Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Let's talk about Research and development


SiWi

Recommended Posts

Hallo everyone.

The game made big leaps the last months and also the last weeks. One area I feel it has still a major weak-point in my opinion is the research.

Now of course it isn't final and hence this critique also tries to offer ways to improve it. but first I must point out what I think is wrong.

1. it seems to be impossible to really go ahead of Research in the campaign even if you beat the enemies in all wars.

2 It also seems impossible to even be have the technologies you are suppose to have

3 the random nature of Research can feel unfair and ridiculous. 

 

Now one could argue that the first 2 points are just balancing issues and can be fixed, just by balancing the speed and the economical effects of losing wars. While that is true to some extend, I think that a couple of more features could also help.

For example, why can't we demand technologies (or boost to research) in peace demands? Why can't we have research buffs for allies? Why couldn't we get a technology a or buffs to research it, from capturing enemy ships that surrender (on a side note, I think we need both the ability to scuttle or have a chance to scuttle ships that would be captured and the ability to gain vessels that surrender)?

many people also suggest the "paradox solution" aka things get harder to research if out of time and easier if they are in the past. Or that some technologies become "common" knowledge. 

But now to the main menu: Point 3.

I get it. I totally do. The devs don't want for people to have radar 3 in the 1910's, it makes sense. But I think the way research is somewhat random is illogical and sometimes frustrating. 

Take my recent British campaign for example: I try to make a heavy cruiser, but I'm basically unable to build anything jet (I'm almost in 1900...), because its impossible to me to have a CA that has decent engine efficiency. Now the solution for that should be to have better boilers and/or funnels. But I can't really focus that because even if I focus alway on that part of the tree I'm likely to get destroyer funnels instead or some other random upgrades.

An other example is gun calibers. While I get that something like radar is to some extend a "random" invention. Whenever I make better 9inch or 11 inch guns or develop new guns, isn't really something base on "chance". This way the game sometimes forces gun calibers on you, because the one you want don't get develop.

I would offer two suggestions to fix the problem.

Lets start with a controversial one perhaps: cut down the tech tree.

there are too man techs and alot of them aren't that useful, in being separate techs. lets take pretty much all of the "building part unlock" technologies. Why can't we just combine all the "capital" or "small" funnels/towers into a single technology that unlocks the building parts for that time. "Funnels for 1900's ships", Funnels for 1910 ships" ect.

This would in my opinion cut down on the problem that tech you need you don't get. Also I think that some of the trees could probably go or be combine. Especially since its sounds as if the devs want to add more techs still.

But I think we can do one better. How about that we can use focus points so that at the end of a tech we get a choice of 3, a bit like Master of Orion 2.

So lets say you used your focus point on big caliber guns, when the tech finished, you get to chose the next one: do you want to improve you already build 12inch guns on you BB#s the 9 inch guns on your CA or invent new 13 inch guns. It becomes more engaging because you can influence the outcome and your strategies become more easy to plan. I think that Boths are more fun in a strategy game then "lets prey this tech is the one I want".

Now to safeguard somewhat against radar rush (which lets be honest, will always happen almost no matter what the devs do) you could make it thats you can't chose in all technology categories or that perhaps among the choices you could have "unknown" technologies that can turn out to be gems like "radar" which doesn't show up in the normal selection or only late.

 

tldr:

give us more options to gain technologies and a egde over enemies (or catch up)

cut down on the bloating of techs and gives us more chances to plan research.

 

What do you think?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's also two things I've noticed about the research. One is slightly funny, and the other one come from a place of historical context.

In my current German playthrough (not on the Beta Branch), I actually wound up unlocking the 16 inch Mk 2 guns before I unlocked the 16 inch Mk 1 guns. Now, I don't know if it was because I had my research budget slider set at 90-95% for almost 3 years while I was at peace with everyone, or if it was something else...but I just find it funny that I would obtain the upgraded version before I obtain the original version. It's not the only case of "finding the second option before the first option" I've encountered however, as I have also skipped over engine choices before (like in a previous British playthrough, I somehow skipped over Diesel 1 and unlocked Diesel 2). While I'm not going to complain about getting the better technology sooner...I still feel like things should progress logically. How are you supposed to get a Mk 2 gun, when you don't even have a Mk 1 gun to upgrade/improve? Not to mention, since I already had the Mk 2 guns unlocked, there was an entire cycle of research wasted on the "big guns" category to unlock the 16 inch Mk 1 guns that could have been used to research something like 14 inch Mk 3s, or 15 inch Mk 2s...because researching the "obsolete" version is a waste (once you upgrade to the Mk 2s, you can't go back to the Mk 1s). Kinda funny, but might need some work...unless there is a small chance that when you have your research slider set very high, you have a certain chance to develop the "better" tech purely down to you're throwing so much money into R&D.

The second one is how some technologies aren't available until well after they were historically used. Take the Nevada class battleships for example: built in 1914, and had an "all or nothing" armor scheme. Now, depending on when I start the campaign and what my tech levels are starting out in a new campaign...I can maybe get the AoN armor scheme sometime in the 1920s. I personally think that since the first instance of the all or nothing armor scheme was seen in 1914, it should be available around 1914...give or take a year or two. If the reason that the AoN armor scheme takes a while to unlock is because the AoN scheme wasn't standard until later or it's a balancing/gameplay thing (since the AoN citadel is listed as Citadel V in game, arguably the best citadel option) and having the AoN citadel that early in a campaign causes issues or something...then I guess I can understand. But, if it isn't due to one of those two reasons...I personally think that certain tech upgrades should be available/able to researched closer to the years they first saw use or were introduced.

Edited by HistoricalAccuracyMan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/20/2022 at 7:38 PM, Admiral Donuts said:

I rather think with the addition of even more technologies to research it warrants a 4th focus in research.

You can add an additional focus by editing the resources.assets. The research settings are just entries in a big csv inside the file. e.g. "sed -re 's/(tech_priorities),3,/\1,4,/' -i resources.assets"

You can also see the algorithm the game uses to calculate tech research rates at https://www.desmos.com/calculator/v2kyqokmeb . The specific values seem to be out of date though. The max boost is now 110, a is 3.8, and possibly other differences exist.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/27/2022 at 5:55 PM, anonusername said:

You can add an additional focus by editing the resources.assets. The research settings are just entries in a big csv inside the file. e.g. "sed -re 's/(tech_priorities),3,/\1,4,/' -i resources.assets"

You can also see the algorithm the game uses to calculate tech research rates at https://www.desmos.com/calculator/v2kyqokmeb . The specific values seem to be out of date though. The max boost is now 110, a is 3.8, and possibly other differences exist.

what software is required to do that (or better how do you do that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, my R&D policy is quite simple:
At start:
- R&D funds slider to max
- Focus on Radar until radar 1 is discovered.
- Focus on Sonar until sonar 2 is discovered.
- Focus on big guns until 12''Mk5 and 15''Mk3 are discovered. 
When a focus becomes available:
- Focus on cruisers until last battle cruiser hull is discovered.

I'll be please if future R&D system evolutions break this policy and force me to think a little more about it. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 10/31/2022 at 10:13 AM, Mundus_Dog said:

what software is required to do that (or better how do you do that?

I did it with the GNU stream editor (sed), but other sed implementations should also work. You could probably make the changes in Notepad++ or another high quality text editor as well. (https://www.gnu.org/software/sed/manual/sed.html)

"sed -re 's/(tech_priorities),3,/\1,4,/' -i resources.assets" is the exact command I ran for increasing the number of priorities.

On 10/31/2022 at 12:01 PM, Lastreaumont said:

Actually, my R&D policy is quite simple:
At start:
- R&D funds slider to max
- Focus on Radar until radar 1 is discovered.
- Focus on Sonar until sonar 2 is discovered.
- Focus on big guns until 12''Mk5 and 15''Mk3 are discovered. 
When a focus becomes available:
- Focus on cruisers until last battle cruiser hull is discovered.

I'll be please if future R&D system evolutions break this policy and force me to think a little more about it. 
 

There is a big research penalty for being ahead of time on tech, so it is worthwhile to spread around research a bit.

Edited by anonusername
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, anonusername said:

There is a big research penalty for being ahead of time on tech, so it is worthwhile to spread around research a bit.

I know, but radar is so much usefull. I stopped counting the battles where I can't find the ennemy because I only know it is somewhere in the NE, especially since the AI learnt again fleeing can be a good option to survive. 
Idem for sonar. Torpedoes still stay the worst threat for my ships. And, bonus, we have at the same time what we need to change our DD into efficient submarine hunters. 
Conclusion: the research penalty seems not to be big enough, (and also hard to evaluate because not clearly displayed on research screen). Or maybe  the problem is ships with 1910 tech everywhere except in radar/sonar/main guns seem to outclass regular 1925 ships without efforts.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Lastreaumont said:

I know, but radar is so much usefull. I stopped counting the battles where I can't find the ennemy because I only know it is somewhere in the NE, especially since the AI learnt again fleeing can be a good option to survive. 
Idem for sonar. Torpedoes still stay the worst threat for my ships. And, bonus, we have at the same time what we need to change our DD into efficient submarine hunters. 
Conclusion: the research penalty seems not to be big enough, (and also hard to evaluate because not clearly displayed on research screen). Or maybe  the problem is ships with 1910 tech everywhere except in radar/sonar/main guns seem to outclass regular 1925 ships without efforts.  

I don't remember the exact research penalty, but it is something like a 1/2 or 2/3 reduction for being 5 years ahead, scaled as you approach that point. There is also a boost for being behind in tech, up to double speed at 10 years behind IIRC. The reduction is worse than it sounds because there is maximum "amount" of monthly research which you cannot exceed, and the limit is calculated prior to taking out the penalty. Radar is useful enough it might be worthwhile, but it's definitely not without some drawbacks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...