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

[itolan1752]

Some feedback. player could freely change engine position.

So far, the engine is in the middle of the funnel most time.

But use some game mechanism. we can change engine position.

Put all main gun to the front:

Behind:

the engine is not in the middle of funnel. it is line up the funnel by front or behind.

I thought player should able to change engine position to balance the weight, just limit part of engine block must be below the funnels.

there is a paint to explain what I wish.(I know it is really bad, but my poor english not allow me explain this by words.)

Edited June 27, 2022 by itolan1752
fix some grammar

[mikekervin]

11 hours ago, Carl_Bar said:

All hulls have a natural speed

Is this visible in the shipbuilder?

[ZorinW]

Apparently we all are fighting the great unknown...

 

 

[Rucki]

4 hours ago, mikekervin said:

Is this visible in the shipbuilder?

Would like to know that as well.

What I do sometimes is just have a look at how much more tonnage I need for increasing 1 knot. Lets say I need roughly 400 Kg more per 1 Knot from 18 to 24 and then suddenly 600 Kg to go from 24 to 25 knots, so thats rougly the limit for this hull then I guess.

But having the hull speed info in the shipbuilder would be better.

[ZorinW]

7 minutes ago, ZorinW said:

Apparently we all are fighting the great unknown...

 

 

And if the overbuilding is fixed, how come France has 441 ships? And still all AI nations have way more tonnage than their ports can actually hold. 

[ZorinW]

Also there must be something wrong with the armor calculations. The number of partial pens I have gotten during 30 years of my campaign with whatever gun is absurd. In one battle my three BBs with 8x 406 guns and 17x 320 guns scored thousands of partial pens and only in the lower tens pens, ricochets and blocks versus a pretty standard AI CA.

I mean, how can a 406 capped AP from ~3km strike the deck, first of all, and then result in a partial pen with 3 dmg!!!   

Edited June 27, 2022 by ZorinW

[havaduck]

Its the same problem still. Like I said ships are now impossible to damage below the water line.

This is a group of 5 battlecruiser pepering the enemy cruiser Admiral Tryhard for pushing in like a dumbfúck from around 4 km.

And they are using these (main)guns:

So NATURALLY all they can hit is the deck armor where they get parital pens. My bad there is a funnel (but considering how screwed this is, its more likely a parabolic hit from 12 " mortars) and there, a single for belt overpen.

 

 

Intermission: I order a full about-turn of my entire fleet (1 dd was disengaged due to damage already) because I baited enemy torpdoes and could basically sense them without seeing them. See if you can spot that one retard ship where the game changed my move order to some sort of follow order. Ofc the games idea of "following" a ship is break formation and run into the god damn opposite direction head first into torpedoes like a retard. Barely dodged those torps but shit like that is wanna make me break something.

 

Nextup I park a battlecruiser next to a light cruiser and this is what the penetration chart gives:

Which seems alright considering it has fúckall armor being a light cruiser.

So naturally the log for damage received looks like this.

 

Edited June 27, 2022 by havaduck

[admiralsnackbar]

58 minutes ago, ZorinW said:

Also their must be something wrong with the armor calculations. The number of partial pens O have gotten during 30 years of my campaign with whatever gun is absurd. In one battle my three BBs with 8x 406 guns and 17x 320 guns scored thousands of partial pens and only in the lower tens pens, ricochets and blocks versus a pretty standard AI CA.

I mean, how can a 406 capped AP from ~3km strike the deck, first of all, and then result in a partial pen with 3 dmg!!!   

3km hit to the deck would probably involve the shell sliding along the deck at an almost parallels angle 

a 3km hit to the belt that partial penned at 3km would be strange unless you're target has 3 feet of belt armor or plot armor. 

[jtjohn1]

Did a 30 year German Campaign

Some things to note:
It's still locking up a lot on "Build Ships" between turns.  I know how to exit out and force it to continue but others might not.

Captured ports are still not usable

It's a thousand times more fun atm now because even at the end of the game or in the wayning years you can force battles.

Really large battles are a lag fest.  I had two where the AI had over 200 ships vs my 20 (Much bigger and more modern ships) and it was almost unplayable (I managed to get thru but wasn't really in control much other than general directions.)

Can't research to same level (So I didn't have all of the research done that I would have if I had started in 1930 or 1940) not horrible but somewhat annoying

By the time 1930 or so rolled around I was easily able to afford anything I wanted.

Still seeing some Torps set off ammo explosions (can't think of a single capital ship where this happened) 

Really making progress though!

Thanks for the hard work!

[PalaiologosTheGreat]

1 minute ago, jtjohn1 said:

Still seeing some Torps set off ammo explosions (can't think of a single capital ship where this happened) 

 

Check out a lot of Japanese cruisers during WWII lol. It happened a lot.

[havaduck]

Another thing on AI battle tactics: AI is still doing really stupid things.

On paper they have enough to put up a fight. 3 BBs, 1 BC and a bunch of cruisers and 2 DDs against my 5 battlecruisers and a single DD.

 

This is them in game.

After the cruiser divsion led by Admiral Tryhard has been anihilated, I can now pick off all their BBs one by one. I can even use that single (empty) DD to "stear" them so they dont run away (from the BCs that is) and present broadside to said BC. I dont even know where their battlecruiser is. Maybe it wandered off? Maybe it got lost? Maybe it forgot to turn avoid off and headed of in the opposite direction of the battle at max speed?

Where are the DDs either? It is possible that they are planing and ambush, but even cloaked DD should (while not visible as a target) give away their position by incoming fire before torps are in range.

 

The AI needs to think about effective gunrange more. My ships can fight out to 7,5 km and 10 km if heavely outmatched, but when I have the advantage like putting 5 BC against one of theirs I consider around 5 km or less to be otpimal because I can hit with many guns and stay outside their other ships optimal gun range. The AI has a similar zone and their ships need to be able to support each other or you can just pick them off. If thats too abstract immagine a lategame BB that can snipe 20 km effectivly. The next BB is 30 km away. The 3rd BB is 60 km away. Why would you do that? Its stupid. And neither should the AI.

 

Another example of DDs "stearing" enemy ships.  I went too close for sake of demonstration, but considering DDs have now quantumfield distortion devices it doesnt matter, they cant touch me.

Lets put facts down: There is a DD with 3x 5" guns plinking (I like the riccochet animations so much!) AP at a BBs broadside. The torps are completely empty. I went without reloads and scored 2 hits on a CA early in the battle, so no threat there.

And then there are 3 BC (I got sloppy at the end and had 2 ships fall out of formation due to accidental and unwanted "follow" order 🙄) waiting and hoping to pump high powered AP into its broadside.

WHO WOULD YOU SHOW BROADSIDE TOO?

 

Let just say the results are "predictable".

 

Thanks to partial deck penn BS, I needed around 500 (I think, could be 400, could be 600) 12" hits to turn this fleet into scrap metal.

 

Anyway: This wasnt hopless for the AI, and it sould have at least sevearly damaged my fleet, but given how bad the AI is using its ships .........

 

 

€: I forgott: "Highest Difficulty" - whatever that does.

Edited June 27, 2022 by havaduck

[o Barão]

Not even the AI can handle this new stability mechanics when designing ships with small citadels.

[Carl_Bar]

1 hour ago, havaduck said:

Its the same problem still. Like I said ships are now impossible to damage below the water line.

This is a group of 5 battlecruiser pepering the enemy cruiser Admiral Tryhard for pushing in like a dumbfúck from around 4 km.

And they are using these (main)guns:

So NATURALLY all they can hit is the deck armor where they get parital pens. My bad there is a funnel (but considering how screwed this is, its more likely a parabolic hit from 12 " mortars) and there, a single for belt overpen.

 

 

Intermission: I order a full about-turn of my entire fleet (1 dd was disengaged due to damage already) because I baited enemy torpdoes and could basically sense them without seeing them. See if you can spot that one retard ship where the game changed my move order to some sort of follow order. Ofc the games idea of "following" a ship is break formation and run into the god damn opposite direction head first into torpedoes like a retard. Barely dodged those torps but shit like that is wanna make me break something.

 

Nextup I park a battlecruiser next to a light cruiser and this is what the penetration chart gives:

Which seems alright considering it has fúckall armor being a light cruiser.

So naturally the log for damage received looks like this.

 

I can confirm i've seen this, i've also noticed hits seem to be disproportionately assigned to the rear and bow ares and not the main belt/deck area's. I've also seen shots from astern consistently hit the bow and vice versa.

Edited June 27, 2022 by Carl_Bar

[mikekervin]

I've also observed cases of countries in negative GDP growth shrinking by the annual rate in one month. This doesn't happen every time, but maybe once every few months.

[mikekervin]

When multiple countries are fighting a common enemy but are not in an alliance the relationship penalties seem to not be applied.

[Dave P.]

Building a KJV lookalike in the skirmish mode, I noticed that the dual Mk4 14" and the quad Mk4 14" have different barrel lengths and still don't group/aim together. Blargh.

[Dave P.]

Hey, I've noticed that when I do sharper turns (like turning 180 to present full torpedo launchers) my turrets stop tracking and don't start swiveling again until my course is stabilized. Is this intentional?

[Carl_Bar]

1 hour ago, Dave P. said:

Hey, I've noticed that when I do sharper turns (like turning 180 to present full torpedo launchers) my turrets stop tracking and don't start swiveling again until my course is stabilized. Is this intentional?

 

If your turning fast enough your turrets will be rotating slower than the ship is turning and thus seem not to track when they in fact are but can't track fast enough.

[o Barão]

2 hours ago, Dave P. said:

Hey, I've noticed that when I do sharper turns (like turning 180 to present full torpedo launchers) my turrets stop tracking and don't start swiveling again until my course is stabilized. Is this intentional?

I noticed the same thing.

[Maurice de Saxe]

As of rn, the economies seem to be completely random. Blockaids and convoy raiding seem to do nothing to slow down an economy. Also during this campain, about 5 years in England randomly disolved. 

[o Barão]

4 hours ago, Carl_Bar said:

 

If your turning fast enough your turrets will be rotating slower than the ship is turning and thus seem not to track when they in fact are but can't track fast enough.

In this example, it is clear that turrets stop tracking the target because the ship is turning.

In the gun's accuracy panel in the right, we can notice the gun's losing the accuracy and the target. The moment the ship goes in straight line or a gentle turn then will acquire the target again and the turrets will start tracking.

[Rucki]

3 Main problems I currently see.

1.) I have partial pens with like 700mm penetration vs 400mm - 500mm belt and 60mm deck. I carefully watched the hit angle and graphically and also the little penetration display shows a near 90% angle, those should be overpens or pens and not partial pens. Then again im shooting the same ship nearly in an 90% angle from behind which should result in a riccochet and am suddenly doing a penetration in the aft belt with an crazy hit angle.

2.) The Display in combat shows me f.e that my 330mm guns had about 60 hits on 30mm to 60mm with partial pens and its 1900 tech, so combat range is very close, so I dont really understand how thats possible ?

It should be either a riccochet because of an bad angle, otherwise 30-60mm will be overpenetrated by 330mm guns.

3.) Most hits in an 0 to 3 Km range are going on the deck instead of the belt. Is there something wrong the muzzle velocity calculation ?

[ZorinW]

This is pure trolling by the game right now. "VULNERABLE CONVOY"

23 BCs protecting a convoy and my one CA and two CLs spawn 5 km away. Only lost one CL though. But of course, my radar equipped ships lost sight of this wall of BCs and transports at 7km 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

SPOTTING IS BROKEN

[Marcus]

A minor Nitpick i noticed in a recent campaign attempt was that the German Dreadnought III hull has a lower maximum and minimum Tonnage compared to the same hull for the Spanish and Austro Hungarians making it hard to future proof German designs for modernisation compared to other nations.

[Buoyant_Friend]

Hmmm, half of my BB's main battery stops firing after a few salvoes... Only aft turrets fire. Fore turrets stay silent after a moment of firing. They're not destroyed and firing arcs are fine (btw some kind of information on firing arcs during a battle would be quite helpful). Anybody seen something like this? 

Edited June 28, 2022 by Buoyant_Friend