also so few cost savings of them compared to heavy cruisers, it's far better just to build heavy cruisers.  However, I still don't recommend building heavy cruisers either, as big gun battlecruisers (think fast battleships) are just far more effective at taking out the enemy.  The Battlecruiser might be twice as expensive than the cruiser, but they are like 4 times more effective, and are cheaper per ton of displacement than cruisers, making it somewhat ironically more difficult for the enemy to blockade you despite having fewer ships in your fleet.  Secondaries from here on out really become optional.  Your main enemy will be torpedoes and enemy light cruisers (they are essentially expensive destroyers but can last a bit more under shellfire though their cost is not worth it for the player).  Also keep the destroyers out of fleet actions, maybe let them fire torps once then let them retreat, otherwise all the do is feed the enemy victory points).

1930: Battlecruisers and Destroyers - by this time, torpedoes are king, or well, at least the most important thing you need to pay attention to from the enemy.  Extreme range plunging shellfire is also very good, and with Radar it is pretty easy to do.  Still, I even arm my battlecruisers (fast battleships) with torpedoes by the stage due to the range torpedoes have.  The AI overloads their designs with so many unnecessary secondaries that they typically have abysmal long-range accuracy.  Most of your battle is largely just trying to avoid your ships from hitting enemy (or your own) torpedoes.  Therefore, long range gunfire should be the main focus to try and take out the enemy. 

1940: 1930, but even more dangerous torpedoes.


Basically, after 1910 just build "Fast battleships" from battlecruiser hulls and have destroyers to kill other destroyers.  Torpedoes become so powerful and abundant in the later years that they will be the main threat to the player, while enemy shellfire will be largely ineffective due too many secondaries.  Cruisers in general are pointless in battle effectiveness and economically (light cruisers EXPECIALLY so).  I would recommend a major decrease in their cost.  They may become more useful once more theaters open up in the campaign, as they were historically more so a strategic weapon, rather than a tactical one, but with the exception of build times, it seems like it is better to build battlecruisers due to their overall greater displacement as that has the blockade effectiveness.  Player destroyers are really only there for potentially torpedo opportunities and for destroyer duels to protect convoys.  Later era destroyers are also a bit too expensive to throw away in the screen orders (which are too aggressive and risky for my taste, particularly with the limited funds available to build our starting fleets).  I think with longer term campaigns in the next version, ship designs will be more diverse, as I likely won't ever have more than 4 capital ships of the same design reducing "fast battleship" battlecruisers, though I guess we will have to find out.  

[Skeksis]

This CA hull is already an 'invalid design', right off the bat, makes it alittle hard to add anything!...

Custom Battles.

Maybe this hull has been accidently classed wrong, should be an BC?, nice hull to have as an CA though - should keep an CA junior version, would be nice. 

Maybe a little query: The max tonnage for below CA is 14000 but... actual tonnage is 13945, technically the ship is under 14000tt. Shouldn't the tonnage limit be based on the actual tonnage rather than the 'designing' limit?...

Custom Battles.

Maybe the v105 calc's of extra beam etc., like adding hull capacity, has exposed what the actual ship tonnage should be based on.

Edited May 24, 2022 by Skeksis

[o Barão]

46 minutes ago, Skeksis said:

This CA hull is already an 'invalid design', right off the bat, makes it alittle hard to add anything!...

Custom Battles.

Maybe this hull has been accidently classed wrong, should be an BC?, nice hull to have as an CA though - should keep an CA junior version, would be nice. 

Maybe a little query: The max tonnage for below CA is 14000 but... actual tonnage is 13945, technically the ship is under 14000tt. Shouldn't the tonnage limit be based on the actual tonnage rather than the 'designing' limit?...

Custom Battles.

Maybe the v105 calc's of extra beam etc., like adding hull capacity, has exposed what the actual ship tonnage should be based on.

"Maybe a little query: The max tonnage for below CA is 14000 but... actual tonnage is 13945, technically the ship is under 14000tt. Shouldn't the tonnage limit be based on the actual tonnage rather than the 'designing' limit?..."

I had the same question a few months ago. Another player from this forum gave me an explanation that made sense, well for me at least.

You can not use all the hull available displacement in your design but the hull will need to have that displacement for normal sailing conditions. 

Let’s say as an extreme example that you are designing a 5k ton ship in a 10k ton hull. The hull volume will need that weight to maintain a normal condition in the water. If using only half the weight, the hull would go up and roll, probably. So to maintain the hull stability, the weight difference would need to be compensated with ballast.

In your example, the difference is so small that would not be an issue, but the game engine doesn't allow. You could fine tune the beam and draught sliders to reach a 14k ton hull or below?