>>>v1.09+ Feedback<<<

[Schmitty21]

Okay, I've gotten to around 1930 in an 1890 game with China. One thing I can say for sure, the economy is screwy. I've won every war, and increased my GDP from dead last to the top 4. I can barely maintain a fleet of older refit ships and do research. Any money I win in a war is immediately spent buying off every other country to get 5 minutes of peace. Introducing GDP gains for captured territories might help but I think it needs balancing. Japan is dead last for GDP due to constantly being at war with everyone and they somehow manage to build massive BB's and BC's. There should be more monetary punishment for having a low prestige or high unrest. Especially on the AI.

Also, diplomacy needs a lot of work. Defeated countries shouldn't be so eager to jump back into war. And countries with barely any ships because they badly lost a war shouldn't be picking fights. Also, if a country is at war with say, 4 other countries, why are they picking fights with a 5th? There needs to be more mechanics for countries to stay out of conflicts while they lick their wounds, and to be smarter about who they engage with.

One bug I'm seeing persistently is if a damaged ship is detached from a formation it instantly swerves hard and stops dead. If you reattach it to the division it will start moving again.

Some Quality of Life requests;

Disable mouse move clicks when alt or shift are held down. I keep accidently turning my divisions when I'm trying to designate targets.

Add buttons to scroll through the different wars going on to the top left war UI. Have it default to whatever war the player is involved in. I want to know how many ships my enemy has left without going to the politics tab.

General requests;

Data on other nation's ships would be nice so I know what I should be building. It could be as simple as that little side/top view infographic from the shipyard.

I'll throw my hat in with those that want the option to upgrade our guns on refit.

A column in the ship design UI for number of ships of that class in the fleet.

Allow us to conquer all colonial possessions. It looks like Tsingtao and some other ones aren't conquerable. Also, if we can take Vladivostok from the Russians it would reduce the wars from ship movement. Japan could also be split into three provinces with Okinawa and Hokkaido separated from Kyushu/Honshu.

Overall the game is moving in a pretty good direction and I've really enjoyed this campaign, though the constant wars with Russia and Japan is getting grating. And the cross Pacific battles with the US are very annoying with the map split. Keep it up the excellent work, every patch is making it better and better.

Edited November 15, 2022 by Schmitty21

[Admiral Donuts]

42 minutes ago, Schmitty21 said:

Okay, I've gotten to around 1930 in an 1890 game with China. One thing I can say for sure, the economy is screwy. I've won every war, and increased my GDP from dead last to the top 4. I can barely maintain a fleet of older refit ships and do research. Any money I win in a war is immediately spent buying off every other country to get 5 minutes of peace. Introducing GDP gains for captured territories might help but I think it needs balancing. Japan is dead last for GDP due to constantly being at war with everyone and they somehow manage to build massive BB's and BC's. There should be more monetary punishment for having a low prestige or high unrest. Especially on the AI.

Ran into the same thing with my Japan campaign. Top economy by far, and pulling +$100 million per month while at war. Suddenly, I'm at -$100 million. And I could not recover.

[SDGMusic96]

Getting a new bug that really hampers my QOL in campaign.... Divisions will all of a sudden reduce speed from top or cruising speed, to >7kn. Unable to increase speed as a division after that. 

[Makko]

A couple issues with territories:

• A tiny colony in a different sea region lets you get transport-massacred.

How am I suddenly losing 12 transports a month when I have one tiny port in the south Atlantic???? There should be a maximum amount of transport losses based off of the size of your ports in a region, and defending your shipping should be proportional to that total amount. IE you only need a few destroyers in your 5000 ton port island halfway across the world to stop your maximum of one transport loss a month. 

• Territories cannot be used as real bases for ships

I got Malta and Tunis as Austria, and was excited to base my ships there, unfortunately if they are damaged they leave and go back to my three home ports. What is the point of these ports if they function no differently than having your ships in the open ocean lol

[beepboop6]

The bug where a war continues even if you click sign a peace treaty still exists

[Fangoriously]

This seems a rather generousness payout of VP for... nothing happening.

An even more generous payout for slightly more than nothing happening. Ive seen much lower payouts for submarine actions against other nations its, just vs the french that seems to be paying out points like this.

Also why is match making like this even possible. I can hardly get the AI to generate a battle when i role up with a  "doom stack" of 2 BBs or BCs.

[Makko]

58 minutes ago, beepboop6 said:

The bug where a war continues even if you click sign a peace treaty still exists

Is this a bug? 

 

I thought it was just your government asking for your recommendation, you're the Navy you can't sign a peace treaty on your own.

[Ribba]

The best feedback I can give is; stop adding features and start fixing all the features that's already in the game, but don't work properly. This tread is full of things you should be prioritizing prior to start adding new features. 

The campaign, in my opinion, is currently (v1.09.2) unplayable. I've started two campaigns, one with Germany and one with Japan, and both times the same thing happens which ruins the playability of the campaign. 

The first thing is that Russia moves every ship to the northeast Asian theater. Every. Single. Ship. 

First, as Germany, I thought that would benefit me massively as a potential exploit. But in reality, when the inevitable war with Russia started, there was nothing I could do. They sunk a bunch of my transports in the northeastern Asia. I sunk none of their (apparently, they have none in the Baltic or North Sea, but I have a LOT in northeastern Asia). So they generated a massive amount of VP while I got a few VP from sinking those ships built in the Baltic who were in transit to the northeastern Asia. 

So Russia need some big fixes. 

The second is that the AI very often put all their ships in one single task force. This is something that never, ever happens in real life. And putting together big task force and sailing them almost to the shore of another country, it would generate an insane amount of tension. But, as Japan, having every single Chinees ship right outside Maizuru, no one in the Japanese government cared. They were more interested in participating in a regatta in Spain. If a country moves big fleets to the coast of another country, it should immediately trigger an event where that government ask the opinion on how to handle this situation. Another thing that should be addressed with the AI, or if the player for that sake puts together big task forces, it the risk of accidents. Basically, the more ships you put together, the bigger the risk for accidents to happen, with the consequence of getting ships damaged or even losing ships. 

Also, even in peace time, the AI had all their ships out on sea, which also is very unrealistic since it would be extremely expensive and big burden on the ships and crew doing this month after month. So ships should take wear and tear when they are out at sea. So, even it's another feature, attrition damage to ships should be implemented in the game if it isn't (I haven't noticed it).

Edited November 15, 2022 by Ribba

[Schmitty21]

32 minutes ago, Ribba said:

The best feedback I can give is; stop adding features and start fixing all the features that's already in the game, but don't work properly. This tread is full of things you should be prioritizing prior to start adding new features. 

The campaign, in my opinion, is currently (v1.09.2) unplayable. I've started two campaigns, one with Germany and one with Japan, and both times the same thing happens which ruins the playability of the campaign. 

The first thing is that Russia moves every ship to the northeast Asian theater. Every. Single. Ship. 

First, as Germany, I thought that would benefit me massively as a potential exploit. But in reality, when the inevitable war with Russia started, there was nothing I could do. They sunk a bunch of my transports in the northeastern Asia. I sunk none of their (apparently, they have none in the Baltic or North Sea, but I have a LOT in northeastern Asia). So they generated a massive amount of VP while I got a few VP from sinking those ships built in the Baltic who were in transit to the northeastern Asia. 

So Russia need some big fixes. 

The second is that the AI very often put all their ships in one single task force. This is something that never, ever happens in real life. And putting together big task force and sailing them almost to the shore of another country, it would generate an insane amount of tension. But, as Japan, having every single Chinees ship right outside Maizuru, no one in the Japanese government cared. They were more interested in participating in a regatta in Spain. If a country moves big fleets to the coast of another country, it should immediately trigger an event where that government ask the opinion on how to handle this situation. Another thing that should be addressed with the AI, or if the player for that sake puts together big task forces, it the risk of accidents. Basically, the more ships you put together, the bigger the risk for accidents to happen, with the consequence of getting ships damaged or even losing ships. 

Also, even in peace time, the AI had all their ships out on sea, which also is very unrealistic since it would be extremely expensive and big burden on the ships and crew doing this month after month. So ships should take wear and tear when they are out at sea. So, even it's another feature, attrition damage to ships should be implemented in the game if it isn't (I haven't noticed it).

Are you sure you're on the latest version? The last patch specifically addressed the large task force issues. I don't see that happening in my campaign.

[Lima]

5 hours ago, Schmitty21 said:

Okay, I've gotten to around 1930 in an 1890 game with China. One thing I can say for sure, the economy is screwy. I've won every war, and increased my GDP from dead last to the top 4. I can barely maintain a fleet of older refit ships and do research. Any money I win in a war is immediately spent buying off every other country to get 5 minutes of peace. Introducing GDP gains for captured territories might help but I think it needs balancing. Japan is dead last for GDP due to constantly being at war with everyone and they somehow manage to build massive BB's and BC's. There should be more monetary punishment for having a low prestige or high unrest. Especially on the AI.

The economy works very simply - at the beginning of the game you get a GDP growth rate and it never changes. You can only worsen the enemy's situation by sinking a lot of transports for them. War reparations are just a joke now. In this campaign (1890-1922) I (Russia) initially had the highest GDP growth, Italy had the second, and Germany had the third. (adjusted for the war, this is still the case).

So yes, the economy needs to be given some dynamics. It's just disappointing that if you win all the wars, but you're initially unlucky that you'll never become economically top 1.

[Lima]

3 hours ago, Makko said:

A couple issues with territories:

• A tiny colony in a different sea region lets you get transport-massacred.

How am I suddenly losing 12 transports a month when I have one tiny port in the south Atlantic???? There should be a maximum amount of transport losses based off of the size of your ports in a region, and defending your shipping should be proportional to that total amount. IE you only need a few destroyers in your 5000 ton port island halfway across the world to stop your maximum of one transport loss a month. 

• Territories cannot be used as real bases for ships

I got Malta and Tunis as Austria, and was excited to base my ships there, unfortunately if they are damaged they leave and go back to my three home ports. What is the point of these ports if they function no differently than having your ships in the open ocean lol

For God's sake, yes. We need to somehow limit the loss of transports, it's just ridiculous to lose dozens because of some islands (poor Brits).

As for the ports in the new territories, it works for me. Ships assigned to them always return home from battles, sometimes even damaged task forces enter new ports.

[Schmitty21]

29 minutes ago, Lima said:

The economy works very simply - at the beginning of the game you get a GDP growth rate and it never changes. You can only worsen the enemy's situation by sinking a lot of transports for them. War reparations are just a joke now. In this campaign (1890-1922) I (Russia) initially had the highest GDP growth, Italy had the second, and Germany had the third. (adjusted for the war, this is still the case).

So yes, the economy needs to be given some dynamics. It's just disappointing that if you win all the wars, but you're initially unlucky that you'll never become economically top 1.

There are events that change GDP so I'm not sure why you're saying it never changes.

[Pappystein]

47 minutes ago, Lima said:

For God's sake, yes. We need to somehow limit the loss of transports, it's just ridiculous to lose dozens because of some islands (poor Brits).

As for the ports in the new territories, it works for me. Ships assigned to them always return home from battles, sometimes even damaged task forces enter new ports.

Heck, Allowing new production Torpedo boats... and the delivery of new ships to ANY port under control at time of completion (as part of it's commissioning process) would go a long way to solving this problem.   Torpedo boats don't die with the birth of the Torpedo boat destroyer... rather they evolve into 4 distinct types of ships.   The modern MAS/PT/Farmile type Torpedo boat which is literally a boat with a couple (4) torpedoes and maybe a couple guns.   The Same group of hulls produced GUN boats... and then the Germans and Japanese both built larger types of Torpedo Boats .  

 

[Admiral Donuts]

New campaign, US 1890. It's 1906, at war with both Russia and China.

I have mine laying 4 and at least half a dozen of those CLs in Balboa. The Russians and Chinese both, on the same turn, with a 24 ship task force at the Canal, just passed through both ends of it. Took no damage from mines, were not intercepted. You would think they would be both. I'm checking the map and there are 0 minefields being layed anywhere my mine-layers are parked.

[Ribba]

2 hours ago, Schmitty21 said:

Are you sure you're on the latest version? The last patch specifically addressed the large task force issues. I don't see that happening in my campaign.

I'm on 1.09.2 Live. 

[Lima]

3 hours ago, Schmitty21 said:

There are events that change GDP so I'm not sure why you're saying it never changes.

GDP growth rate. +0.5XXXX thing. Events change the total number of GDP.

[Marshall99]

There is a bug in divisions.

I had two ships. A pre dreadnought BB and a CL. The BB took one heavy damage, so the CL wanted to lead the division. I did not wanted this, so I detached the BB. It just stopped moving. The speed was 0. And the CL also stopped. When I attached them again, they started moving again.

This is a major gamebreaking bug. This have to be solved as soon as possible. I reported this issue via in game. 

And this wasn't the first time I experienced this bug. My grand dreadnought battleship almost sunk because of this issue. 

[Abuse_Claws]

66% fore weight offset seems like a bit of an overkill
And it's not like stuff can't be moved further back easily
Such design flaws make enemy ships pretty much toothless, which is kind of sad

[aradragoon]

17 hours ago, Skeksis said:

What's needed is another level of alliance, ‘Military Pack’, where units in each other’s territory doesn’t raise tension.

So, if have alliance for x months then a Military Pack is offered:

E.g.

• 3 Months – 100, 000, 000.
• 6 Months – 250, 000, 000.
• 12 Months – 450, 000, 000.

I think that would help but not be enough to make alliances feel fully integrated into the game. Having this allow resupply and docking at allied bases would be good, maybe missions where the game asks you to move a fleet to patrol along with an ally or something. Even so I think treaties are a must.

[Abuse_Claws]

Maybe someone can explain this one to me, but I think it might be a bug of some kind.

So for my stats (Ally Dmg) I understand that the average thickness of armor penetrated by my shells was 8.5", and when adjusted for armor quality and hit angle it rises to 13.4", which makes sense.

What certainly doesn't is that for the AI (Enemy Dmg), the average thickness of armor (15.8") was somehow "effectively" reduced to 1.2" (effective indeed!).

Maybe I'm reading it wrong? 
Here,

[Abuse_Claws]

Aaand yet another issue (seemingly?)
So I have noticed that training level for all my ships except two (two BBs were somehow spared by this stupidity plague) just plunged to Cadets
Including the ships that just annihilated a US doomstack of 8 BBs and like 3 dozen smaller ships
Including the 'museum' 1890 CL that I have on "defend" role for literally decades (since mothballing doesn't work anymore and I don't want to scrap it, as it did some amazing work in its time)
What's even more weird, I still have 4,623 men in the crew pool... And their training level is 'Cadets' as well. What??? Isn't Cadets basically "untrained" in this game? Why are those men considered my crew pool if they are not trained?

Edit: I have re-read the tooltips in-game and I understand now that this might not be a bug, as I did reduce the crew training funds drastically in the last few months. But I still don't understand how veterans turn into cadets in a matter of months

Edited November 15, 2022 by Abuse_Claws

[neph]

18 hours ago, Skeksis said:

What's needed is another level of alliance, ‘Military Pack’, where units in each other’s territory doesn’t raise tension.

So, if have alliance for x months then a Military Pack is offered:

E.g.

• 3 Months – 100, 000, 000.
• 6 Months – 250, 000, 000.
• 12 Months – 450, 000, 000.

Pact?

[Lima]

How one small detail can change everything

Before fixing VP, I had to sink hundreds of ships in long wars, at the end of which a RNG peace agreement awaited.

Now I don't really care about the RNG of the peace agreement, because I know that I won't have to fight again for several years for some island.

The game has become 200% better.

[Skeksis]

IMO.

BBs/large hulls are still turning on a dime. It’s related to Auto-Avoid Torps, it enables ships to turn in a smaller radius than designed capability, often what is physically impossible, especially prevalent when AI avoiding player torps. Also damaged engines/rudder does not affect or diminish Auto-Avoid. Totally unrealistic and very damaging to the game’s image, i.e. looks too arcady. Also weakens AI when player turns on.

AI places/designs one off caliber guns and/or multiple calibers, breaks game maker own rules of shell splashes accuracy effect and penalties apply. Weaken AI.

AI designing superfast CA speedboats, sacrificing armor/survivability, frustrating to hit and when hit, too easily destroyed and AI is penalized by fast turns. Weaken AI, Unrealistic, Image damaging.

Lone AI with full rudder damage keeps turning away from pursuers. Hmm....what can you say? Some things have been around for so long that they seem part of the scenery! Image damaging.

VPs added to tally for pre battle damage or unrelated damage. Just frustrating.

DDs or minesweeping tech is not working or having minimal effect, player side. If working as intended then we need info or event message to say, “x number of mines cleared by #”, i.e. ships were saved!

AI not investing in minesweeping tech for designs, inclusion should not be minimized. AI suffering huge losses. Also weakens battle AI – as and when entering battle after such damage.

BBs only TF not dying to submarine (x3) TF. This is very Unrealistic.

DD TF vs SS TF, seems randomized, DDs should have decisive advantage. Maybe ASW not working fully, yet.

We can't see the damage of our ships in the world view pre mission/ship info tab. We need to know this for selecting options, especially needed post turn with ‘meetings’ but we are lockout of viewing such general information.

Edited November 15, 2022 by Skeksis

[Pappystein]

13 hours ago, Schmitty21 said:

Are you sure you're on the latest version? The last patch specifically addressed the large task force issues. I don't see that happening in my campaign.

A bit of followup.   I too am on latest version.  I do not see many of the issues other complain about but I still have to fight doomstacks of enemy ships (new and pre-existing campaign)  In every case the doomstack has been less than 60 ships but it still has been 60 ships.   So No longer am I seeing 300 ship TGs... just 60ship ones