>>> Beta 1.06 Feedback<<< (FINAL UPDATE 6th Release Candidate)

[jkl]

Weight gain from caliber increase need rebalance, picrelated.

Guns still need rebalance. Having 4" turret with 2.1t and 4" casemate with 29t have no sense.

Especially when 6" turret have weight of 45t and 6" casemate have only 39.

Just wtf guys with numbers?

 

[Nick Thomadis]

There were a few more fixes in the Update 3 that were not mentioned.

- Citadel size and offset now aids more to stabilize the ship and reduce pitch/roll.
- Detonation/Flash Fire base chances reduced. Note: The Flash Fire chance in the Design phase is indicative. If you have proper armor protection you may never have a Flash Fire even though the chance is high when the Flash Fire conditions are met.
- Some other minor fixes for bugs reported.

[LoSboccacc]

1 hour ago, Nagato said:

As intended. It worked far far better in 1.05. This "so called upgrade " is catastrophy, i cant create one single bloody ship that has no pitch-roll in yellow. Its impossible to make. This is downgrade not an upgrade. They changed things that worked maked them worse. It totally destroy fun of making ships. Not only my ships cant hit a squat they get butchered in every battle, i did manage to make few decent designs but it is still a bad. I simply cannot see this as an upgrade.

 

 

honestly not having yellow pitch/roll seems more a skill issue than a 106 patch issue

 

[Nick Thomadis]

6 hours ago, AdmiralKirk said:

The forward casemate on this British armoured cruiser hull obstructs the main gun's firing arc for some reason...

What exactly happens here? It is not shown very clearly. It would help to see the space behind the turret. If the turret has very little space behind it to rotate, then it cannot rotate fully.

Casemate guns do not seem to obstruct, although if this is the case, then we will check it out.

[Kirron]

Research right now is simply too slow for proper functionality. Screenshot below shows time to several key techs at maximum spending for a 1890 start, two years in already.

Without usage of the focuses which double or triple the length of non-focused research, several techs that are already 2/3's complete will take over 2 further years of research. Often, these are also the first ones in their respective trees, which players start with but still end up being required to research through.

And when focuses are used, the slow down they incur in other projects is simply too prohibitive to use in anything but a few truly key techs such as getting the earliest rangefinders. Slowing down every other tech by 1.5/2/3 in order to boost 1/2/3 tech's research speeds by 3/2/1.5 simply isn't viable when the time to completion is already so long for so many trees that are also incredibly dense in techs (see Boilers, natural draft start -> lighter boilers -> small advanced funnels 1 -> medium advanced funnels 1 -> large advanced funnels 1 -> induced boilers, that alone takes over ten years without using the focuses and if you do use them, you are sacrificing almost every other similar module such as the control stations, engines, turret mechanisms, etc).

 

TLDR;

While some trees are roughly, vaguely, balanced for current speeds (range-finders, big and small guns) most other key techs take far too long to research (control stations, internal protection, boilers/funnels, Compound to Harvey armour, communications/radar, etc) for limited impact. They need speeding up.

Edited June 3, 2022 by Kirron

[TiagoStein]

7 hours ago, Norbert Sattler said:

I just got asked whether I wanted an alliance with Germany. I declined and still ended up in an alliance anyway...

Also Austria-Hungary when starting in 1890 doesn't seem to get any pre-dreadnoughts to unlock. You start with BB1 and research consistently brings me directly to Dreadnought 1, with no other BB hull in between.
Is that intentional?

Edit:

Also this just happened...

I think that is intentional. You are not playing the prime minister you are the chief admiral. You advise the prime minister but he can ignore you.

[Vanhal]

Either 1.06 or one of the hotfixes seemed to cause drastic drop in big guns accuracy, i'm now playing 1930 campaing and hitting anything above 5km is practically impossible for guns 381 mm+, and that's with longest barrels and most other accuracy bonuses and modules possible.

[Norbert Sattler]

25 minutes ago, TiagoStein said:

I think that is intentional. You are not playing the prime minister you are the chief admiral. You advise the prime minister but he can ignore you.

Then why am I asked in the first place, if my answer doesn't matter anyway?

[Dirlinger]

44 minutes ago, Norbert Sattler said:

Then why am I asked in the first place, if my answer doesn't matter anyway?

Maybe they went RTW2 (rule the waves) route where your influence and vote increase the chance that decision will go your way but it is just part of several parameters deciding the final decision.

It should be better communicated to the player somehow though.

[Fangoriously]

1 hour ago, jkl said:

Weight gain from caliber increase need rebalance, picrelated.

Guns still need rebalance. Having 4" turret with 2.1t and 4" casemate with 29t have no sense.

Especially when 6" turret have weight of 45t and 6" casemate have only 39.

Just wtf guys with numbers?

 

In your own screen shot you can see the casemate has over 10 inches of side armor, that's where all the weight is coming from. I always 0 out casemate armor.

Main gun weight differences can also be explained by how much armor is on it, and different barrel calibers on the different turret models.

[LoSboccacc]

 

can confirm the new mechanics for head on / tail on damage work now XD

maneuvering and keeping range is so much more important, feels great.

I wonder if that mission against the modern battleship is even doable now, I remember getting by only by cheesing the bow bounces

Edited June 3, 2022 by LoSboccacc

[captinjoehenry]

1 hour ago, Vanhal said:

Either 1.06 or one of the hotfixes seemed to cause drastic drop in big guns accuracy, i'm now playing 1930 campaing and hitting anything above 5km is practically impossible for guns 381 mm+, and that's with longest barrels and most other accuracy bonuses and modules possible.

Can confirm.  Update 3 did odd things to big gun accuracy even into 1940.  15" and below guns seem to be largely ok but past that point the accuracy gets odd. 

Especially when going from 17 to 18". The guns tech level are the same in custom battle but the 17" gun is significantly more accurate. 

And depending on the components you can end up with odd situations where sometimes a gun is more accurate at a longer range than a shorter range.

As an example when engaging a 130,000 ton SBB at 20km with a 140,000 ton SBB 20.9" max length mk 3 guns (max range of 70km) have less than a 20% chance to hit while the ships 8.9" max length mk 5 secondary guns (max range 25km) have nearly a 100% chance to hit.  And a 40,000 ton BC with 15.9" max length mk 4 guns (max range 65km or so) at around 22km range vs the exact same 130,000 ton SBB has around 40% chance to hit.  I can't remember the exact hit chance for the 15.9" gun but both the 15.9 and 20.9 inch gun are in quad turrets and the 8.9 secondary are in triple turrets.

For the most part it seems like the tech level of the gun has a vastly greater impact than anything else in the current patch for 1.06 while previously going down a tech level for a gun aka 4 -> 3 or such would result in the next size up gun 15 -> 16 having the same or slightly worse stats at the same ranges now the impact is vastly greater.  And the accuracy of secondary (mk 5 guns in 1940 custom battle) compared to main guns (Mk 4 or 3 for high caliber BB guns) currently vastly favors the secondary guns when engaging the same target at the same ranges.  While in nearly all previous patches unless the range was REALLY short or the target was of a small very agile type the big BB guns would always have an accuracy advantage.

[Rucki]

1 hour ago, Fangoriously said:

In your own screen shot you can see the casemate has over 10 inches of side armor, that's where all the weight is coming from. I always 0 out casemate armor.

Main gun weight differences can also be explained by how much armor is on it, and different barrel calibers on the different turret models.

 

Does someone know if the Belt armor is behind casemates ? I always left some casemate armor, so that those hits wont penetrate into the the mid ship sections, but if the the belt (and maybe citadel ?) is behind casemates, then I will go as well with 0 armor on those.

[TiagoStein]

3 minutes ago, Rucki said:

 

Does someone know if the Belt armor is behind casemates ? I always left some casemate armor, so that those hits wont penetrate into the the mid ship sections, but if the the belt (and maybe citadel ?) is behind casemates, then I will go as well with 0 armor on those.

Citatel for sure must be behind the casemates.  It would make no geomtric sense otherwise. What I do not know is how tall /deep the main belt goes (in real life it varied from project to project)

[Hale]

16 hours ago, vyprestrike said:

You’ll be waiting for a long time then, because the devs confirmed that pitch and roll were working as intended in this update.

If the intent is saying "on average end of game ships (1950) are about 100% more stable than 1890 ships due to valid reasons"  I'm ok with that but the way the UI presents it to the player in 1890 is "all the ships you design suck the big one"

[Darth Khyron]

I can confirm problems with own accuracy. The enemy seems to do just fine, even at range. But, yeah, had two battles where the fleets parted with damage, but no substantial losses because the ammo ran low.
What I am curious about: Enemy ships are now zigzagging constantly. Yet, they do seemingly not suffer from accuracy loss.

Edited June 3, 2022 by Darth Khyron

[Rucki]

26 minutes ago, Hale said:

If the intent is saying "on average end of game ships (1950) are about 100% more stable than 1890 ships due to valid reasons"  I'm ok with that but the way the UI presents it to the player in 1890 is "all the ships you design suck the big one"

I agree with that. I think its totally fine to have historical differences represented in the hull designs, like f.e. saying the 1890 British pre-dreadnaught is more stable, hence have better base aim stat as the German 1890 pre dreadnaught or that later and bigger hull types are more stable.

But I would rather have the pitch and roll stats in the ships designer be about how balanced this type of ship is compared to what we can adjust in the designer. I would at least expect using the smallest possible main guns, funnels and towers in an balanced way (no heavy aft or fore balance) and no secondaries/casemates to give me the best possible pitch, so basically a number around 0%, because what else could I do to balance this ship more ? Just give the hulls f.e. a base aim number to represent the rest.

[Tycondero]

3 hours ago, TiagoStein said:

I think that is intentional. You are not playing the prime minister you are the chief admiral. You advise the prime minister but he can ignore you.

Not sure whether it is intensional. Would be great to hear the devs on this.

[Plazma]

Eh... again the VP is added to the opposite site. I lose game, by wining it. 

 

In my opinion guns now are little too accuracy when you playing with the length of barrels and torps should be little more lethal. (Especially when my TB send torpedo in opposite directory or disappeared in waves...) 

 

and the GDP, NO IDEA WHY IS SHRINKING! I have 150% transport capacity, France can lose 10TR (+11 TR by missions) and I only 1 TR, but my growth is less and less, half of France growth per month. (Italy here) In the France GDP is 2x biggest, they lost 10x - 21x more TR and the growth of GDP is 2 time biggest than my! Ye, even if I don't lost TR and have growth on + my GDP shrinking... when AI economy increasing like 10% per month after sunk 20 TR.

What one Italy person with British person doing in German bar? Clash of ships  

 

Also for some reasons I have CL vs CL, 4 TB vs 4 TB and very rarely 1 CA vs 2 CL, that above was the biggest battle, no idea why TB is heavy involved in fights and CA + BB are not used. 

 

Also why in the distance of 0.3 km my guns what normally can pen 1.6" of armor are blocked by TB what have 0" armor? (HE, 3.3" gun) 

 

Edited June 3, 2022 by Plazma

[Norbert Sattler]

I've had a couple of close spawns in the past, but this one takes the cake: 0.2 km away from the enemy TBs...

And after Alt + F4 restarting I even "managed" to be dropped between the enemy ships...

Edited June 3, 2022 by Norbert Sattler

[Draco]

I think the reduced accuracy at long range is a good thing, but yeah short-medium range accuracy needs a buff on the big guns after this patch, my BBs can only get up to a 35% main gun hits of ammo expended if they spend the majority of their time firing at targets less than 15km away.

Also, something is straight up wrong with german turrets just not dying from penetrations... they just won't go out of action no matter how many times you pen them.

I just fought a 108kt german super with 3x2 20.9" guns, and I penned that thing's turrets with 18" heavy shells 10 goddamn times and not a single turret went out of action...

I've said it before, I'll say it again, I think it is stupid for turret HP to be tied to the ship it is mounted on.

No way in hell they'd have stayed operational if they were mounted on one of my british BBs and took that many pens.
Here you are witnessing this particular turret take it's 5th penetration of the day (I was counting) to the internal barbette. It still kept firing back after that, plus all the ones it took before. How?

[TiagoStein]

2 hours ago, Rucki said:

I agree with that. I think its totally fine to have historical differences represented in the hull designs, like f.e. saying the 1890 British pre-dreadnaught is more stable, hence have better base aim stat as the German 1890 pre dreadnaught or that later and bigger hull types are more stable.

But I would rather have the pitch and roll stats in the ships designer be about how balanced this type of ship is compared to what we can adjust in the designer. I would at least expect using the smallest possible main guns, funnels and towers in an balanced way (no heavy aft or fore balance) and no secondaries/casemates to give me the best possible pitch, so basically a number around 0%, because what else could I do to balance this ship more ? Just give the hulls f.e. a base aim number to represent the rest.

That is a bit of desire of overcontrol maybe?

People do not have that mentaility with numbers that are not percentages, so that might be  the way to solve this confusion. Find another way to represent the inertia tensor other than a growing percentage

[captinjoehenry]

1 hour ago, Draco said:

I think the reduced accuracy at long range is a good thing, but yeah short-medium range accuracy needs a buff on the big guns after this patch, my BBs can only get up to a 35% main gun hits of ammo expended if they spend the majority of their time firing at targets less than 15km away.

Also, something is straight up wrong with german turrets just not dying from penetrations... they just won't go out of action no matter how many times you pen them.

I just fought a 108kt german super with 3x2 20.9" guns, and I penned that thing's turrets with 18" heavy shells 10 goddamn times and not a single turret went out of action...

I've said it before, I'll say it again, I think it is stupid for turret HP to be tied to the ship it is mounted on.

No way in hell they'd have stayed operational if they were mounted on one of my british BBs and took that many pens.
Here you are witnessing this particular turret take it's 5th penetration of the day (I was counting) to the internal barbette. It still kept firing back after that, plus all the ones it took before. How?

For the gun accuracy I agree it was definitely too high in the previous versions of 1.06 especially at extreme ranges.  But the latest patch 3 seems to have really messed up the usual ratio of gun accuracy when you compare guns compared to more or less all the other patches.  In addition to having some oddness with accuracy and over all rather excessively low accuracy for the biggest guns at most middle and low ranges.

 

As for the turret damage looking at that picture I'm not seeing any damage numbers for a 18 shell penning the main gun turret.  Just seeing a 5" partial pen on the turret doing minimal if any damage.  As you'd expect from a 5" shell failing to pen the turret.

As far as the 18" shell penetrating the main gun turret did you see how much damage it actually did?  As the German SBB have some of the highest damage resistance in the game.  It's very much their main trait.  So that 18" shell might not have actually dealt that much damage.  Like the German SBB can fairly easily get 75% or more gun damage reduction while the British SBB / BB has far lower damage reduction from shell hits.  I'm not sure the exact number but I'd guess it's probably closer to 50% so everything else being equal given those reduction numbers your British ship would take twice as much damage from the same hit as the German SBB would.

 

Also as a side note I'm pretty sure Germany has the exact same design of twin 20" turrets as most other nations.  As most nations do not yet have unique turret designs for the really big guns (18" - 20") and a good bit of weapon properties do seem to be tied to the design of the turret.  Like you'll see that different 3d models for the same gun size and tech level have noticably different traits.  Like most enclosed turrets have longer barrels than open turrets along with other details like that.

[Vanhal]

Some more feedback, this time 1940 start.

1. As i suspected previously big guns are now TRASH, capital letters. Maxed everything possible, plus the new long barrels and the accuracy is way below 1.05. This make battles very long, tedious and frustrating, make defeating more numerous enemy fleets very hard (and those battles happen all the time), and make big guns unusable. Is there even a reason why let's say 508mm gun would end up being this much less accurate than 305mm? Sure, some could be attributed to refining of tech, but not that much, it's still a similar gun, not a laser vs warhammer.

2. New barrel mechanics is completely borked now. Even the longest barrel make accuracy way worse than the 1.05, for an added cost, weight and lessened rof. Yay. Normal barrel feel like sniping with a shotgun now. Short barrel... i'm not THIS masochist to try. I know there were reports of supposedly "too much" accuracy in 1.06 base, but it actually felt right back then, battles were faster and more risky, and it wasn't actually unbalanced that much because rof, weight and cost.

3. Of course the biggest smelly carcass in the closet, all this is huge indirect buff to torpedoes. Yes, the very same torpedoes that supposed to be nerfed of which we asked repeatedly, are now buffed because you need to come to 5 km to reliably shoot anything.

4. Speaking some more about torpedoes - duds are rare and very rare in later dates, basically unneeded mechanic. Course deviation is much better and funnier, though i feel it saved me as many times as killed me by eating a torp that i would dodge otherwise. There are also completely random torps out of seemingly nowhere which is honestly quite fun.

5. What is NOT fun is that enemy cruisers are still loaded with dozens of launchers. Please stop. Fix this. Seriously.

6. Finally, the torp launcher detonation is working but its very rare, i seen it just once, which seems very insufficient considering those ships pack dozens of launchers each and were hit hundreds of times of times with various calibers guns.

Edited June 3, 2022 by Vanhal

[captinjoehenry]

21 minutes ago, Vanhal said:

Some more feedback, this time 1940 start.

1. As i suspected previously big guns are now TRASH, capital letters. Maxed everything possible, plus the new long barrels and the accuracy is way below 1.05. This make battles very long, tedious and frustrating, make defeating more numerous enemy fleets very hard (and those battles happen all the time), and make big guns unusable. Is there even a reason why let's say 508mm gun would end up being this much less accurate than 305mm? Sure, some could be attributed to refining of tech, but not that much, it's still a similar gun, not a laser vs warhammer.

2. New barrel mechanics is completely borked now. Even the longest barrel make accuracy way worse than the 1.05, for an added cost, weight and lessened rof. Yay. Normal barrel feel like sniping with a shotgun now. Short barrel... i'm not THIS masochist to try. I know there were reports of supposedly "too much" accuracy in 1.06 base, but it actually felt right back then, battles were faster and more risky, and it wasn't actually unbalanced that much because rof, weight and cost.

 

Personally I do agree with you.  When I was having two hand built fleets fight each other in custom battle in patch 2 the gun accuracy felt pretty good.  It might have been a bit high but overall it felt like it worked really well.  Long guns had a nice advantage of notably higher accuracy.

And unlike other people I didn't really have any occurrences of 100% accuracy other than at fairly close range or against massive SBB at mid to close range.  At the same time though my hand built ships don't tend to have too many parts.  With 2 to 4 main gun turrets on average and between 4 and 20 secondaries at most and almost always far on the lower end of that range.  That along with only having 1 or 2 funnels, usually just 1, meant that I probably had an average part count around 15 or so on my ships.  And at that part count the exact excessive levels of accuracy didn't really occur in patch 2.  

And as was posted in the change log the accuracy issue was caused by part count on the target ship and most AI designed ships and a good number of player designed ships seem to have a lot more parts than the ships I tend to build.  With notably higher count of secondaries and tertiary guns as well as torpedo tubes and a good number of barbets.  

If I were to guess the really excessive accuracy might have happened around 30 parts or more that lead to so many people seeing 100% accuracy at rather long range.