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

[Norbert Sattler]

A further update on the ally situation.

When I and Italy are both at war with the UK, everything works as intended.

When I am at was with the UK and Italy did not join my war, supposedly the alliance is still in place, but practically I have to fight both the UK and Italy...

[Norbert Sattler]

5 minutes ago, itolan1752 said:

This post   propose the same problem.

a little irony is developer slow down research speed at some 1.06 update.(2 or 3 times?)

There is no irony there, because everything but guns was researching way too fast, so the slow-down was absolutely necessary. You could finish every research, except the repeatables in the mid 30s if you started in 1890.

I agree, gun-research should be sped up, as well as the slot with the main and secondary towers. There are currently a few hulls that are very likely to be unlocked long before there are any secondary towers available for them, but only those slots and not all research in general.

In fact I'd say it might even be a good idea to slow down range-finger, since I regularly get my first set of radar in about 1905 or 1907 at the latest.

I also dearly wish the devs would implement quad variants for all guns. I don't understand why we have quat 3 and 4", quad 14" + and everything in between is limited to tripples.

Edited June 30, 2022 by Norbert Sattler

[Littorio]

18 hours ago, Danz_Von_Luck said:

While I like all the suggestions above, putting the game on hold will not help at all, you do understand this game is in testing and not released right? if it was a finished game atm I would be sorely disappointed but it IS NOT. most if not all games go through this process some behind closed doors and some publicly but its not finished yet.

Yes...I understand it is testing. I just don't think it is worthwhile for current players or devs based on their demonstrated pace of work and all the problems that multiply with each "update." The devs get too distracted by multiple competing demands, and players are routinely disappointed. No one wins. The current model of "gradual progress" every week is obviously failing.

I would rather not hear anything about this game at all for 6 months, and then see what they can silently produce in that timeframe. That way, if all we still get is garbage, then I know to put this title aside and never come back. They would have failed the test. I for one believe the devs would love to have half a year to work without constantly being distracted by the forum and Steam. They can polish away at bugs without worrying about angry people.

Then there is the fact that this company is owned now by a Swedish mobile game developer. That doesn't bode well for an in-depth, high-realism naval game like we all wanted. Frankly, given the pace of work and what has been delivered, I am no longer confident in seeing a good finished product from this beta.
 

15 hours ago, Candle_86 said:

Well this is unplayable, got into a war with Germany and AH as france, Brittian and Italy signed an alliance with me and we went to war. Then because my fleets are fighting Germany and AH, my standing with them dropped until they declared war on me suddenly. How the hell does this make any god damn sense. The campaign is hard broke with this bug.

 

Events

Germany and Me went to War

AH Delcared war on me for going to War with germany

Britian asked to be my Ally as they where already at war with AH, accepted

Italy asked to be my ally 2 turns later, accepted

Moved my fleets of the AH and German Coasts

Britian and Italy over 2 years went from 100 to -100 standing and declared war on me. While we where in an alliance. Since when do allies hate it when you help them fight a war?

4 hours ago, Norbert Sattler said:

Now the British have declared war on me, forcing me once again to somehow fight my Italian allies...

 

I mean look...the campaign is still so messy it's ridiculous given all of the times "campaign bugs have been fixed." Just let it rest for months and then we will see if they are actually serious about this title or not. Every update since they made the map bigger than just Britain vs. Germany has been a smoldering fire of disappointment that has only added bigger and bigger issues. VP bugs are still happening for god's sake....

[Norbert Sattler]

Something seems to be wrong with the penetration calculations.
I've had fights were 102 mm mark 1 would constantly score partial penetrations against 300+ mm armour plate at even 45° amgles and now I'm in a fight where mark 3 250 mm guns bounce and block on 227 mm main belt on a flat 90° angle...

And then when I hit the same ship in the nose, where the tooltip tells me I have 1.6% chance to penetrate... I can do damage.

@Littorio

Without feedback it'll take that much longer for them to find and fix the issues.

No offense, but if you have no intention of playing the current version, why are you even reading this thread and more so posting here? Discouraging other people from playing and reporting errors helps no one and just wastes everyone's times, including your own.

Edited June 30, 2022 by Norbert Sattler

[Candle_86]

45 minutes ago, Littorio said:

Yes...I understand it is testing. I just don't think it is worthwhile for current players or devs based on their demonstrated pace of work and all the problems that multiply with each "update." The devs get too distracted by multiple competing demands, and players are routinely disappointed. No one wins. The current model of "gradual progress" every week is obviously failing.

I would rather not hear anything about this game at all for 6 months, and then see what they can silently produce in that timeframe. That way, if all we still get is garbage, then I know to put this title aside and never come back. They would have failed the test. I for one believe the devs would love to have half a year to work without constantly being distracted by the forum and Steam. They can polish away at bugs without worrying about angry people.

Then there is the fact that this company is owned now by a Swedish mobile game developer. That doesn't bode well for an in-depth, high-realism naval game like we all wanted. Frankly, given the pace of work and what has been delivered, I am no longer confident in seeing a good finished product from this beta.
 

 

I mean look...the campaign is still so messy it's ridiculous given all of the times "campaign bugs have been fixed." Just let it rest for months and then we will see if they are actually serious about this title or not. Every update since they made the map bigger than just Britain vs. Germany has been a smoldering fire of disappointment that has only added bigger and bigger issues. VP bugs are still happening for god's sake....

that may be, but campaign is the only enjoyable part of this game, custom isn't really that fun, nor is naval acadamy 

[Littorio]

18 minutes ago, Candle_86 said:

that may be, but campaign is the only enjoyable part of this game, custom isn't really that fun, nor is naval acadamy 

It's not very enjoyable if it cannot even be completed in any semblance.

[ZorinW]

Right now it does feel a lot like band aids being applied to the problems that arise instead of facing the fact that certain basic systems are too flawed to keep fixing and need to be rebuild from the ground up.

[ColonelHenry]

1 hour ago, Littorio said:

Yes...I understand it is testing. I just don't think it is worthwhile for current players or devs based on their demonstrated pace of work and all the problems that multiply with each "update." The devs get too distracted by multiple competing demands, and players are routinely disappointed. No one wins. The current model of "gradual progress" every week is obviously failing.

Though I agree with competing demands, communication is good. It is a learning experience for this team and I hope they are taking the right lessons from this game. Specifically, all of these could have been avoided had they pushed through the Covid time, being bought by another company, etc. and actually communicated while delivering updates akin to the current pace. During the Alpha stage, so many dedicated people wanted to give feedback, extremely detailed feedback to the team but more than half of the time all we got was crickets from the dev with nearly no update whatsoever. The smaller but dedicated playerbase would have been so beneficial to this team it's insane that they botched that entire thing.

I don't comment much here anymore just the occasional bug report in-game because I do not want to sound like I'm saying this isn't going anywhere concrete but I have to agree that the bug squashing is getting ridiculous as the game feels like it's being held upright by a 90 years old man trying to balance what amount to a car while rope walking across the Grand Canyon.

Tbh, this beta gave me a hello kittying anxiety attack because the amount of bugs that I encountered and I couldn't write much because I felt hopeless for the devs. I felt like so much potential was wasted, and like 99% of the ideas that so many talented naval history enthusiasts on this forum would never be implemented because they can't even make the campaign AI to actually be an AI and not 10 nested if statements.

Not sure if I should have wrote this...

[kjg000]

2 hours ago, Candle_86 said:

that may be, but campaign is the only enjoyable part of this game, custom isn't really that fun, nor is naval acadamy 

I agree that, for me, the campaign is the only part that makes the game more than a passing fad, but please be aware that others will disagree.

I don't understand why the Devs are having so many problems with it as it should be the easiest and most conventional part of the game with many decades of examples to draw from. 

The ground breaking part is the designing and modelling of the ships. Combat is also difficult as they are going down the path of making it fairly realistic. Something I for one am thankful for.

I haven't yet finished a 1.06.20 campaign, but I'd say, if they get the campaign to a playable state it'd be a reasonable live release for an early access path. Note l think they  NEED to make the campaign workable first  though, as well as a few UI tweaks mentioned many times previously.

Yes there are lots of things that still need fixing before a fullrelease, but I suspect the Devs are under some pressure to make a release and these problems can be resolved in 1.07.

Edited June 30, 2022 by kjg000
Early access not early release

[RegamusMaximis]

Agreed the campaign gives a purpose to randomly building ships for battles, without it, I wouldn't be 70 hours in. 

[o Barão]

7 minutes ago, RegamusMaximis said:

Agreed the campaign gives a purpose to randomly building ships for battles, without it, I wouldn't be 70 hours in. 

Me: 😱(2k or 3k hours in this game)

Edited June 30, 2022 by o Barão

[aradragoon]

10 minutes ago, ColonelHenry said:

Though I agree with competing demands, communication is good. It is a learning experience for this team and I hope they are taking the right lessons from this game. Specifically, all of these could have been avoided had they pushed through the Covid time, being bought by another company, etc. and actually communicated while delivering updates akin to the current pace. During the Alpha stage, so many dedicated people wanted to give feedback, extremely detailed feedback to the team but more than half of the time all we got was crickets from the dev with nearly no update whatsoever. The smaller but dedicated playerbase would have been so beneficial to this team it's insane that they botched that entire thing.

I don't comment much here anymore just the occasional bug report in-game because I do not want to sound like I'm saying this isn't going anywhere concrete but I have to agree that the bug squashing is getting ridiculous as the game feels like it's being held upright by a 90 years old man trying to balance what amount to a car while rope walking across the Grand Canyon.

Tbh, this beta gave me a hello kittying anxiety attack because the amount of bugs that I encountered and I couldn't write much because I felt hopeless for the devs. I felt like so much potential was wasted, and like 99% of the ideas that so many talented naval history enthusiasts on this forum would never be implemented because they can't even make the campaign AI to actually be an AI and not 10 nested if statements.

Not sure if I should have wrote this...

I agree with the first part but I have to say the last part is just wrong. What is disappointing is despite so many early access games out people STILL have no idea how alpha/early access works.  Yes this is still alpha, the game is NOT feature complete yet. (As evidenced by this update which is in testing and introduces large parts of the campaign)

Alpha will address many bugs but the intent is to keep a relatively stable platform and add all features into the game in a working fashion. Then get a general workability and general balance.

Beta, as in a true beta and not the beta of a specific version since terms have really gotten kind of convoluted, is where you really see bugs fixed and game balance focused on. The game is, at least supposed to anyway, be polished to a proper full release state. That isn't to say there might not be some additional features added but the

This is not a defense of these devs specifically. Most of this was just behind closed doors before early access became so popular. (Which does have merits, don't get me wrong.)


That being said, I have agreed with the communication for quite awhile.


All in all, though, I would expect more updates like this until the game is feature complete and then worry about the large number of bugs, proper full game balance (things like 12inch is slightly too strong. Things like penetration not working I think is problematic enough to warrant fixing so other features can be properly tested), and overall polish. I can't say with certainty it will get to the point people will like but I am hopeful.

[MasterBurte]

This is a Problem with the Battleship II. I couldn't place the turret straight facing foreward but sideways. I wanted to try if it can rotate free like the builder suggests but before i had the chance to finish building it in campaign the next update hit and the savegame is gone. Would be nice to have the option to choose which version of the game to run manualy in steam.

[ColonelHenry]

8 minutes ago, aradragoon said:

I agree with the first part but I have to say the last part is just wrong. What is disappointing is despite so many early access games out people STILL have no idea how alpha/early access works.  Yes this is still alpha, the game is NOT feature complete yet. (As evidenced by this update which is in testing and introduces large parts of the campaign)

Alpha will address many bugs but the intent is to keep a relatively stable platform and add all features into the game in a working fashion. Then get a general workability and general balance.

The problem isn't just the bug. The problem is that there are so many bugs I cannot tell which is intended and which is a feature (dead serious). The current problem of partial pen, I noticed it for awhile now, but I wasn't sure if it's wacky armor calculation, AI over-armoring their ships, or as some people now suggest the game is mistaking deck hit percentage with belt hits. We all expect bugs and we're here to test the product. But we can only go so far without the debugging console and everything falls apart within 30 seconds of starting a campaign.

I just hope this game turn out to be good.

[kjg000]

5 minutes ago, MasterBurte said:

This is a Problem with the Battleship II. I couldn't place the turret straight facing foreward but sideways. I wanted to try if it can rotate free like the builder suggests but before i had the chance to finish building it in campaign the next update hit and the savegame is gone. Would be nice to have the option to choose which version of the game to run manualy in steam.

I've only fitted secondaries by rotating them before, and I've never checked to see if it works in battle as 1, I've been fighting the battle  and 2, I'm not sure I'd be able to determine if the secondary was rotating through the displayed arc anyway.

Would love to hear if the primary can be seen to move through the displayed arc or if it seems to be restricted or get stuck.

[Littorio]

2 hours ago, ZorinW said:

Right now it does feel a lot like band aids being applied to the problems that arise instead of facing the fact that certain basic systems are too flawed to keep fixing and need to be rebuild from the ground up.

Yes, I think certain things may have to be entirely rebuilt, which is why I suggested the pause.

2 hours ago, ColonelHenry said:

The smaller but dedicated playerbase would have been so beneficial to this team it's insane that they botched that entire thing.

I don't comment much here anymore just the occasional bug report in-game because I do not want to sound like I'm saying this isn't going anywhere concrete but I have to agree that the bug squashing is getting ridiculous as the game feels like it's being held upright by a 90 years old man trying to balance what amount to a car while rope walking across the Grand Canyon.

Tbh, this beta gave me a hello kittying anxiety attack because the amount of bugs that I encountered and I couldn't write much because I felt hopeless for the devs. I felt like so much potential was wasted, and like 99% of the ideas that so many talented naval history enthusiasts on this forum would never be implemented because they can't even make the campaign AI to actually be an AI and not 10 nested if statements.

Yeah...this is what I am talking about. It's too big of a mess to wade through without a restructuring. They need a deadline free few months to redo things. I don't think such a thing would ever happen, but it is what I would do and what I would like to see. The current method of release is as ZorinW says "band aids." Big band aids on larger and larger problems that keep getting more complex the more is added to it. This is why I have been urging caution and building slowly since the very first campaign iteration. Sadly, many people pushed for a "bigger" campaign quickly and this is what we get....

It is a hydra...for every bug that is fixed, two more take it's place...and then the old bug is reactivated by new code put in to fix the other bugs...and it's only going to multiply the larger and more complex the campaign gets....

Edited June 30, 2022 by Littorio

[Carl_Bar]

8 hours ago, hangma said:

The speed of research on the main gun technology is too slow.

 

As i noted myself previously this isn't restricted to guns tech.

 

6 hours ago, RegamusMaximis said:

Is this right for the 1920's?

Just faced these CL's which were armoured to the point, even the biggest gun I could put on a French CA couldn't penetrate the deck armour unless at maximum range. You seem to be able to out armour the periods capability to pen it atm. Pics for example  

If I understand how you work out armour values right, 6 deck everywhere + 1.3 citadel armour = 7.3 x 143% armour bonus giving 17.6'' deck armour. Even with the build 100% towards penetration, a CA's biggest gun only stands a chance at max range with a lucky hit

 

6" of deck armour on a light cruiser is a LOT. It's no suprise your CA's are having issues. But thats seriously heavy even in game to do.

 

4 hours ago, Norbert Sattler said:

There is no irony there, because everything but guns was researching way too fast, so the slow-down was absolutely necessary. You could finish every research, except the repeatables in the mid 30s if you started in 1890.

I agree, gun-research should be sped up, as well as the slot with the main and secondary towers. There are currently a few hulls that are very likely to be unlocked long before there are any secondary towers available for them, but only those slots and not all research in general.

In fact I'd say it might even be a good idea to slow down range-finger, since I regularly get my first set of radar in about 1905 or 1907 at the latest.

I also dearly wish the devs would implement quad variants for all guns. I don't understand why we have quat 3 and 4", quad 14" + and everything in between is limited to tripples.

 

Um no it's not just big gun techs that are slow. Since my last post on the subject i did a campaign run as UK where i maxed the tech slider but didn't set any focuses, every single tech branch was consistently behind by significant amounts.

[itolan1752]

1 hour ago, Carl_Bar said:

Um no it's not just big gun techs that are slow. Since my last post on the subject i did a campaign run as UK where i maxed the tech slider but didn't set any focuses, every single tech branch was consistently behind by significant amounts.

So I like this idea.

add icon to show what techs are behind, and what techs are advanced.

not just help player to know what techs need boost, also help developer to balance research speed.

EDIT:

I am very surprise that current update's research speed is slower than I thought. (I thought it will just in time)

Edited June 30, 2022 by itolan1752

[Kiknurazz91]

Some hulls are still not balancing correctly. British destroyer leader is still pitching horribly. No matter how I build it I cannot get the pitch below 28 and it bobs for apples and wont fire torps. Maybe I'm doing something wrong but this problem happens with some other BB hulls and CA hulls. It really does seem odd that with even no weight it starts at more than 20 pitch. Yes I realize my CG is forward and my weight offset is high in this pic but when all this was done right the lowest pitch I got was 28.1.

Edited June 30, 2022 by Kiknurazz91

[Nick Thomadis]

*UPDATE 21* (30/6/2022)
- Fixed critical bug which caused nations in good relations to fight each other.
- Some fine tunings in shell ballistics.
- Battle AI balance to be overall more effective in all situations.
- Definite fix for "false positive" errors when we view ships in Design interface of the campaign. The Weight Offset, Pitch/Roll stats will now be accurately saved.
- Event balance to have stronger impact on GDP and Naval Budget.
- Minor other fixes.

PLEASE RESTART STEAM TO RECEIVE THE UPDATE (Saves had to be reset - We plan to release tomorrow with some final minor improvements. Please report if you find any critical bugs)

[dasHopsili]

i really dont get the absurd amount of negativity about the game. this game has recieved constant updates with the devs actually reading feedback since the beta was released. if you compare it to its initial playable version then there is such a gigantic difference and most if not everything for the better. yes the game has a gigantic array of bugs and yet i can still play a campaign and dont really be bothered by most of them. i can still make fairly realistic ships and make them work in a campaign and while its far from the most optimal way to play cause 12 inch guns with max length are busted, its still playable. so maybe just keep giving feedback about bugs rather than talking about what the game in your opinion should look like at this point

[Baboulinet]

29 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:

*UPDATE 21* (30/6/2022)
- Fixed critical bug which caused nations in good relations to fight each other.
- Some fine tunings in shell ballistics.
- Battle AI balance to be overall more effective in all situations.
- Definite fix for "false positive" errors when we view ships in Design interface of the campaign. The Weight Offset, Pitch/Roll stats will now be accurately saved.
- Event balance to have stronger impact on GDP and Naval Budget.
- Minor other fixes.

PLEASE RESTART STEAM TO RECEIVE THE UPDATE (Saves had to be reset - We plan to release tomorrow with some final minor improvements. Please report if you find any critical bugs)

While the improvements are trendemous, I'd not say the update is releasable in its current state. We still get alliance bugs, and Nations Fleets or even the entire country just vanishing for no apparent reason. And the "Building ships" crash still happens. 

I'd advise to polish it a little more until we can get really long and meaningful campaigns, without crashes or oddities in AI management, before release. 

Like so many others said before, Tech needs some refinement too. (Radar and engine are too quick, fuel and guns are too slow for example).

Most of the complaints in Steam reviews are about the game and its updates being rushed while still full of bugs. As beta testers we don't mind, we sign for it. But the regular player won't like it, and can wait a few days/week in order to get a stable patch.

[Skeksis]

Finally a stable version, I believe continuous campaigns will be well received. The best part will be building replacement ships with new tech and seeing them go into action – as truly as an Ultimate Admiral of Dreadnoughts would command.

Well done.

Edited June 30, 2022 by Skeksis

[Vanhal]

14 minutes ago, dasHopsili said:

i really dont get the absurd amount of negativity about the game. this game has recieved constant updates with the devs actually reading feedback since the beta was released. if you compare it to its initial playable version then there is such a gigantic difference and most if not everything for the better. yes the game has a gigantic array of bugs and yet i can still play a campaign and dont really be bothered by most of them. i can still make fairly realistic ships and make them work in a campaign and while its far from the most optimal way to play cause 12 inch guns with max length are busted, its still playable. so maybe just keep giving feedback about bugs rather than talking about what the game in your opinion should look like at this point

At this point i just give up with getting to catch the bugs, all change so fast - and it is a good thing, this is probably the most active and responsive dev team i ever seen, standard for an industry, even indie, is waiting weeks for even tiny things to get fixed (or at least attempted to... godspeed devs).

However i noticed yet another problem that is increasing with every version since 1.0

Namely lack of space for fun. For me, this game was always "here you go some ship parts, have fun". And lately i just noticed the margin of ship creativity is getting smaller. Especially with no modifications, all of my ships has been boringly plausible, else they just don't work at all. Boring.

[Aloeus]

5 minutes ago, Vanhal said:

At this point i just give up with getting to catch the bugs, all change so fast - and it is a good thing, this is probably the most active and responsive dev team i ever seen, standard for an industry, even indie, is waiting weeks for even tiny things to get fixed (or at least attempted to... godspeed devs).

However i noticed yet another problem that is increasing with every version since 1.0

Namely lack of space for fun. For me, this game was always "here you go some ship parts, have fun". And lately i just noticed the margin of ship creativity is getting smaller. Especially with no modifications, all of my ships has been boringly plausible, else they just don't work at all. Boring.

I generally like the more realistic constraints (where it actually is realistic, which it isnt always) But a "creative/arcade" mode where you don't have some limitations like pitch and roll and balance etc would probably be enjoyable.