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

[slightlytreasonous]

Excellent, another topic to infect with the obvious...

 

Apart from all the choices in the build screen, the game gives you ample opportunity to win handedly.  

Sure you might have an ammo detonation that realistically should send half the ship to the stratosphere, but its not a guaranteed kill.  Sure you might have engine damage, but you never lose all power and become a assured dead sitting duck. And sure, you might have a slower reload for your quad, but you never face random breakdowns in the midst of battle.

And as mentioned, you're all seeing.  Really, AI improvements can only go so far when we have this level of plot armor.  Granted, AI does too, but you get my point.

 

 

[Zombie1914]

2 hours ago, o Barão said:

Let me explain more in details, so there is no confusion here.

There are many things where we as the player cheats in battle. It is all related to crucial information that should not be possible for us players to have.

1- When you spot a ship, you will a "?" mark about the ship class. This is to simulate your sailors trying to identify the targets at sea. Well, this is useless when you can just teleport your camera to the enemy unit and see what is the ship. This would be very important in a real battle to prioritize targets, set a battle plan, etc. In this game is irrelevant.

2- When an unknown enemy ship show up, you will know by clicking on the ship, what weapons the ship have and what is the weapons range. You will know this by looking at the circles in the sea. So you will know from the start if a ship have torpedoes or not and if you're inside their torpedo range as an example.

3- When an unknown enemy ship show up, you already will know if they can pen your ship armor by hovering the mouse above your ship.

4- When a target is identified, you will know exactly, their accuracy level for each gun updated in real time, their crew training level, how much ammo they have onboard, if they launched the torpedoes, and a detailed report about the ship damage.

So in conclusion, the player have access to a lot of NONSENSE BULLSHIT info that helps a lot in making the right decisions to win the battle easily. This is completely wrong and makes the game a lot easier for the player.

So it is a little ironic to see players complaining about how weak the AI is in battle, or if the AI cheats, when it is us the players that have access to crucial information to make everything easier for us.

 

PS: Have you seen the way the AI dodging torps?

Yes of course. Terrible. I hate to see a ship doing a 360-degree turn in the same spot. However, if you set your ships to AI control, you will get the same thing. So is it cheating if you can have the same thing? Or is in fact more of a situation of tweaking the AI ship movement?

I see your point but most of the information gained through the ship identification is not as relevant as you make it sound.

Yes, eyeballing the ships gets you a better idea of their abilities but you would normally have Navy Identification Charts and basic intel available so its not that much of a cheat. Ship size, smoke and attack pattern/behaviour telll you pretty much all you need to know. Even the spotting order and/or seeing some smoke clouds closing in is good enough information for most battles.

e.g. you see some small ships on a course near you and they suddenly start turning away, you can bet there are torps on the way

Sure, the AI might have Veterans on board and better accuracy on its guns but knowing this honestly doesnt change how to attack him. Yes, i would try to out-range the oponent if i knew that i have more range but how often is that actually viable.

 

Yes, just because my own AI can do it too i still consider it cheating because its BS and honestly made me giving up on fitting torp entirely.

Edited June 26, 2022 by Zombie1914

[Plazma]

3 hours ago, Sturmalex said:

This is also possible for the player. You just need to crank up the training slider. Thats what makes all ships snipers in combat (and TBs in 1890 impossible to use due to the +600% range found bonus.

My whole campaign in 1890 are TB. You build around 200 of TB, each cost 0,3mln-0,4mln put as much as you can 2.9" long barrel guns. The TB are fast and small (bonus to dodge bullets). Watch how the BB burn down after bunch of TB spamming with HE. 

 

About Veterans if your ship are in task forces or are "in Begin" this probably count as additional training above "Trained", so even if the slider "crew training" saying this only will count to "training" level you can train your crew to Vet. I saw big difference between level of crew after "limited" and "in begin" stance. 

But also the slider "crew training" when I put example to 50% I see that my crew lose experience! 

[aradragoon]

15 hours ago, mikekervin said:

I think there's a couple errors with GDP and transports which is making the game unplayable as you get deeper into a war.

1. There seems to be a fixed percentage of total needed shipping that you can build per turn, this doesn't change at all depending on the economy or dock capacity.

2. Shipping is lost at a very high rate, sometimes even if the enemy is completely blockaded.

3. Shipping percentage sometimes goes down even when no ships are lost.

4. Shipping percentage sometimes doesn't increase even after enough turns without any shiping losses.

5. The amount if shipping needed doesn't decrease when the economy declines.

6. The shipping penalty seems to be over-applied, because it applies a negative GDP percentage that increases per turn, as well as a fixed expense penalty that doesn't decrease as the economy shrinks - essentially amounting to a larger and larger percentage of the economy over time. Taken together this essentailly means that if you lose a few ships per month for about a year you can never, ever stabilize your economy if you are at war. Even if you reduce your spending and scrap ships it can never be enough. I believe this is a cause of the AI never being able to field a fleet in the late game.

For example with a 1890 start as UK:

Get into a series of consecutive wars, because each time my ships blockade one country in the meditteranean they increase tension with the other ones as well. Despite winning every battle I lose shipping to ghost ships. Soon the AI doesn't generate any battles, so I can't generate victory points, and it takes 3 years to win all the wars despite not taking any losses, and in that time my shipping percentage goes down to 60%. 

At the start of the war my GDP was $14 billion, when the wars ended it was down to $10 billion. I had to scrap every warship in order to not go bankrupt, and kept shipping slider on maximum. By the time I built enough shipping to get to 0 GDP growth my total GDP was 5 bllion but I was still paying the fixed transport penalty every turn, so for the 8ish years this took I had to have zero research and zero training. Once I went from 99% to 100% my GDP magically flipped to 15 billion with huge monthly growth and budget surpluses.

It seems to me that there is a formula error in here creating some wrong economic results, and this is contributing to some of the strange behaviour players have observed in mid-late game.

I agree with all this. I would add, though, that we are also missing tech research to improve the economy. I.E. making transports build faster (like liberty ships as an example), increasing civilian shipyards or the ability to use military shipyards for transports, tech to increase the size and/or cargo capacity of transports, speed of transports etc.

Also it might be nice to see some military upgrades for transports like increased protection or possibly even transport ships that are disguised smaller warships.

[SpardaSon21]

One of the big issues I've noticed regarding stability is how heavy towers are.  I'm trying to build a pocket battleship for the "The Pocket Battleship" academy mission and my main tower is 15% of the total weight of the ship, second only to the hull.  Removing the RDF and the rangefinders and using Triangular Tower IV, the lowest, drops it down to 2,500 tons and 12%... still well above the bulkheads at 11.7 or the torpedo bulges at 8.4%.  Using Geared Turbines 2 and a speed of 28 knots on Advanced Heavy Cruiser 2, somehow the machinery that takes up my entire centerline, boilers and transmissions, is a mere 670 tons.  Did I mention I'm using a maxed out beam?

How the hell does any of that add up?  I somehow have 2,500 tons of steel on top of my hull.  Can someone more familiar with ships tell me how much those upper assemblies are supposed to weigh?  I'm pretty sure it shouldn't be more than my internal bulkheads (set at Many)  I also have a third of the 2,570 tons of fuel oil an actual Deutschland-class carried.  What's really ridiculous is that the Modern Secondary Tower IV is bigger than that Triangular Tower IV... and is less than half the weight at only 1,100 tons.

Edited June 26, 2022 by SpardaSon21

[Plazma]

3 times... my half fleet fight vs 1 CL. I know this can happens, but:

-After fight my fleet go back to the home ports, so I lose 1 tur to collect them again and send them.

-This fight is boring

-This happens for me 3 times in row. My 2 DD in nowhere have biggest battles experience... 

 

Also why my 80% fleet in North Sea doing nothing or fighting with 1 CL or sometimes with 1 CA or 2 DD. I don't sunk even 1 TR in North Sea after 5 months battle with Britain, but I sunk around 30 TR in Mediterranean! Someone could explain it to me?

[itolan1752]

10 minutes ago, Plazma said:

3 times... my half fleet fight vs 1 CL. I know this can happens, but:

-After fight my fleet go back to the home ports, so I lose 1 tur to collect them again and send them.

-This fight is boring

-This happens for me 3 times in row. My 2 DD in nowhere have biggest battles experience... 

 

Also why my 80% fleet in North Sea doing nothing or fighting with 1 CL or sometimes with 1 CA or 2 DD. I don't sunk even 1 TR in North Sea after 5 months battle with Britain, but I sunk around 30 TR in Mediterranean! Someone could explain it to me?

If you choose auto battle and no ship get heavy damage. Fleet will stay where they are or keep going position that you want they go to.

If some ship have light damage. they will stay in fleet and not able to repair (even you take they to port, they won't repair) until they get heavy damage in auto battle or get manual battle.

Even there are some ship get heavy damage. only damaged ship will return to port. when they finish repair, they will teleport to fleet immediately (you don't need control, and they don't need time to move, they will just ... teleport).

So auto battle not just save time for boring fight but also keep you fleet in position.

BUT this is must be a bug I thought.

[Skeksis]

With update 15, as Germany, I could war with France and hold off Britain with diplomacy.

Update 18 added (or improved) forced bilateral tension, this completely stages wars now, it forces Britain to ally and war soon after France's war declaration. Ditto for the axis. This happen every single game I tried to play as Germany 1910. 

I DON’T WANT TO WAR WITH BRITIAN. Meaning I want to war when I choose, as with update 15.

IMO, continuous war means, build fleet – fight war – make peace rebuild fleet – fight war – so on and so on. With 10 nations that’s the only way for an open word campaign to work, it should be impossible to fix wars on a worldwide 50 year scale.

As described in the original concept, to fight the “what if” wars, with whoever (whoever is the assumption). For the player to choose tension and not for the choice to made for you by the game with forced bilateral tension.

IMO diplomacy development has lost sight of the original concept. If development isn’t crafted towards the end game then it means re-writes and a whole lot more of frack up issues. Breaking the game again and again and again, to which most should be fixed in this patch and held to the end game.

Sorry for the criticism but UAD isn’t following its original concept. And players expectations. Diplomacy is one sided and alittle undesirable to play.  

Edited June 26, 2022 by Skeksis

[Skeksis]

The game still stalls with “Building Ships”. The fact that you can use the exit game menu and re-continue the campaign, suggest building ships loop is complete and it’s something else. I.e. the game is still processing messages.

Also I noticed this happens when, in the same turn, tension has increased to war.

Edited June 26, 2022 by Skeksis

[Skeksis]

6 hours ago, Plazma said:

3 times... my half fleet fight vs 1 CL. I know this can happens, but:

-After fight my fleet go back to the home ports, so I lose 1 tur to collect them again and send them.

-This fight is boring

-This happens for me 3 times in row. My 2 DD in nowhere have biggest battles experience... 

 

Also why my 80% fleet in North Sea doing nothing or fighting with 1 CL or sometimes with 1 CA or 2 DD. I don't sunk even 1 TR in North Sea after 5 months battle with Britain, but I sunk around 30 TR in Mediterranean! Someone could explain it to me?

It’s like if the game won’t draw ships from AI ports, as if all ships “In Being” aren’t selected, drawn out.

[RegamusMaximis]

Agree with the main towers weight being way too much, from a quick google, the heaviest I saw mentioned was the massive superstructures the British ended up making and they were in the hundreds of tons range, not the 10000 ton range

Short of sacrificing all the stats, you're hamstrung into taking up alot of your ships weigh just on the 2 towers and funnel, which really limits what you can build 

[aradragoon]

Found a potential bug. Had my fleet out and designed a refit for my battleships. While the battleships were out on sea patrol I selected to start refit (13 months). I waited a turn and noticed it still said 13 months and moved my BB's back to port. They arrived at port the next turn (2 turns after starting refit). Didn't check that turn but hit end turn (now 3 turns) and looked at timer and the refit was done (essentially instantly but at best 10 months early).

[mikekervin]

I think there is an error in transport shipping calculation.

Playing as Germany in 1940, when I lose 4 transports my shipping goes down 1%, but I am only able to build 0.11% of my shipping percentage each month. Are we to believe that a industrialized nation of 100 million people can only build 0.44 ships in a month?

I am currently building 100 light cruisers, with a construction time of 11 months, or an average of 9.1 per month. Surely it is not 20 times faster to build a warship than a transport ship of similar tonnage?

[admiralsnackbar]

bug: diplomatic status changes [and even some wars] happen between nations that have ceased to exist. 

[kineuhansen]

hope we get some hulls news soon 

[Skeksis]

Pushing open world freedom some more…

I understand GameLabs have an principle of providing the challenge to the player. But for open worlds (or sandboxes) it’s a matter of where that lies. 

For UADs the challenge lies with wars. As open world you have to trust the player to engage in those wars. Once you can do that, the world becomes open to the player and their freedom to choose war, with the principle challenge in toe.

It will not be any less of a game but more challenging being repeatable. i.e. the player has many more challenges to choose. 

Wars are the challenge, not diplomacy. Diplomacy is the vehicle to wars, the vehicle to the challenge.  

Edited June 27, 2022 by Skeksis

[SodaBit]

39 minutes ago, Skeksis said:

Pushing open world freedom some more…

I understand GameLabs have an principle of providing the challenge to the player. But for open worlds (or sandboxes) it’s a matter of where that lies. 

For UADs the challenge lies with wars. As open world you have to trust the player to engage in those wars. Once you can do that, the world becomes open to the player and their freedom to choose war, with the principle challenge in toe.

It will not be any less of a game but more challenging being repeatable. i.e. the player has many more challenges to choose. 

Wars are the challenge, not diplomacy. Diplomacy is the vehicle to wars, the vehicle to the challenge.  

Diplomacy could use a lot more work IMO. Every campaign as Germany thus far, I try to do the opposite of her historical alignment, swapping out Austria and Italy for Britain and France, as they're much MUCH better allies than my neighbors to the south. I'll try my a** of to improve relations with the two, avoid every possible conflict with them, increase relations when ever I get the chance, all while telling the Italians to piss off and the Austrians where they can shove it. The end result should be at least some sort of mutual understanding between Germany and the Franco-British alliance, and icy, if not outright hostile relations with Austria and Italy. Instead, what I get is France and Britain constantly harassing my country's fishers for 50 years straight, Italy just neutral, and Austria refusing to let go like an obsessive ex-girlfriend, constantly asking for an alliance As If I Haven't Spent The Last 5 Decades Trying To Avoid Just That.

[Kiknurazz91]

The game was working better before the hotfix now it freezes everywhere. I cant even start the campaign with both custom fleet or auto generated (worse than before). Just tried custom battle with 2 BB and 2 BC on both sides and it froze not even a minute into customizing the first ship. Finally got past that (took 30min to customize my 4 ships) and the game froze at the loading game screen, 20min later still frozen. I'm not sure if its some conflict in the code or just simply becoming too overwhelming for the game with all the mechanics continuously added but at this point for me the game is unplayable. I doubt I get on until 1.06 finally rolls out because ever since update 15 it has been problem after problem and every update seems to only exacerbate the freezing issue. 

[SpardaSon21]

6 hours ago, RegamusMaximis said:

Agree with the main towers weight being way too much, from a quick google, the heaviest I saw mentioned was the massive superstructures the British ended up making and they were in the hundreds of tons range, not the 10000 ton range

Short of sacrificing all the stats, you're hamstrung into taking up alot of your ships weigh just on the 2 towers and funnel, which really limits what you can build 

Agreed.  From my understanding the three major weights of a ship are firepower, protection, and speed.  Superstructures appear to have been built around those three elements using leftover tonnage, not a major component for players to worry about like they are in UAD.

[Carl_Bar]

15 hours ago, SpardaSon21 said:

One of the big issues I've noticed regarding stability is how heavy towers are.  I'm trying to build a pocket battleship for the "The Pocket Battleship" academy mission and my main tower is 15% of the total weight of the ship, second only to the hull.  Removing the RDF and the rangefinders and using Triangular Tower IV, the lowest, drops it down to 2,500 tons and 12%... still well above the bulkheads at 11.7 or the torpedo bulges at 8.4%.  Using Geared Turbines 2 and a speed of 28 knots on Advanced Heavy Cruiser 2, somehow the machinery that takes up my entire centerline, boilers and transmissions, is a mere 670 tons.  Did I mention I'm using a maxed out beam?

How the hell does any of that add up?  I somehow have 2,500 tons of steel on top of my hull.  Can someone more familiar with ships tell me how much those upper assemblies are supposed to weigh?  I'm pretty sure it shouldn't be more than my internal bulkheads (set at Many)  I also have a third of the 2,570 tons of fuel oil an actual Deutschland-class carried.  What's really ridiculous is that the Modern Secondary Tower IV is bigger than that Triangular Tower IV... and is less than half the weight at only 1,100 tons.

 

I don't have a detailed breakdown for many ships but as a useful example i know HMS Hoods conning tower massed some 500 tons. Most of that was coning tower armour ofc, but it provides some context, 2500 tons still sounds extreme.

 

Regarding engine weight. It depends greatly on the hull form and how well designed it is. All hulls have a natural speed, upto that value it takes very little power to achieve the desired speed, after that it gets exponentially harder. As an example. The Evergiven, (the ship that got stuck in the Suez Canal the other year), masses 270,000 tons, has 59,600KW of installed engine capacity and a top speed of 22.5 knots. The WW1 vintage Queen Elisabeth class of the Royal Navy had a displacemen of 33,000 tons, an installed power of 59,000KW, and a top speed of 24 knots.

 

As you can see despite very similar top speeds and installed engine power there's a huge difference in displacement. Something similar applies if you compare the Queen Elizabeth class to the Nelsons, despite a significant increase in displacement and a significant drop in engine power the speed only dropped by 1 knot.

[Aloeus]

If the game gives me an ambush battle where I am the one ambushing with DDs, I should be able to withdraw at will. Its nonsense that I'm apparently ambushing slower capital ships (a BB and a CA) but I can't withdraw. I end up just going into the game and running away, because it turns out I am faster than a BB and CA

[Darth Khyron]

I am playing a long campaign now, from 1890 on. Now is the year 1925. Happy to finally have gas turbines with oil firing (just researched full oil :)) for my modern battleships :). But research is more or less okay in my eyes. I think shipyards are growing too slow currently.

My problem, aside from perpetual war, are two things :
France seems to be knocked out for good fairly easy, it ceased to exist in 1901, being ganged up by all other four countries. That happened in three campaigns now.

Also, I cannot assign a harbour for my ships anymore. I have my first modern battleship IIs and Is under construction, but, despite scrapping a lot of my old BBs, I cannot assign harbours to them.
In addition, I took Ireland, Gibraltar, Cyprus and Malta, as well as Corsica (which I lost when France was dissolved).
It would be very nice to use these harbours and assign new homeports for the ships. It would be very helpful for defending transports in the mediterranen or the irish sea in case of a war.

Ah, almost forgot. I am still having events converning france, for example prisoner exchange and the like, even if france is no longer around.

Edited June 27, 2022 by Darth Khyron

[itolan1752]

10 hours ago, aradragoon said:

Found a potential bug. Had my fleet out and designed a refit for my battleships. While the battleships were out on sea patrol I selected to start refit (13 months). I waited a turn and noticed it still said 13 months and moved my BB's back to port. They arrived at port the next turn (2 turns after starting refit). Didn't check that turn but hit end turn (now 3 turns) and looked at timer and the refit was done (essentially instantly but at best 10 months early).

yes, this should be a bug.

you can refit a ship immediately. just need follow the steps:

1. refit ships who not in the ports.

2.into "Ship Design" and "View" any ship. then Exit. (maybe you just need into Shipyard? I didn't test others possible way.)

3.every refit ships who not in the ports will finish refited in the same turn.

[Senji]

I found that enemy ship are hard to sink.

And i found that my shells didn't connect with enemy ships and going throw the model with no damage.

[SodaBit]

Alright, I've got some ship design feedback here, it's going to be a long one, so go you might wanna get something to drink before taking on this text wall.

While there have been recent improvements to player agency when it comes to over all ship design, in my opinion, Designing Ships In This Game Has Gotten Worse Over The Past Few Months. It's gotten to the point where I've Lost More Viable Designs With 1.05 and 1.06 Than I Gained. This isn't just down to the weight issue, but also baffling limitations for certain hulls. Some examples of previously viable designs that aren't viable any more due to "Improvements" are as follows:
1. Alaska Class CB.

As of 1.05, this was the go to cruiser killer for the USN, and now in 1.06...

No fun allowed. Mind you, that's the same main tower as before, and if I'm not mistaken, the largest main tower available for this hull, but for some reason it can no longer take the same 12" triple turrets. 
2. Super Dreadnought SMS Bayern.

Probably everyone's best friend for a 1920's Germany campaign, Bayern is a very well rounded option for the time. Decent armor, large guns, and good accuracy. I hope you weren't too keen on that last part, because with 1.06...

Even if your crew wasn't constantly seasick, they'd still struggle to hit the broad side of a barn from the inside with the way Bayern bounces around the waves now. Good luck finding another Super Dreadnought to take her place, there's preciously few good hulls available for Germany these days.
3. "Scharnhorst" class BC. 

I've always found it rather humorous that my 1940's German BC's come out looking like Bismarck while the corresponding CA's come out looking like Scharnhorst. When I heard that I'd be able to mount 200mm guns on CL's and 150's on DD's, I was looking forward to continuing the trend in 1.06, with CL's that look like Hippers, and DD's that look like M Class CL's.

Had I known that in order to make Hipper a CL I'd have to give up making Bismarck a BC, I probably wouldn't have been as exited. It's the same story as Alaska's above. Worked just fine before, but now it doesn't because????
4. One of, if not the most iconic BB's in history, IJN Yamato.

Well balanced, tough as nails, and hits like a freight train. A truly legendary ship, and with damn good reason. It's a shame she went down on a pointless suicide mission, but what's even worse is what happened with 1.06.

From a marvel of modern engineering to an unmitigated disaster. Hey, at least I got a uniform secondary battery out of it. Still don't know why she can only have 1 row of 127's, given that the mounting points are exactly the same size for all the side mounts.
And finally, an honorable mention that didn't make it to 1.05 live for some reason.
USN Fast Battleship, USS Iowa in the BC slot.

This option is no longer possible because the largest guns you can mount on this hull in 1.05's live version and 1.06 is the 15" gun. Really doesn't make much sense when the CB's from the other side of the Pacific can mount up to 18" guns. If you really wanted to, you can get 9 460mm guns on a 35,000 ton hull and call it a BC. If the IJN can do that, why can't the USN get 9 406mm guns on 50,000 ton hull and call it a BC?
Last I Checked This Game Was About Being Able To Design Your Own Ships. The Last Thing It Should Be Doing Is Limiting How Players Can Do Just That.
I understand that some designs players want to make aren't going to be viable, but that doesn't mean that they should be prevented form making those designs. If you're going to have realism play a part in the design process, then it should at least be, you know, realistic. Last I checked Yamato didn't have the hilarious stability issues that were present on Fusou and Yamashiro, nor did Bayern's crew leave the ship puking their guts out from how bumpy the ride was.