>>> v1.06-1.08+ Feedback<<<(17/8/2022)

[kineuhansen]

if you want feedback you get it at least my game when i click next turn its freeze and make the game unplayable

[The PC Collector]

6 minutes ago, Kane said:

Yes, I do.
That aside, I even went to the trouble of contacting the curator of battleship New Jersey to ask him about it, and while he's been too busy to pull paperwork for the exact numbers, even he found the numbers....unlikely, even accounting for cooling equipment, steel cabinetry, etc.
Putting aside what I know about radio equipment from the era, I'm inclined to trust his judgment about whether or not 2,000 tons of radio is reasonable or not.

Okay, I had tried to do some research on my own, to no avail. I was also thinking about the literal kilometers of wiring some dreadnoughts had as antennae... XD

To be completely clear: I'm also inclined to think that those weights for radios are unrealistic. Just... want to be sure because, you know... those damn vacuum tubes.

[Kane]

33 minutes ago, The PC Collector said:

Okay, I had tried to do some research on my own, to no avail. I was also thinking about the literal kilometers of wiring some dreadnoughts had as antennae... XD

To be completely clear: I'm also inclined to think that those weights for radios are unrealistic. Just... want to be sure because, you know... those damn vacuum tubes.

Yeah I tried doing the same, and had trouble finding much in the way of specifics, hence why I contacted New Jersey, about it.
And yeah I know old radios are heavy.  I get to trip over them on a fairly regular basis having a family member who collects them.  (And as that family member gets older, I get to schlep them around more and more often when they decide something needs to be moved.)

But 2,000 tons is a lot of weight.
2,000 tons is an entire Fletcher-class destroyer ready for battle.
or
40 Tiger-tanks
or
68, B-17's at max take-off weight.
and so on.

The ridiculous weight of radios for large battleships in the game (as well as the rather ludicrous weight for some other systems) is a direct result of the devs making certain pieces of equipment scale with others.  Such as your radios scaling with your tower.

I just bring up the radios specifically every time I post since it is one of the best examples of the problem with scaling systems.
 

Edited July 27, 2022 by Kane

[BuckleUpBones]

Secondaries Trigger Jammed Bug. It's all in the video.

 

Edited July 28, 2022 by BuckleUpBones
Upgraded video to 4k

[BuckleUpBones]

Custom Battles Invalid Design Bug. This one gets pretty nasty if you have a lot of designs per year. You have to go through all of your designs to find those invalid ones but even then if they're all good custom battles won't launch. 

 

[SpardaSon21]

19 hours ago, TAKTCOM said:

CLs right now just bad. They do not stand up to competition with DD as scouts, screen and torpedo platforms. Too big, too slow.

They are also noncompetitive in comparison with CA in the matter of artillery. Typical stability CL hull 1890-1919 is ~30, which means a penalty of about 25% to accuracy. Worse, the double turrets for CL are ~1917, which means that lack of raw firepower.

Light cruisers before 1920, i.e. the first half of the game, are terrible and you should not expect anything good from using CLs. They're kind of OK by 1930, but why use them if you have destroyer leaders anyway...

I don't understand why restrictions on the size of guns are needed, in real history there were no problems installing 10-inch guns on 3k cruisers, or even a 320mm gun on a 4.2k cruiser. It's not that we have any Washington Naval Treaty or something.

A major issue is CL hulls do not have the gun mounts or even displacements for anything historical.  The Dresdens had 10 4" guns and another 8 2" guns... and you can barely fit that.  The Brit Highflyers that entered service in 1899 had this: 

11 6-inch guns and 8 3-inch guns, and entering service in 1898.  Can you even lay down a 5750 ton CL in 1897?  Hell, here's one laid down even before the game starts:

That's a 9500 ton "CL" laid down in 1888, and with a 9.2" main armament and 6" casemates.

3 hours ago, Kane said:

Yeah I tried doing the same, and had trouble finding much in the way of specifics, hence why I contacted New Jersey, about it.
And yeah I know old radios are heavy.  I get to trip over them on a fairly regular basis having a family member who collects them.  (And as that family member gets older, I get to schlep them around more and more often when they decide something needs to be moved.)

But 2,000 tons is a lot of weight.
2,000 tons is an entire Fletcher-class destroyer ready for battle.
or
40 Tiger-tanks
or
68, B-17's at max take-off weight.
and so on.

The ridiculous weight of radios for large battleships in the game (as well as the rather ludicrous weight for some other systems) is a direct result of the devs making certain pieces of equipment scale with others.  Such as your radios scaling with your tower.

I just bring up the radios specifically every time I post since it is one of the best examples of the problem with scaling systems.
 

Things would be far, far less stupid if towers didn't weigh an absurd amount.  I had no idea the Dunkerque's main tower weighed three thousand tons, or more than an entire destroyer, even before you start adding components on.  Thank you for correcting me, Ultimate Admiral: Dreadnoughts. /s

[Karlchen]

1 hour ago, SpardaSon21 said:

A major issue is CL hulls do not have the gun mounts or even displacements for anything historical.  The Dresdens had 10 4" guns and another 8 2" guns... and you can barely fit that.  The Brit Highflyers that entered service in 1899 had this: 

11 6-inch guns and 8 3-inch guns, and entering service in 1898.  Can you even lay down a 5750 ton CL in 1897?  Hell, here's one laid down even before the game starts:

That's a 9500 ton "CL" laid down in 1888, and with a 9.2" main armament and 6" casemates.

Things would be far, far less stupid if towers didn't weigh an absurd amount.  I had no idea the Dunkerque's main tower weighed three thousand tons, or more than an entire destroyer, even before you start adding components on.  Thank you for correcting me, Ultimate Admiral: Dreadnoughts. /s

That are first class cruisers. Even if they had no armoured belt they would count as CA in game

[Plazma]

2 hours ago, BuckleUpBones said:

Secondaries Trigger Jam Bug. It's all in the video.

 

Maybe after 1 year they will fix that... 1-2 month passed and still they have this issue... 

[The PC Collector]

4 hours ago, Karlchen said:

That are first class cruisers. Even if they had no armoured belt they would count as CA in game

The point still stands. Most CL hulls (especially early ones, the worst offender being the semi armoured hulls, which are based on a real CL which carried lots of casemate mains) are clearly designed to have casemate main guns, and the game not allowing them significantly cripples them. Honestly I don't understand how the devs could make such a mistake considering that casemate mains on CLs where a common thing even until the late 1920s.

Edited July 27, 2022 by The PC Collector

[mk4m]

48 minutes ago, The PC Collector said:

The point still stands. Most CL hulls (especially early ones, the worst offender being the semi armoured hulls, which are based on a real CL which carried lots of casemate mains) are clearly designed to have casemate main guns, and the game not allowing them significantly cripples them. Honestly I don't understand how the devs could make such a mistake considering that casemate mains on CLs where a common thing even until the late 1920s.

Historical many protected and armoured cruisers have main guns in casemates.

Edited July 27, 2022 by mk4m

[The PC Collector]

@Nick Thomadis Fleet management upgrades are badly needed. Right now, the moment you have to fight in more than two areas at the same time, the game becames a tedious chore because the current fleet management was desgned for the old 1-2 years campaign in which you rarely got more than 50-60 ships. Right now, in a system in which is easy to accrue more than 100-150 ships, and you might need to fight more than one war at a time on multiple places, the system simply doesn't work anymore.

The current taskforce system was a big step on the right direction worked fine with the 1.05 campaigns, and might still be good for the AI, but for the player the system doesn't work anymore. Organising your task forces is too tedious and time consuming, because you have to redo them after EVERY SINGLE ENCOUNTER. This is an issue that has me on the edge of giving up the game for the time being

As such, the following options should be implemented ASAP:

- Permanent task forces are a must, and should be the top priority to make the game more playable in its current status. It doesn't has to be too complex, just like normal taskforces, but which doesn't get disbanded when they arrive a port. Once you have created one, you should have the option to set a home port to it (this is, where the ships belonging to the task force will go back for repairs) and two buttons to add/remove ships from it. Otherwise it can work like the normal taskforces. This might require adding tabs to ports, one to see unassigned ships and another to see taskforces.

- Fleet management page needs filter options ASAP. As it happened with the task forces, the current system simply doesn't work anymore for the number of ships you can have. At the very least, the option to filter by port, status and ship type are badly needed with the amount of ships you can get right now.

[21hugoPT]

I started a campaign from 1890 and is June 1929 and I already have Super Battleships and the max tonnage that I can upgrade of the shipyard is 4K tons and i keep upgrade the shipyard when it finish. Can I suggest in the research Tab, having a tech that increases the upgrade of the shipyard by 500 tons and this tech will take longer to research

[Kane]

EVERY TIME ONE OF MY SHIPS GETS SUNK, MY CURRENT DIVISION / SHIP SELECTION GETS DE-SELECTED.


Edited:  So, less rage post.

Please fix this.  It is incredibly annoying.  Infuriating even.  Especially when I lost a battleship to torpedo-induced flash fire because the loss of an inconsequential destroyer de-selected the ship I was controlling while I was dodging torpedoes.

Also.
Still have a real problem with my battleships getting torpedoed by my own destroyers.
If the destroyers set to "screen" were programmed to put themselves between the enemy and the ships they're screening, they'd do a lot more good.  Also be a lot less friendly-fire.

Edited July 28, 2022 by Kane
Edited for less rage. /Spelling

[Kane]

Also.
Was waiting to complete a start-to-finish play-through before leaving commentary.  But something is seriously, ridiculously, crazily wrong with penetration in this game.

I have a huge tech advantage over all opponents.  But I've been noticing that my shells are getting blocked / or partial pens when there is no excuse for it.  The battle I paused to make this post is the most egregious example.

My German battleship with 16.1" guns, +20% barrels and heavy shells.  Shooting at a Austro-Hungarian battleship.
The AH battleship has 11" of Krupp-I belt armor, Citadel-I.
My battleship's 16.1" guns are using capped-ballistic-II heavy shells, w/ tube powder.
At 5,000 meters they should be going through that 11" of Krupp-I like a Ukranian penis through a Russian anus.
But instead they're getting blocked, or partial pens.
This is a serious problem.  And before someone asks, yes, I have my AP ammo selected.

Now granted, I've argued that armor in this game is too ineffective in many respects (angling BS aside), so part of my hopes this is sign of a coming armor/defense rework.  But this is a bit much. In any case what the armor says it can stop, and what the gun says it can penetrate are very far off, and I'm inclined to think its a mistake somewhere.

Edited July 27, 2022 by Kane

[SpardaSon21]

13 hours ago, Karlchen said:

That are first class cruisers. Even if they had no armoured belt they would count as CA in game

The Highflyers were second-class cruisers.  Even a third-class cruiser like the Pearl is extremely difficult to build.

[Lakel]

3 hours ago, Kane said:

If the destroyers set to "screen" were programmed to put themselves between the enemy and the ships they're screening, they'd do a lot more good.  Also be a lot less friendly-fire.

More screen and less hiding in the corner of the map, or suiciding into the enemy fleet when they get tired of that would be nice indeed.

That is one fun thing to watchin in RTW with your DD escorts, they will occasionalyl dive in for torpedo runs but arent suicidal. Minus one german DD i had that dove into the enemy fleet and emerged unscathed after sunset, sinking a couple capitals, that was a crazy little DD, but a one off.

Edited July 27, 2022 by Lakel

[kineuhansen]

i would love to know how anyone find the loading times in ua dspecial when you start a new campaign or click next turn

[Tycondero]

On 7/27/2022 at 6:49 PM, The PC Collector said:

@Nick Thomadis Fleet management upgrades are badly needed. Right now, the moment you have to fight in more than two areas at the same time, the game becames a tedious chore because the current fleet management was desgned for the old 1-2 years campaign in which you rarely got more than 50-60 ships. Right now, in a system in which is easy to accrue more than 100-150 ships, and you might need to fight more than one war at a time on multiple places, the system simply doesn't work anymore.

The current taskforce system was a big step on the right direction worked fine with the 1.05 campaigns, and might still be good for the AI, but for the player the system doesn't work anymore. Organising your task forces is too tedious and time consuming, because you have to redo them after EVERY SINGLE ENCOUNTER. This is an issue that has me on the edge of giving up the game for the time being

As such, the following options should be implemented ASAP:

- Permanent task forces are a must, and should be the top priority to make the game more playable in its current status. It doesn't has to be too complex, just like normal taskforces, but which doesn't get disbanded when they arrive a port. Once you have created one, you should have the option to set a home port to it (this is, where the ships belonging to the task force will go back for repairs) and two buttons to add/remove ships from it. Otherwise it can work like the normal taskforces. This might require adding tabs to ports, one to see unassigned ships and another to see taskforces.

- Fleet management page needs filter options ASAP. As it happened with the task forces, the current system simply doesn't work anymore for the number of ships you can have. At the very least, the option to filter by port, status and ship type are badly needed with the amount of ships you can get right now.

Indeed. The formations cannot be maintained as the game stands now. I often find that initially the formation of the group at the start of the battle is very much to my liking. However, once you start to adjust directions or give other roles (screen, scout) the formation gets messed up. We need a way to set formation, similar to Total War games. 

A more important issue is that the AI does not know how to fight well at all. 1 vs 1 is already problematic, but when trying to do fleet vs fleet engagements it really seems that the AI just dives in and goes for 17th century naval "skirmish" tactics. The AI does not deploy and use its fleet to its strength by forming battle lines and letting the BBs duke it out if it has an advantage there for instance. Ideally the BBs should try to force the hostile fleet to cross its T. If it feels it cannot win, it should try to escape etc. Right now, I cannot notice any fleet manoeuvre that the AI seems to conduct in an premeditated and organized manner. I can understand it's hard to program, but as this is a single player game, having a skilled AI capable of challenging a player is vital to its reception as a good strategy game. 

Edited July 29, 2022 by Tycondero
Grammar

[Karlchen]

9 hours ago, SpardaSon21 said:

The Highflyers were second-class cruisers.  Even a third-class cruiser like the Pearl is extremely difficult to build.

Im totally with you there. All the earlier German small cruisers like Dresden in your example are impossible to build in this game. Because of the 10,5cm casemates. 

But first and second class cruisers would be counted as a ca by in-game logic. It doesn't matter if they are armoured cruisers or protected cruisers 

Good example for this are the German classifications as large- and  small cruisers. 

The protected cruisers of the Victoria Luise class were large cruisers while the protected cruisers  of the contemporary gazelle class were small cruisers. 

[The PC Collector]

19 hours ago, Karlchen said:

But first and second class cruisers would be counted as a ca by in-game logic. It doesn't matter if they are armoured cruisers or protected cruisers 

Well, if you want, we can go for proper Washington CLs: Neither Omaha nor Svetlana can be reproduced either. Guess why: Exacly, no casemate mains allowed. And they are mid-late 1920s proper CLs.

Edited July 29, 2022 by The PC Collector
fixing typos

[Toby]

@Nick Thomadisdo you have any idea yet what the main thing for the next patch will be and a rough idea if when it will go into beta release? really enjoying the camoaigns at the moment

[kineuhansen]

freeze make the campaign unplayble and its not my pc its the game

[Nick Thomadis]

Hello Admirals,

We have repaired a major problem that caused lag and crashes, especially in the campaign. Furthermore, we offer fixes and improvements that you recently requested. Please take a look at the changelog:

https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/1069660/view/3379406856635797688

[o Barão]

53 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:

Hello Admirals,

We have repaired a major problem that caused lag and crashes, especially in the campaign. Furthermore, we offer fixes and improvements that you recently requested. Please take a look at the changelog:

https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/1069660/view/3379406856635797688

Reduced the weight of Radio/Hydrophone/Sonar and increased their cost respectively.

Interesting. I need to check this. Maybe I can finally use radio on my ships?

Armor weight adjustments to rise exponentially and prevent the creation of unrealistic ships with too much unnatural armor for the size of the ship.

To rise exponentially???? Well is possible to argue, that a hull structure would need to have more ( or stronger) beams and columns to support the ship armor weight. I also need to see this  one. 🤔

 

Interesting idea to balance player ship vs AI.  Lets see how it plays.

[o Barão]

Ship motion feedback

• Pitch 16.
• 21 knots speed.
• Smooth waves.

The ship is going up and down.