The PC Collector Posted July 30, 2022 Share Posted July 30, 2022 Once again, I have to come here to give the same feedback I have given again and again, and for some reason the devs stubbornly keep ignoring:The number of ships which can be put on a task force need a hard cap Hopefully this way the devs will finally notice it, because I have run out of resources in the english language to stress how badly needed is this. 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IshPR7777 Posted July 30, 2022 Share Posted July 30, 2022 @Nick ThomadisCan you add Derfflinger-class battlecruiser hull for Germany in 1910s? We already have Von der Tann type battlecruiser hull, but still it needs more WW1-era German Battlecruiser hulls to be added into the game. Reminder, Derfflinger-class battlecruiser hull for Germany would take in 1912-1919 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Werwaz Posted July 30, 2022 Share Posted July 30, 2022 26 minutes ago, The PC Collector said: Once again, I have to come here to give the same feedback I have given again and again, and for some reason the devs stubbornly keep ignoring:The number of ships which can be put on a task force need a hard cap Hopefully this way the devs will finally notice it, because I have run out of resources in the english language to stress how badly needed is this. I mostly agree with this, but I would also have a max tonnage along with a max number to prevent battleship doomstacks. I think such a limit would make the most sense at about 5X the largest battleship's displacement. I think it would tie into a proper logistics system pretty well if they ever implemented that. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeksis Posted July 30, 2022 Share Posted July 30, 2022 (edited) 1 hour ago, The PC Collector said: Once again, I have to come here to give the same feedback I have given again and again, and for some reason the devs stubbornly keep ignoring:The number of ships which can be put on a task force need a hard cap Hopefully this way the devs will finally notice it, because I have run out of resources in the english language to stress how badly needed is this. Unfortunately I have to disagree, again! Other than the 50 ship cap per side, DO NOT CAP BATTLES ANY LESS. Monster battles is the BEST PART OF THE GAME. Just 1 vote for the other team. Actually, currently, all battles are rather balanced, some big ones, some little ones, some outnumbered ones, all pretty damn good. Edited July 30, 2022 by Skeksis 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pizzafighter Posted July 30, 2022 Share Posted July 30, 2022 it looks like the bug, where the AI don't get crew for its ships is back again 😕 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gsam Posted July 30, 2022 Share Posted July 30, 2022 (edited) 5 hours ago, Skeksis said: Unfortunately I have to disagree, again! Other than the 50 ship cap per side, DO NOT CAP BATTLES ANY LESS. Monster battles is the BEST PART OF THE GAME. Just 1 vote for the other team. Actually, currently, all battles are rather balanced, some big ones, some little ones, some outnumbered ones, all pretty damn good. Problem is, right now it does not appear engines are optimized to handle it. I fought over 150 ships in a battle and I have a pretty beastly rig and it brought the game to a crawl. Like 1 frame every 5 seconds. Edited July 31, 2022 by Gsam 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdmiralObvious Posted July 31, 2022 Share Posted July 31, 2022 So, I've been noticing a particular bug in regards to the new Citadel mechanics, and I think I've identified an issue that seems to be hull specific in that the game does not actually seem to recognize where the Citadel armor is on specific ship classes. I've checked this with the Super BB of pretty much every nation, as well as the N3/G3 classes of BB, and once you complete the ship build, the ships do not show the Citadel, nor engine placement scheme. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdmiralObvious Posted July 31, 2022 Share Posted July 31, 2022 This is a normal, working ship. This ship on the other hand tends to experience very unusual penetration mechanics, in a lot of cases, the game seems to ignore the fact the internal armor scheme exists, and seems to fall back to an older model? I'm not 100% sure if this specifically affects the penetration chance, or how the game sees it, but it has been noticed that shots that should be blocked by the internal armor scheme overpenetrate the ship instead? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeksis Posted July 31, 2022 Share Posted July 31, 2022 (edited) New all-time peak, not bad team UADs. oh you should go and see this too, 270 new this month (but probably most of them this week with this release). Last 30 Days 749.6 +270.2 +56.36% Edited July 31, 2022 by Skeksis 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mk4m Posted July 31, 2022 Share Posted July 31, 2022 5 hours ago, Skeksis said: Unfortunately I have to disagree, again! Other than the 50 ship cap per side, DO NOT CAP BATTLES ANY LESS. Monster battles is the BEST PART OF THE GAME. Just 1 vote for the other team. Actually, currently, all battles are rather balanced, some big ones, some little ones, some outnumbered ones, all pretty damn good. Sorry, for me "monster battless" is bad and annoying, the worst part of the game. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urst Posted July 31, 2022 Share Posted July 31, 2022 Monster battles could be fun if we could set formations before the battle started and the AI weren't as dogshit. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lakel Posted July 31, 2022 Share Posted July 31, 2022 Yup, definitely requires actual formations and formation keeping if you want massive battles , that the fact it slows to a frame by frame . Not unreasonable to have some form of fleet size selector at the campaign start. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fangoriously Posted July 31, 2022 Share Posted July 31, 2022 Well the complaining seemed to work, the BBs I designed for the campaign I started before these last 2 patches ballooned displacement up to 104% overweight, now displacement on those same ships is down to to 97% underweight with the latest patch. You should all feel spoiled right now lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mk4m Posted July 31, 2022 Share Posted July 31, 2022 (edited) 2 hours ago, Urst said: Monster battles could be fun if we could set formations before the battle started and the AI weren't as dogshit. Maybe, for now the AI not fight in formations and not keep formations, almost every battle is big mess. Impossible recreate Tsushima or Jutland. Edited July 31, 2022 by mk4m 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SAk Posted July 31, 2022 Share Posted July 31, 2022 Hi there! I've played about 100 hours of this game and I'm really liking this game. Especially the modern era. However, there are a couple minor nitpicks I have, mostly to do with the modern light cruiser 1 hull and its garbage towers that accompany it. The modern CL tower 1 forces you to have the barbette built in which limits any cool potential designs involving taller barbettes (3 layers) or only having one turret and not having it be elevated strangely.I tried experimenting with the smaller barbette but it limits the range of the one on the top barbette despite there clearly being space?From another angle, another gun. I realize that the 6 inch might be too big, but if the 5 inch gun can fit and can be seen CLEARLY going over the next gun, why is the range limited?? THIS ISNT THE CASE FOR THE DESTROYER LEADER HULL THOUGH?? The gun peaks over the green line... Yet it still allows the full range on the top gun. Yucky... The hull also needs to have maximum beam in order to place torpedoes with plausible radius (Sorry no sc's) and the light cruiser 2 for the italians have the depth charges stuck on them. Why? Subs aren't in the game yet and it's not like ALL cruisers and destroyers were equipped with depth charges? Please make them an optional part of the hull. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeksis Posted July 31, 2022 Share Posted July 31, 2022 (edited) 33 minutes ago, mk4m said: Maybe, for now the AI not fight in formations and not keep formations, almost every battle is big mess. Impossible recreate Tsushima or Jutland. So you wanta cut off the hand that feeds the game! Better still, break something that's not broke to improve something else? I don't think so. While unprioritized, my advice is with large engagements use the pause button every few seconds/minutes and step through every ship maintaining helms. a.k.a. git gud and play some ABBA. Edited July 31, 2022 by Skeksis 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mk4m Posted July 31, 2022 Share Posted July 31, 2022 1 hour ago, Skeksis said: So you wanta cut off the hand that feeds the game! Better still, break something that's not broke to improve something else? I don't think so. While unprioritized, my advice is with large engagements use the pause button every few seconds/minutes and step through every ship maintaining helms. a.k.a. git gud and play some ABBA. It's not fun. I want play battles like real battles as possible, not fight against huge swarm of chaotic moved without any battleplans ships. 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The PC Collector Posted July 31, 2022 Share Posted July 31, 2022 (edited) 11 hours ago, Skeksis said: Monster battles is the BEST PART OF THE GAME. No. They aren't. The break computers (My brand new I5 11400 + GTX1650 could barely move the one I got yesterday, if I got beyond x2 I got a nice slideshow), they make the AI run out of ships too quickly ruining the chance for nice, long wars (I have yet to see a war lasting more than a year) and aren't coherent with the era. Even worse, they end being shooting practice because tha AI don't know how to handle efficient battle lines. In my experience, the most challenging battles I've got have been the ones in which I get 3-4 ships against 6-7 AI ships. "Monster battles" as you call them, can remain in the campaign via rare event. As in you get an event saying "The enemy is forming a huge fleet near our waters! We should stop them!" or something like that, and then you can have your monster battle. But in its corrent form, Doomstacks/monster battles are something which must be removed from campaign ASAP. If you want to play those battles regularly, go custom battles, is for what they are for anyways. Even better: They can make the task force hard cap an optional rule for those rare players which like those battles. But for most of us, the cap is needed. Edited July 31, 2022 by The PC Collector 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karlchen Posted July 31, 2022 Share Posted July 31, 2022 58 minutes ago, The PC Collector said: No. They aren't. The break computers (My brand new I5 11400 + GTX1650 could barely move the one I got yesterday, if I got beyond x2 I got a nice slideshow), they make the AI run out of ships too quickly ruining the chance for nice, long wars (I have yet to see a war lasting more than a year) and aren't coherent with the era. Even worse, they end being shooting practice because tha AI don't know how to handle efficient battle lines. In my experience, the most challenging battles I've got have been the ones in which I get 3-4 ships against 6-7 AI ships. "Monster battles" as you call them, can remain in the campaign via rare event. As in you get an event saying "The enemy is forming a huge fleet near our waters! We should stop them!" or something like that, and then you can have your monster battle. But in its corrent form, Doomstacks/monster battles are something which must be removed from campaign ASAP. If you want to play those battles regularly, go custom battles, is for what they are for anyways. Even better: They can make the task force hard cap an optional rule for those rare players which like those battles. But for most of us, the cap is needed. Maybe taskforces should be capped at 100 ships but everything less will ruin the game. It's called dreadnought because it's about battleships. And those ships bwere build to fight massive battles. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The PC Collector Posted July 31, 2022 Share Posted July 31, 2022 5 minutes ago, Karlchen said: Maybe taskforces should be capped at 100 ships but everything less will ruin the game. It's called dreadnought because it's about battleships. And those ships bwere build to fight massive battles. And yet, a battle like that only happened once in the entire history of battleships. As I said, if you want to play those regularly, is what Custom Battles are for. The majority of us don't want them in campaign save for the rare event battle. Task forces should cap at 20-25 ships at the very most. And it already almost feel like too many ships. 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urst Posted July 31, 2022 Share Posted July 31, 2022 (edited) 6 hours ago, Skeksis said: So you wanta cut off the hand that feeds the game! Better still, break something that's not broke to improve something else? I don't think so. While unprioritized, my advice is with large engagements use the pause button every few seconds/minutes and step through every ship maintaining helms. a.k.a. git gud and play some ABBA. You are, quite literally, the only person who thinks this. Stop defending shitty game design by implying that it somehow takes skill instead of blind luck to make it work. Large battles are nothing but a slog in which my 4 to 10 CAs or CBs kite around the AI until everything is dead or I get board and go in for torp runs that get my ships ripped up, purely to end the battle faster. Edited July 31, 2022 by Urst 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The PC Collector Posted July 31, 2022 Share Posted July 31, 2022 (edited) 14 hours ago, Pizzafighter said: it looks like the bug, where the AI don't get crew for its ships is back again No, it doesn't. When they suffer a lot of losses they might get run out of crew (it happens to the player aswell) and as the new crew they get goes to the reaired ships which need their crew replenished and any mothballed ship they might have, they may take a while to start building up crew pool again. That is another completely unrelated problem that they should address, tho. I already gave feed back on that subject and mentiones that the base crew pool cap should at the very least be made 3 o 4 times the current one, and the base monthly crew gain should at the least be double. In addition, both numbers should increase as the campaign progresses, to compensate ships needing more and more crew as the campaing goes on. Additionally, the option to raise emergency leaves or recruitment campaigns should be added. Sorry, but I don't buy that countries which are supposed to be great powers can't pull out 20-30k sailors out of thin air if needed. Edited July 31, 2022 by The PC Collector Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karlchen Posted July 31, 2022 Share Posted July 31, 2022 2 hours ago, The PC Collector said: And yet, a battle like that only happened once in the entire history of battleships. As I said, if you want to play those regularly, is what Custom Battles are for. The majority of us don't want them in campaign save for the rare event battle. Task forces should cap at 20-25 ships at the very most. And it already almost feel like too many ships. It happened all the time in history. Like Lepanto, salamis, trafalgar, 4days battle. In the time period the game is taking place it happend three times comes in my mind already without looking, at tsushima, Jutland and surigao straight. But it could have happened even more. But the airplane (and mines) prevented it. But if you decide you don't want to go for decisive battles build cruiser fleet and do cruiser warfare. If you design your ships well, just run from the enemy fleets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The PC Collector Posted July 31, 2022 Share Posted July 31, 2022 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Karlchen said: n the time period the game is taking place it happend three times comes in my mind already without looking, at tsushima, Jutland and surigao straight. Yeah. At the very most, they happened ONCE per war. Hence why they should be rare event battles, not your everyday battle. Edited July 31, 2022 by The PC Collector 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o Barão Posted July 31, 2022 Share Posted July 31, 2022 @Nick Thomadis about the new citadel mechanics, I have one question. Why AP shells not capable of penetrating the citadel are able to deal damage to the engines? The experiment: Player ship 22.9 cm belt 22.5 cm 1st inner belt 18 cm 2nd Inner belt AI ship spawns at 2 km distance the guns are only able to penetrate around 30 cm at 2 km away (+/-) The AI have a low penetration chance. The combat log shows many partial pens. In theory, the shells should be able to defeat the armor belt and cause damage. The damage report shows that is causing considerable damage to the player ship. This is all fine. The many partial pens. But if the shells are defeating the armored belt and causing damage, but are unable to defeat the citadel. Why is the engine being damaged? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts