>>>v1.09+ Feedback<<<

[Lima]

19 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:

The problem of those "unfinished" ships is not related to German Engineering or general AI engineering. It seems that at some time you interrupted a game turn because it was taking too long (closed and restarted the game)? Then some ships may have saved themselves in this condition, so when you restarted the campaign, they became permanently broken and will cause turn lags in all subsequent turns.
It would help very much to know if this was the case.

The problem of the bugged ships has been solved, since they are now dead. I have been running this campaign since 1.09.1 and I didn't have any critical freezes, so I didn't interrupt the turn. However, there were several crashes along the turns. I think considering that I'm playing from 1.09.1 and for 40 game years, one bugged class of ships is not so bad. It wouldn't matter at all if auto-resolve was better.

I understand that this is a bugged ship problem is not related to German Engineering. However, German engineering is a problem. In every campaign except the one I played for them, Germany is very weak. They are incredibly behind in technology. Austria and Japan, with much worse economies, are able to produce quite good ships, but German ships are just scrap metal.

Edited November 23, 2022 by Lima
typo

[Admiral Donuts]

I have not seen a free VP issue in this campaign. Currently 1927 in an 1890 campaign.

[Nick Thomadis]

1 hour ago, Admiral Donuts said:

I have not seen a free VP issue in this campaign. Currently 1927 in an 1890 campaign.

Wow, impressive progress from yesterday, or you continued an old campaign?

1 hour ago, Lima said:

The problem of the bugged ships has been solved, since they are now dead. I have been running this campaign since 1.09.1 and I didn't have any critical freezes, so I didn't interrupt the turn. However, there were several crashes along the turns. I think considering that I'm playing from 1.09.1 and for 40 game years, one bugged class of ships is not so bad. It wouldn't matter at all if auto-resolve was better.

I understand that this is a bugged ship problem is not related to German Engineering. However, German engineering is a problem. In every campaign except the one I played for them, Germany is very weak. They are incredibly behind in technology. Austria and Japan, with much worse economies, are able to produce quite good ships, but German ships are just scrap metal.

Maybe Germany has been economically strangled and cannot keep up with the other nations' technology? The upcoming new feature -different government types- will help army based nations to handle more effectively multiple wars.

[Admiral Donuts]

37 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:

Wow, impressive progress from yesterday, or you continued an old campaign?

Maybe Germany has been economically strangled and cannot keep up with the rest nation technology? The upcoming new feature -different government types- will help army based nations to handle more effectively multiple wars.

Yeah I've been hammering them out. I really have nothing better to do as I'm disabled. This was a continuation of the campaign I started the day before the patch.

This German campaign, I've been in 3 separate wars with Russia, China and Japan, and 1 with the US, 1 with AH. They've all been short ones. I haven't been in a cycle of long wars since the change in VP gain which I am enjoying immensely.

So, really, nothing that would strain the economy, and never a blockade in sight. I control 26 territories.

It would happen this way...at war, seeing +$100 million or more positive monthly budget and then next turn, -$100 million and then on for many years like that. No change in anything that I could imagine would cause that. It sometimes happens at peace as well. I've even had my entire fleet )
54 surface ships) in being while at war, and crew training turned all the way down and nothing I do can change me from losing money even at war. I traditionally have played the campaigns as boost the GDP at all costs, ignore fleet budget. Since GDP is tied with that anyway, the rewards are huge. I'll have everything turned up during peacetime and still seeing +$25 million monthly budget typically.

But then - something changes, without notification, and even in a condition where I might be seeing +20% growth with the number one GDP in the world I'm bleeding money suddenly.

I would also mention - this isn't the only time it's happened. I've seen it several times before and multiple times in a given campaign.

 

 

Edited November 23, 2022 by Admiral Donuts

[Lima]

9 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:

Wow, impressive progress from yesterday, or you continued an old campaign?

Maybe Germany has been economically strangled and cannot keep up with the rest nation technology? The upcoming new feature -different government types- will help army based nations to handle more effectively multiple wars.

That's the thing, Germany don't have any problems in the economy. In fact, they are the fourth power in the world (economically). But Germany has "behind" technology and I see it in every campaign. Because of the constant wars with me, Japan is in a terrible condition ($15.215.050.000 GDP at 1932), however, Japan has "average" technology and pretty good designs.

Just like with Germany, I haven't been at war with Italy for a very long time (the last war was in 1897-1900). Italy does not have a single pro-dreadnought in the fleet, there were only a few old cruisers. The new ships are not bad.

After the complete destruction of its fleet, Germany has built new ships, and they are simply terrible. These are dreadnoughts with mk1 guns, slow cruisers and just incredibly bad destroyers. All these ships are very cheap, you can't even get a lot of VP for them.

For example, here's how many points are given for the German fleet

And for the Austrian (they also has "behind" technology).

[Admiral Donuts]

Same campaign reloaded after last hang up, had to task manager out while forming up task forces for battle.

[Abuse_Claws]

At last!

A while ago (actually, it was in the 1.09 beta feedback thread) I posted about this bug where auto-generated names of TBs and DDs (and even submarines, as it later turned out) made their way to the ship name pool. And I joked about one day seeing a BB with a DD/TB name. Well, the day has come!

[Admiral Donuts]

A quick update, I had to fight that battle 3 times each time failing and having to dump the game from task manager. The 4th I noticed after deciding to auto resolve it and move on, that my entire force were all reinforcements (R). I don't know if that matters, but I thought I would toss it in there to help out.

[Eirchirfir]

25 minutes ago, Admiral Donuts said:

A quick update, I had to fight that battle 3 times each time failing and having to dump the game from task manager. The 4th I noticed after deciding to auto resolve it and move on, that my entire force were all reinforcements (R). I don't know if that matters, but I thought I would toss it in there to help out.

It has been some time seens I have encotered this bug as it is rare.

The reason that you could not fight the battle was because your entire force was in (R) state.

There most be at least 1 ship which is not in the (R) state to fight battles manuely. If the entire force is in the (R) state then the game get stuck trying to load none (R) state ships which does not exist in the battle so it searches for somehing which does in this case not exist.

To get around this bug is simpely to use auto-resolve which you did or ingonre the mission if possbile.

[Lima]

5 hours ago, Abuse_Claws said:

At last!

A while ago (actually, it was in the 1.09 beta feedback thread) I posted about this bug where auto-generated names of TBs and DDs (and even submarines, as it later turned out) made their way to the ship name pool. And I joked about one day seeing a BB with a DD/TB name. Well, the day has come!

For a long time, most of my fleet looks like this. I just want to have different common names for different classes (CA-1/DD-1) since at the moment I'm confused in this pile of "P".

I'll finish a couple more wars and rename all this mess. Since I'm not too good at naming the Russian fleet, I'll make half of the fleet Spanish and Italian.

[neph]

Behold, my cruiser. I've had it for 7 years, since the start of the 1910 campaign.

https://imgur.com/5wkNWJB

27 million (after 3? refits?), 10x9.2" broadside. 27 kts. 14 kilotons.

What else do we got?

Barbette III. Antitorp II. Double hulls. Antiflood II.

Now wait! This is one of those missions where the French came along. The brought a battlecruiser. Let's see what it looks like...

Wait, that's my ship! Except it costs 33 million. And it displaces 20 kilotons. And it has a 37% weight offset (SAD!)

What else does it have?

Antitorp I. Standard bulkheads. Antiflood I. Citadel I (?!?!).

AI--this is a battlecruiser that's as heavy as my cruiser & costs more & is worse! Why & how

[neph]

Just now, neph said:

Behold, my cruiser. I've had it for 7 years, since the start of the 1910 campaign.

https://imgur.com/5wkNWJB

27 million (after 3? refits?), 10x9.2" broadside. 27 kts. 14 kilotons.

What else do we got?

Barbette III. Antitorp II. Double hulls. Antiflood II.

Now wait! This is one of those missions where the French came along. The brought a battlecruiser. Let's see what it looks like...

Wait, that's my ship! Except it costs 33 million. And it displaces 20 kilotons. And it has a 37% weight offset (SAD!)

What else does it have?

Antitorp I. Standard bulkheads. Antiflood I. Citadel I (?!?!).

AI--this is a battlecruiser that's as heavy as my cruiser & costs more & is worse! Why & how

By all other standards, I'm nitpicking like crazy. This might be the best AI design I've seen in a while. It doesn't have a mixed main battery. It doesn't go crazy on secondaries. It's got good speed & good protection (forgot to show that--it's 5"x11"x4", which is better than my 4"x8"x4", albeit I've got a 3" inner belt)... and yet...

[Suribachi]

Why is Division 2 always the flagship and not Division 1?  On that note, why is there no icon in the division cards showing that it is the division containing the flagship?

[Lima]

Designer report - one big offset and two minor problems

I don't usually make light cruisers, but here I decided to make one. And immediately regretted it. Russia only have this modern CL hull, and it's just a nightmare. Making this thing beautiful and combat-ready is just incredibly difficult (fore weight offset hello). On the hulls of other nations, it is possible to place 4 guns of the main caliber without any problems + secondaries + torpedos. Yes, I know that Italy and France have such a hull, but they also have other hulls.

Also, 152mm guns weigh less than 127mm guns (all mk5)

Advanced mines V weighs nothing

[Grizli60rus]

18 hours ago, Lima said:

Designer report - one big offset

The same problem is on the hull of the battleship 5. The screenshot shows that the armor of the limbs is the same, the engine room is shifted to the stern, there are 2 towers of the main caliber on the stern, but still 55% overweight on the bow!
Changing the length of the ship has almost no effect on this. And even adding 300mm of armor to the stern does not allow you to make the ship balanced.
If possible, I ask you to look at and adjust the balance of this very interesting, but now useless ship. Thanks! 

Edited November 25, 2022 by Grizli60rus

[Capilla]

3 hours ago, Grizli60rus said:

The same problem is on the hull of the battleship 5. The screenshot shows that the armor of the limbs is the same, the engine room is shifted to the stern, there are 2 towers of the main caliber on the stern, but still 55% overweight on the bow!
Changing the length of the ship has almost no effect on this. And even adding 300mm of armor to the stern does not allow you to make the ship balanced.
If possible, I ask you to look at and adjust the balance of this very interesting, but now useless ship. Thanks! 

I also think that fore weight offset is one big problem.

One solution (the complicated and bad one) whould be that when you add tonnage to the ship, the size doesnt increase not only at the middle and the back, but also the fore end of the ship. This should increase the distance between the turret and the foremost end of the bow reducing the weight offset. Also, in this hull design, incresing the middle section makes little sense. This is bad because it means messing with all the vissual assets of the hulls and is a huge change. I only mention this to talk about the lack of sense on huge middle section increases on hulls with unusable midsections.

Other option (The most appealing and easy I think) would be to give a natural stern weight offset to the hulls representing the rudder compartment (With the rudder upgrades increasing more this weight, and offset, even more). This would be able to solve the general fore weight offset with most of the hulls without needing to mess with the actual visual models. This makes sense because ships are designed to be balanced at the end of its construction when everyting (main weapons, engine rooms and superstructure) is already placed. Having a perfectly balanced hull at the beggining makes little sense. Most of the work here would be testing designs that looks like real existing ships (trying to keep with historical dimensions, proportions and armor). Once you see a hull having 15% to 25% (this is just an optimistic example) fore weight ofset with all that hull variations, then you know that giving a natural 20% weight offset woud be a huge help for the playerbase. I think most of us like our ships looking good more than covering them with all the guns we can. 

[o Barão]

4 hours ago, Grizli60rus said:

The same problem is on the hull of the battleship 5. The screenshot shows that the armor of the limbs is the same, the engine room is shifted to the stern, there are 2 towers of the main caliber on the stern, but still 55% overweight on the bow!
Changing the length of the ship has almost no effect on this. And even adding 300mm of armor to the stern does not allow you to make the ship balanced.
If possible, I ask you to look at and adjust the balance of this very interesting, but now useless ship. Thanks! 

Remove the bow belt and deck armor and see if you can get a reasonable result.

[Lima]

33 minutes ago, o Barão said:

Remove the bow belt and deck armor and see if you can get a reasonable result.

You can do something as ridiculous as this.

Yes, even such a problematic hull can be "balanced". But at what cost? This is obviously not correct, these components should not be there. And I don't want to play with such a terrible-looking ship (hello CL). AI tries to make ships look like historical ones and very often it turns out 100 fore weight offset.

[Capilla]

For some reason as soon as it reaches MK2 tech, all secondary guns on spanish capital ships become turreted ones. This is a 1892 battleship.

This problem with spanish capital ship secondaries have been there for more than a year and I think it  would be a good idea to solve it. Also the turret design doesnt look from the time period...

[o Barão]

3 hours ago, Lima said:

You can do something as ridiculous as this.

Yes, even such a problematic hull can be "balanced". But at what cost? This is obviously not correct, these components should not be there. And I don't want to play with such a terrible-looking ship (hello CL). AI tries to make ships look like historical ones and very often it turns out 100 fore weight offset.

And In reality is worse. I see it is missing many secondaries in that example. The moment they are placed, it will switch the weight forward even more. This hull IMO only works well with all main guns in the stern. A reverse Richelieu/Dunkerque design pre XX century. Not good.

[Admiral Donuts]

5 minutes ago, o Barão said:

And In reality is worse. I see it is missing many secondaries in that example. The moment they are placed, it will switch the weight forward even more. This hull IMO only works well with all main guns in the stern. A reverse Richelieu/Dunkerque design pre XX century. Not good.

Just retreat every fight. And slow down to cruise.

[Admiral Donuts]

In the Russian technological institute, the battleship 3 hull comes before the battleship 2 hull. I think it's this way in other countries as well.

[Abuse_Claws]

Ah, Spanish ships confidently sailing through the Northwest Passage to the ancient Spanish land of Alaska
I love this game xD

[neph]

Overall, I am hugely impressed by how much better combat feels. Between the changes to HE/AP balance, the continued iterations to barrel length balance, the new "Angle!" mechanics for extreme roll, and the changes to armor damage leading to eventual penetration, UA:D is better than ever.

Thank you, Devs! This game is more fun to play than ever before.

 

Now to the issues I've observed in 1.09.03:

* The tooltip over ports isn't large enough if there is an additional line in the description (for example, if there is a minefield, or so many ships that the list fits on two lines).

* Captured ships will occasionally just vanish from the world menu & the fleet panel without a trace. I had 3 captured US battleships. Suddenly I had two. No clue where they went! The rest of their fleet was still there.

* Cannot refit captured ships. This is because you cannot refit from the "view ship" screen, which, given the tooltip suggesting it, seems like an oversight? It would be far more useful to take battleships from your defeated foe if you could refit their bad designs & make them better. Also, if you accidentally delete a design/the last refit there is no way to ever refit that class of ships again.

* It seems to be possible to have ships get stuck on Meeting, where a small, fast ship is blocking the progress of a large fleet moving in the other direction. The large fleet has enough recon that it will generate the same mission each turn, but the small ship is fast enough to withdraw. This will go on for months until peace is declared. The only way to resolve this is by fighting the battle & doing or receiving enough damage that sufficient ships on either side return to port for repairs. Note that this won't happen if you auto-resolve--it has to be a real battle! In the meantime both sides will just keep getting more damaged and possibly (if far away from supporting ports) lower on fuel.

* Frequently, main guns just won't fire, or only one turret will fire. This is very, very annoying & can't be fixed except by continuously switching targets--they'll fire one shot at a new target & then stop shooting again. Supposedly it is also possible to fix this by switching secondaries completely off, but this seems spotty. It seems to also affect torpedoes, which will similarly not fire.

* Destruction of escorting ships ends the battle, with no chance to kill transports. Suggestion: as soon as all escorts are dead, show the "End Battle" button, but do not require the battle to end.

* AI-controlled ships & ships with "auto avoid" on will rarely come to a complete halt next to sinking ships. You can't get them to move at all. The only way to fix it is to wait for the sinking ship to finish sinking (at which point the ship will start moving again) or to turn auto-avoid off. Enemy ships suffer from this problem as well.

* For some reason, once I could unlock Modernized Dreadnought and I had the shipyards large enough to build it, every single ship (destroyer to older battleship) showed that massive hull, concealing the components & other elements on the ship. You could still view it & refit it, but it was really really hard to see what was going on because the hull blocked everything from view.

* Ending a war frequently results in going to war with the same nation a few months later. Similarly, rejecting an alliance request usually results in another a few months later. The result is that you'll fight the same nations a million times and never have a hope of fighting any others. It seems like this is because once two "sides" have formed, the relation bonus/penalty you get when other nations go to war (you become closer to your friends & further from your enemies) is enough to keep you locked into that side forever, because this happens *every time* somebody goes to war. Could we experiment with war not changing relations between other nations?

* Enemy ship design continues to be awful. Sometimes they make decentish designs. Other times they make monstrosities with 50% fore weight offset & no funnels. What?!?

* Finally, please do not generate unskippable "ambush" and enemy "convoy raid" missions if the 'attackers' are just going to immediately run away--even before visual contact. Having to pursue my ambushers for irl minutes on 10x or 30x speed is absurd, especially when the same mission is generated every single month until there is finally some resolution (see above).

And a few suggestions:
* Forbid changing armor quality, number of hulls, beam/draft, or citadel type when refitting. Make changing armor thickness & anything about turrets >5" (those with barbettes) very expensive (or forbid it entirely!) Right now, it's too easy to never have to build new ships because you can just keep refitting a good design forever. This would make older ships be harder to keep updating.
* Would be really nice if we could refit ships with new types of superstructure & funnels.

Edited November 26, 2022 by neph

[DieselPower]

Update 3 has fixed many issues in the campaign. It is much more stable, it's rare that turns hang up any longer. The only times I have to exit out to the main menu is during submarine encounters when the auto-resolve function refuses to work/

 

Speaking of submarines... they are extremely buggy. If your task force encounters them and encounters damage, many strange things happen. The task force refuses, even after 4 commands, to return to port for repair. Not only that, I lost 2 BB's, with Sonar, in a task force with 6 DD's with full ASW outfits. Then when finally moving the surviving ships back to port, they are forced into a port strike mission...when they have no ammo! So now, we're back to giving away VP's when forced into a battle we don't want with damaged ships.

 

Why would you attack a port with no ammunition?

 

For the next update, please address submarines and mines, or add a function to enable and disable them until things are more polished and understandable.