>>> Beta 1.09 Feedback (Released)<<<

[Pappystein]

1 hour ago, Lima said:

This is actually possible even if you do everything right. The US has "Cage mast" spotting wunderwaffe. Their BB CA CL always detect the enemy earlier before radar. Especially noticeable in 1900. (And as far as I remember, the first Cage masts appeared on South Carolina-class BB).

US CA 1900

Spain CA 1900

This is exactly why I point it out as a bug.   It SHOULDN'T be ship size affect abilities to see others... rather it should be ship Height (which is why the Cage masts are pretty OP...) HOWEVER I think the player needs to be forced to switch to something else (Tripod, Pagoda, whatever) to utilize the bigger/better Rangefinders just like IRL.   that is the reason the US switched from the Cage mast to the Tripods and then the Giant towers...to support the mass of the improved gunfire rangefinders/target measuring devices.

 

Also While cage masts are more stable when damaged than other tower types, they are quicker to absolutly fail... It does not seem that is modeled either (eg 1 5" hit on a cage mast might as well be called NO DAMAGE so no penalties should be applied to the part... but a bunch of hits and the cagemast should have greater penalties than other forms of towers.   Just my 2 cents on that sidebar-subject

 

[The PC Collector]

2 hours ago, Pappystein said:

Actually Small Dreadnought is not meant for that.  Rather your Semi dreadnought hulls are the Battleship hulls that allow for Battleship caliber wing turrets.

You're missing my point. Which hull in the game is intended for semi dreadnoughts is irrelevant. The thing is that, as they existed, I see no reason why the AI should not build them.

[o Barão]

1 hour ago, Pappystein said:

It SHOULDN'T be ship size affect abilities to see others... rather it should be ship Height

Funny you said this, because that is exactly how it works.

Each ship hull will have a different spotting range. The bigger the hull, the bigger the value. I am not talking hull displacement here or hull length, but instead the difference between the hulls available for the player to choose. As an example in this image, Modern Battleship II is bigger than Modern Battleship I and will have a bigger spotting base value.

IMPORTANT THING TO KNOW: changing the hull draught will not have an impact on the spotting range, only the hull you choose. This is a feature missing from the mechanic IMO.

Same thing with towers. The bigger the tower, the better the spotting value.

Radars work different. Instead a fixed value, use a % value that will have an impact to the tower spotting range. So the bigger the tower, the higher the radar will be placed and the bigger the bonus will be.

[Shaun]

Building new ships takes far too long for the entire world, and it's only going to get worse when new nations are added. I often find myself in infinity loading screens and the game not responding. Any chance of each nation having some predesigned blueprints, and possibly a slider to adjust the ratio of predesigned to generated blueprints? I have a few ideas as to how this could work.

• Due to technology being a factor which affects blueprints, the pre-designed ships could just be a templates for equipment placements, so with technology progression, different mark guns, sizes and armouring could be changed, so it's not the same every time.
• Historically the different nations used different calibres and barrel lengths. These could be optionally preset for each nations, for example 1.9, 3, 4.7, 6, 7, 8, 9.2, 10, 12, 12.5 and 13.5 inch for early British guns.
• Optionally force nations to use only equipment they used at the time, for example cordite for the British, PoudreB for French etc, torpedo sizes and so on.
• A limit on how many new designs can be built each month. If this is exceeded, use a predesigned blueprint.

Edited October 27, 2022 by Shaun

[o Barão]

19 minutes ago, Shaun said:

Building new ships takes far too long for the entire world, and it's only going to get worse when new nations are added.

 Don't expect to have new nations in game before the game is released. Maybe you will see in a future DLC if we are lucky. That is only my opinion based on what I read here in the last 3 years.

• Historically the different nations used different calibres and barrel lengths. These could be optionally preset for each nations, for example 1.9, 3, 4.7, 6, 7, 8, 9.2, 10, 12, 12.5 and 13.5 inch for early British guns.
• Optionally force nations to use only equipment they used at the time, for example cordite for the British, PoudreB for French etc, torpedo sizes and so on.

This is a sandbox game, not a copy of what happened in the past.

 

[idontfckingknow]

How does "Invade" works? Im literally at the doorstep of the enemy port and still nothing happens. 

there should be a manual option to attack ports, this is to counter nations that converge all of their ships into one Fleet.

[Shaun]

43 minutes ago, o Barão said:

 

I'm aware it's a sandbox game, but it also has to be playable 😆

[Thramoun]

23 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:

Beta Update RC1 "Release Candidate" (26/10/2022)

Please note there is a TOTAL SAVES RESET!

- Fixed crash that made a campaign unplayable, related to "Research" phase of campaign turn.
- Fixed bug that made the campaign not able to continue after a battle (When you saw loading phase "Battle").
- Fixed bug that created many invalid saved designs due to extra, wrong change of tonnage, after the save. When it happened for AI in the campaign the designs were discarded and the AI had to spend more time to make a new design, resulting in more campaign turn delays. When it happened for the human player, the design (Normal or Refit) was unusable, could not build anything or it contained misaligned parts.
- Fixed bugs that created inconsistent Refit time calculations.
- Fixed bug that did not allow to change Role for submarines that went out in sea.
- Fixed bug that forced ships to enter a repair phase after commissioning.
- Fixed some bugs for control/attack radiuses of Task Forces/ Submarine groups which could make them very large and create various issues with extra mine hits and problems with pathfinding and mission generation.
- Ship costs / Optimal Hull speed balances, your old saves will have weight differences, if you try to use them. This change will address overpowered ships which were not costed sufficiently and the ability to sustain very large fleets in campaign.
- AI personalities balance for nations which could be more evasive than needed.
- Further formation improvements.
- Other minor fixes.

This version is considered a release candidate. We need your feedback to fix any remaining issues, if needed, so we can release as soon as possible.

Please Restart Steam to receive the new update.

Thank you for fixing the "...Battle..." bug, finally I can play again.

[Iuvenalis]

On 10/26/2022 at 2:16 PM, Nick Thomadis said:

- Fixed crash that made a campaign unplayable, related to "Research" phase of campaign turn.

@Nick Thomadis Unfortunately this bug is not fully fixed, but doesn't seem to cause permanent damage to the save so that's good. I got to 1900 in a US campaign and it happened again. I submitted a bug report. Oddly, it repeated after reloading my campaign twice and the third time it resumed working again. I failed to take note if it was progressing my ship building during the failed turn change but it did still advance 1 month with the failures, so I'm not sure if those turns were "lost" or not. I'm now 6-7 months past the error month and seem to be progressing again.

[Max Sin]

Hm. There is good news. After restarting the game, when the moves freeze, everything continued, and no longer freeze. It is now 1907. The moves become long, but if you wait, then everything is fine.

And now the next claims. I agree with the tester above, and from myself.

Technology is still slow. In particular, big guns, engines, and especially hull construction.

The technology branch of the turret mechanisms is too overloaded. It would be more logical to move the barrel length to big and small guns. The whole weapon systems research system basically needs to be reworked.

Reloading guns. Why does a 10% increase in barrel length increase the reload time by 20%???! Where is the logic ?

Generally speaking, this patch has the right to life. Thanks for your work !

[Käptn_Flitschauge]

5 minutes ago, Max Sin said:

Reloading guns. Why does a 10% increase in barrel length increase the reload time by 20%???! Where is the logic ?

They're using muzzle loaders, silly

[CapitanIncognito]

Suggestion: If the AI will just run away in a fight, make the Withdraw button prior to that fight have a 100% success rate. If neither side wants that fight, it shouldn't waste my time.

[Admiral Donuts]

In the last couple updates, I've been getting combat missions against countries that I've gone to peace with, and also continuing to blockade them for a couple months after making peace.

Edited October 27, 2022 by Admiral Donuts

[Knobby]

31 minutes ago, Max Sin said:

Reloading guns. Why does a 10% increase in barrel length increase the reload time by 20%???! Where is the logic ?

For battleship calibers where the gun has to return to horizontal to be loaded this makes sense. Longer barrel means more mass and should move slower. For guns that don't need to return to horizontal to reload it makes no sense at all.

[o Barão]

44 minutes ago, Max Sin said:

Why does a 10% increase in barrel length increase the reload time by 20%???! Where is the logic ?

The logic is the bigger the barrel, more heavier the barrel is. Is not a question about time wasted to reload the barrel when already in position. Is the time wasted to move the barrel to a firing position or to a horizontal position to start the reloading procedure.

 

As an example:

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_16-50_mk7.php

Iowa guns. 

1700 tons

Rate of elevation 12 degrees per second.

 

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNJAP_18-45_t94.php

Yamato guns 

2730 tons 

Rate of elevation 8 degrees per second.

 

Note: 

- In UAD, increasing the barrel will increase the overall turret weight. However this will not have any impact to the turret rotation speed. An important detail missing from this mechanic. 

- Also the range does not have an impact to the time needed to get the gun ready to fire. IRL all ships could speed up the process if firing at targets at close by not needed to waste time to elevate the barrel so much and then losing time to bring the barrel back to reload. This doesn't exist in UAD. 

 

Edited October 27, 2022 by o Barão

[Max Sin]

8 minutes ago, Knobby said:

For battleship calibers where the gun has to return to horizontal to be loaded this makes sense. Longer barrel means more mass and should move slower. For guns that don't need to return to horizontal to reload it makes no sense at all.

I agree. But it doesn't have to be THAT big. After all, the mass of the tower is also increasing, the mechanisms for lowering and raising the barrel, etc. have been improved. And then with increasing barrel length, reloading becomes even longer. When, because of this, it no longer makes sense to increase the length of the barrel, because. a standard barrel will fire twice as often.

[o Barão]

10 minutes ago, Max Sin said:

I agree. But it doesn't have to be THAT big. After all, the mass of the tower is also increasing, the mechanisms for lowering and raising the barrel, etc. have been improved. And then with increasing barrel length, reloading becomes even longer. When, because of this, it no longer makes sense to increase the length of the barrel, because. a standard barrel will fire twice as often.

"At the loading angle of +3 degrees, a firing cycle of about 30 seconds could be achieved. However, this would equate to a range of no more than 6,560 yards (6,000 m). The additional elevation and depression times required to reach an elevation of 41 degrees increased the firing cycle by about 11 seconds. As can be seen in the Range Table below, most ship-to-ship actions would rarely exceed an elevation of 20 degrees, so an intermediate time of 35 seconds would seem to be reasonable for most battle-range engagements."

Yamato guns.

30 seconds plus 11 seconds if shooting at max range. Time wasted to move the barrel at 8 degrees per second.

 

Now if we could imagine a 10% barrel increase. The barrel will be much heavier. Doesn't matter how well design are the mechanics and engines to move the barrels for the time period, we will always see a worse time to get the barrels in the right angle. And this also applies to the turrets. The Yamato guns were so heavy that it was only possible to rotate them at 2 degrees per second. 

 

[Pappystein]

58 minutes ago, Max Sin said:

Reloading guns. Why does a 10% increase in barrel length increase the reload time by 20%???! Where is the logic ?

Generally speaking, this patch has the right to life. Thanks for your work !

TYPICALLY but not always you are adding bigger shell and bigger powder (thus heavier)    I think a prefect example of this is the Italian Dreadnoughts that were upgraded for WWII.   they were upgraded from 12, to 12.6" but the same barrel length (thus the caliber of the barrel was actually reduced since the diameter of the shell was increased without lengthening the barrel)  And the rate of fire went DOWN.   Bigger shell Bigger powder... slower rate of fire.

[Admiral Donuts]

33 minutes ago, Pappystein said:

TYPICALLY but not always you are adding bigger shell and bigger powder (thus heavier)    I think a prefect example of this is the Italian Dreadnoughts that were upgraded for WWII.   they were upgraded from 12, to 12.6" but the same barrel length (thus the caliber of the barrel was actually reduced since the diameter of the shell was increased without lengthening the barrel)  And the rate of fire went DOWN.   Bigger shell Bigger powder... slower rate of fire.

For gun-size maybe, but not barrel length.

[Admiral Donuts]

Game stopped responding at Building Ships.

Did it again the following month.

And again.

Again. Each month.

Edited October 28, 2022 by Admiral Donuts
cleanup

[Shaun]

2 hours ago, Max Sin said:

I agree. But it doesn't have to be THAT big. After all, the mass of the tower is also increasing, the mechanisms for lowering and raising the barrel, etc. have been improved. And then with increasing barrel length, reloading becomes even longer. When, because of this, it no longer makes sense to increase the length of the barrel, because. a standard barrel will fire twice as often.

For the benefits you get from having longer barrels ie more accuracy, velocity and penetration, it’s not a bad trade-off. 20% isn’t that much.

[Shaun]

Anyone having issues with enemies constantly sailing away from you so you never actually meet them in battle? Haha

[Cobrakhan]

RC1 - I am getting stuck on the "building ships" step of turn resolution as Austria-Hungary May 1892.  On killing the game and re-opening, I am still on May 1892.  Have tried 4-5 times and never advance to June.

[o Barão]

4 minutes ago, Shaun said:

For the benefits you get from having longer barrels ie more accuracy, velocity and penetration, it’s not a bad trade-off. 20% isn’t that much.

There is also the cost and weight penalty.

[Shaun]

40 minutes ago, o Barão said:

There is also the cost and weight penalty.

Can’t have it all