>>>v1.09+ Feedback<<<

[Admiral Donuts]

Well, my German campaign is gone.

Here's why...

I have 18 destroyers undergoing refit for 9 months.

My economy is once again, by far, the largest in the world, and I can't stop bleeding money. It will bankrupt me, or I must scrap at least half of my 54 ship navy, while at war with 4 nations. Maintenance costs keep rising no matter how many parts I remove from my ships. They are rising uncontrollably. And it's ridiculous. Every tech increase increases maintenance and hull weight and there is no way to stop it. After 1932 my fleet starts to degrade no matter how I handle it.

I finally managed to get into a huge, war ending battle with the Japanese. And it keeps getting stuck while forming divisions. I will not lose ships to BS auto-resolve and the horrific way that the AI handles it.

I am not doing this any more until these game-ending issues are resolved. It's a waste of my time, and getting overly frustrating.

 

 

 

[Lima]

39 minutes ago, Admiral Donuts said:

Well, my German campaign is gone.

Here's why...

I have 18 destroyers undergoing refit for 9 months.

My economy is once again, by far, the largest in the world, and I can't stop bleeding money. It will bankrupt me, or I must scrap at least half of my 54 ship navy, while at war with 4 nations. Maintenance costs keep rising no matter how many parts I remove from my ships. They are rising uncontrollably. And it's ridiculous. Every tech increase increases maintenance and hull weight and there is no way to stop it. After 1932 my fleet starts to degrade no matter how I handle it.

I finally managed to get into a huge, war ending battle with the Japanese. And it keeps getting stuck while forming divisions. I will not lose ships to BS auto-resolve and the horrific way that the AI handles it.

I am not doing this any more until these game-ending issues are resolved. It's a waste of my time, and getting overly frustrating.

And this is the reason why I am so angry about the overweight of my DDs. To refit them, you actually have to rebuild the ship, whereas it takes a couple of months to replace the armor on the battleship. And all this despite the fact that the overweight occurs in a second. Yes, I know that refit time is a known issue, but still.

Well, this is not counting the fact that in the refit window I have to sort out 200+ ships with the names P-xx.

Edited November 29, 2022 by Lima

[Cryadis]

Working on my typical AU campaign (start 1890, hard, selfbuild ships).

We now have the year 1906, but the whole game i was somewhat stuck due my GPD never rising and i am not sure how to influence it except the occationa event.

In this capaign i started out with a GPD at around 11.000.000.000 in 1890, by 1906 i control 16 provinces vs the initial 5, spain and china dissolved and my transports are always either max or close to it, yet my GPD is at about14.000.000.000.

This on one had severly limits on how many ships you cna have (12BB,12CA and 11CL here atm) and Tech budget etc also is a percentage of your naval budget, which in turn is a percentage of your GPD.

AI in this capanain coperatively is doing quite well:

Germany GPD: 40.000.000.000

USA: 38.000.000.000

Italy: 23.600.000.000

British Empire: slightly above 66.000.000.000 (!)

So yeah from my point of view i am doomed to fall behind.

On the other hand i am aware i play on hard, but there we run into a different issue that happened once in my game (and might also have a slim influence on my GPD issue): AI runs about with its hugh blob of a fleet, in this game it was italy i was at war with.

So the Italian blob cruises between Western and Eastern mediterranian and sicne to blob is so bigh they of course blokade. Issue is, i gather my own (smaller, but possibly better blob) in the hopes to catch their blob.

It took about 8 turns praying to the mission gods (all while getting blokaded off and on) to finally get the mission you can fight them. --> If you get blokaded the player should have the possibility to break it by fighting.

 

Small sidenot on these AI blobs:

They never / hardly ever seem to return to port. So in this case the Italian ships where not woefully outdated, even worse: most of them had no ammo ?!

 

I really like the game aspect of designing ships and then leading them in battles (and tbh i did the grafics), however from a gameplay point of the the capaign really needs some more work.

Also i am really curious about the upcomming stuff in the next version (in the hopes that the gameplay aspect gets improved).

[Cryadis]

Oh and some logical inconsistency regarding starting and especially ending wars:

on one hand the game does not give you a direct say when war or peace happens, but on the other hand you are free to park your fleets around the globe to generate tensions... that is if your nation is not too loved by your prferred target, in that case you are doomed to peace

[o Barão]

- deleted -

Edited November 29, 2022 by o Barão

[Aruon]

doing/Just did a 1890-1895 Japan campaign (custom-built navies). it was... interesting:

 

Japan: Very underpowered, I could only initially build to about a third of the Chinese navy, let alone the gigantic Russian pacific navy.

the seemingly only reliable way to survive without getting nuked by the Chinese and Russians was initially to either limit/mothball my navy or hide them by the Spanish islands and irritate the spanish.

 

eventually got into a war with Russia as the whole world went to war with each other and was blockaded for a solid year with my research and crew budgets nearly zeroed to stay alive.

 

my new mega-navy (now only about 1/3rd of the Russians) is built and worked up... and i find out that crew training of green is about a billion times more effective than cadets.

 

bring my entire navy into battle with the entire Russian navy and their cadet-trained navy...

aaaaaaaand it's a completely one-sided slaughter... against mainly 1-3 numerical odds save for torpedo boats... sure.

 

oh and the world war going on in the background- both China and the UK governments have fully collapsed due to being super-blockaded by the Franco-German-Spanish alliance...

uhhhh. what happens now? any way to claim territory? any rebuilding of their territory? because if not than this campaign is over. 

 

it seems that cadet-level training largely means "nobody home" for combat effectiveness even against Green-level training, so that either needs to be buffed, or Green nerfed

Japan has about half its needed starting GDP (at least for a player start)

there needs to be an auto-surrender for utterly defeated AI nations.

 

still a fascinating campaign though!

[neph]

How did my funds suddenly get so negative? Is it related to a large battle putting many of my ships into repair at the same time? I've been running a deficit for a while, but I had a good, >500,000,000 dollar buffer that suddenly vanished at the end of this turn.

Edited November 30, 2022 by neph

[Lima]

1 hour ago, neph said:

How did my funds suddenly get so negative? Is it related to a large battle putting many of my ships into repair at the same time? I've been running a deficit for a while, but I had a good, >500,000,000 dollar buffer that suddenly vanished at the end of this turn.

Ship repairs cost a LOT +fuel/ammo, it is better to have a cushion of monetary reserve before the war.

[Draco]

I think there should be an option to play a weekly campaign instead of a monthly one.
It feels weird when it takes upwards of four months for a taskforce to travel from europe to asia, plus I've seen entire years go by just trying to consolidate my taskforces to take on doomfleets and such... the campaigns are over too fast and not enough stuff has time to happen in them.

[neph]

6 hours ago, Lima said:

Ship repairs cost a LOT +fuel/ammo, it is better to have a cushion of monetary reserve before the war.

Did you read what I wrote? I had a half-billion dollar reserve that, in the time between starting a turn, fighting battles, and ending a return, went negative. I wasn't aware there were any instant costs--I expect this is working as intended but it is unexpected & poorly communicated what & why is going on.

[Lima]

20 minutes ago, neph said:

Did you read what I wrote? I had a half-billion dollar reserve that, in the time between starting a turn, fighting battles, and ending a return, went negative. I wasn't aware there were any instant costs--I expect this is working as intended but it is unexpected & poorly communicated what & why is going on.

That is, half-billion not that much honestly. I 've had - a billion+ after major battles.

But if I remember correctly, I had a bug when the money went to -99.999.999.999, that was once in 1.07.

[Eirchirfir]

So I just fought a battle and noticed that two CL shared the same name.

I do think I know what might have happed to cause two diffrent ships to share the same name.

1. The first thing that happed was a new CL-class was designed named Oryol-Class.

2. Then a new ship of the priveuse class of CL was laid down with the name Oryol.

3. After that the first of the Oryol-Class CL was laid down which whould have been given the name of the class which whould have been Oryol.

4. The russian navy now have two diffrent CLs with the same name.

This is the most likey thing which caused the ships to end up with the same name. Yet it mattered little as both ship whould be sunk in the battle with the rest of the task force.

Whatever caused the cruisers to have the same name so is it still better then nations running out of names and just giving random numbers to their ship for names.

[Aruon]

3 hours ago, Eirchirfir said:

So I just fought a battle and noticed that two CL shared the same name.

I do think I know what might have happed to cause two diffrent ships to share the same name.

1. The first thing that happed was a new CL-class was designed named Oryol-Class.

2. Then a new ship of the priveuse class of CL was laid down with the name Oryol.

3. After that the first of the Oryol-Class CL was laid down which whould have been given the name of the class which whould have been Oryol.

4. The russian navy now have two diffrent CLs with the same name.

This is the most likey thing which caused the ships to end up with the same name. Yet it mattered little as both ship whould be sunk in the battle with the rest of the task force.

Whatever caused the cruisers to have the same name so is it still better then nations running out of names and just giving random numbers to their ship for names.

 

funnily enough Орёл (Eagle) does tends to translate to either Oryol and Orel (rarely Oriol too); all of which are the same place; and google translate frequently gets one or the other when translating from Russian to English.

[Cadmus02]

I got to 1944 in my 1890s campaign as Japan before I walked away from the game. Right now I think there is a pretty solid foundation, I just hope some improvements can be made:

1. Turns take way to long. Over a minute on a fairly powerful computer. If I alt+tab to use the web the turns don't process until I tab back to the game.
2. A ship being involved in a mission prevents it from moving. I've encountered a few different times where my task force which is low on fuel and ammo is stuck in an area for months because there are convoy missions. This is really frustrating if my task force has to have a serious fight at a handicap even though I gave the order to go back to port 5 turns ago. Maybe missions should only be calculated after move, or maybe let there be an order for task forces to not engage.
3. For battles like DD vs DD they start too far apart. It can take real world minutes to get into firing range. The best way I can think to fix this is to start 1 KM out of spotting range and add an extra KM to the starting range for every ship in the fight. Up to a max of 20-30 KM. This would give admirals time to arrange their task forces but greatly reduce tedium.
4. Instead of blockades happening automatically they should be a task force mission. You blockade any port within X KM. Your blockade can be broken if the enemy disperses your task force. The allies blockaded Germany in WWI, not necessarily due to any ratio of ships but because the Germans weren't willing to try and break the blockade.

Those are the biggest issues I'm seeing. Overall the game is shaping up nicely, and I am looking forward to the next update!

[beepboop6]

When you get the msg "Enemy smoke spotted to ...." Is this direction measured from the flagship or from whatever the nearest ship might be to the enemy in question?

[neph]

 

Bug: Naval alliances keep their assets merged for payment in future wars.

The US & Russia were in an alliance, & when I defeated them they showed up as a joint negotiation in which I could seize both their assets in the same menu.

Later, I got into a war with just the US, but I can still steal Finland from Russia. Not great for them!

[admiralsnackbar]

is there any way to reduce relations with a particular country after said relations go above like 50? since the fleet presence ceases to deteriorate relations. 

[RNV]

Hello,

The recent fixes made the campaign experience much smoother, thank you.

I would like to ask other readers if they're experiencing this too: are your ships going back to random ports after actions instead of home port / closest port? 

I one of the release candidates this was fixed for me, in the live version however it started happening again. If I'm the only one experiencing this, please disregard this post and I'll try to reinstall the game and see if something happens, however, if others are experiencing this too, I think it should be pretty high on the bug-fixing priority because it makes large empires very hard to manage with ships reappearing on the other side of the world after a campaign.

[Eirchirfir]

4 hours ago, admiralsnackbar said:

is there any way to reduce relations with a particular country after said relations go above like 50? since the fleet presence ceases to deteriorate relations. 

Unresticted submarine warfare is a sulution if you are in another war so that the submarines try to sink enemy convoyes.

[Draco]

5 hours ago, RNV said:

Hello,

The recent fixes made the campaign experience much smoother, thank you.

I would like to ask other readers if they're experiencing this too: are your ships going back to random ports after actions instead of home port / closest port? 

I one of the release candidates this was fixed for me, in the live version however it started happening again. If I'm the only one experiencing this, please disregard this post and I'll try to reinstall the game and see if something happens, however, if others are experiencing this too, I think it should be pretty high on the bug-fixing priority because it makes large empires very hard to manage with ships reappearing on the other side of the world after a campaign.

Yes, happens all the time and is super annoying, have to wait entire months just to get my task forces back together for future actions.

[Draco]

14 hours ago, Cadmus02 said:

I got to 1944 in my 1890s campaign as Japan before I walked away from the game. Right now I think there is a pretty solid foundation, I just hope some improvements can be made:

1. Turns take way to long. Over a minute on a fairly powerful computer. If I alt+tab to use the web the turns don't process until I tab back to the game.
2. A ship being involved in a mission prevents it from moving. I've encountered a few different times where my task force which is low on fuel and ammo is stuck in an area for months because there are convoy missions. This is really frustrating if my task force has to have a serious fight at a handicap even though I gave the order to go back to port 5 turns ago. Maybe missions should only be calculated after move, or maybe let there be an order for task forces to not engage.
3. For battles like DD vs DD they start too far apart. It can take real world minutes to get into firing range. The best way I can think to fix this is to start 1 KM out of spotting range and add an extra KM to the starting range for every ship in the fight. Up to a max of 20-30 KM. This would give admirals time to arrange their task forces but greatly reduce tedium.
4. Instead of blockades happening automatically they should be a task force mission. You blockade any port within X KM. Your blockade can be broken if the enemy disperses your task force. The allies blockaded Germany in WWI, not necessarily due to any ratio of ships but because the Germans weren't willing to try and break the blockade.

Those are the biggest issues I'm seeing. Overall the game is shaping up nicely, and I am looking forward to the next update!

Agree on all points except the max 20-30km part. My battleships are designed for long range fighting, they function best if they spawn 40+ kilometers away from the enemy and have time to damage them as they close before the enemy can reply.
A max spawn distance of 30km would make such builds much less effective, bordering on obsolete.
A better solution would be to eliminate restrictions on x10 & x30 speed.
That way all design philosophies remain valid, but tedium is still reduced significantly.

[Draco]

Petition to give individual ships logs in campaign, so you can select a ship and see previous engagements it has taken part of, a list of kills, refits undergone ect.

[lordcmdr]

1 hour ago, Draco said:

Petition to give individual ships logs in campaign, so you can select a ship and see previous engagements it has taken part of, a list of kills, refits undergone ect.

Seconded!

[Lima]

RNG DAMAGE BUG

It's like with engines. I just hate this bug, one of the worst bugs in this game. It's VERY old. I thought maybe the developers had forgotten about it. So a reminder. Although I'm not too hopeful.

The battle is almost over. No damage received. 86% structure (14% damage).

And, of course, I "took" damage in this battle. Much more than zero. And yes, this destroyer had 90% of the structure before the battle.

What do we see here? 49% damage out of air. And there is no damage on the destroyer. By the way, this TF has a "very high" priority of repairs and should have already returned to the port.

The state of the TF is just bad right now. I haven't been able to catch the British fleet for 10 turns (again yes, my entertainment in every campaign) which is moving back and forth along the Suez Canal (yes again). Instead of 100 ships, my blind TF catch groups of 1-2 ships (not every turn). But I can tolerate it for now. Just fix this RNG damage after the fight, it's terrible. This is an incredibly old bug.

Edit: I forgot to mention, it's 1901, and the AI has no minefields. I also don't use them.

 

Edited December 2, 2022 by Lima

[admiralsnackbar]

2 hours ago, Lima said:

RNG DAMAGE BUG

It's like with engines. I just hate this bug, one of the worst bugs in this game. It's VERY old. I thought maybe the developers had forgotten about it. So a reminder. Although I'm not too hopeful.

The battle is almost over. No damage received. 86% structure (14% damage).

And, of course, I "took" damage in this battle. Much more than zero. And yes, this destroyer had 90% of the structure before the battle.

What do we see here? 49% damage out of air. And there is no damage on the destroyer. By the way, this TF has a "very high" priority of repairs and should have already returned to the port.

The state of the TF is just bad right now. I haven't been able to catch the British fleet for 10 turns (again yes, my entertainment in every campaign) which is moving back and forth along the Suez Canal (yes again). Instead of 100 ships, my blind TF catch groups of 1-2 ships (not every turn). But I can tolerate it for now. Just fix this RNG damage after the fight, it's terrible. This is an incredibly old bug.

 

I'm also struggling to catch enemy fleets. Which is annoying because they can mass near my ports in full force, blockade me for a turn, I try to put my fleet out on sea control to 'stop' them, and they retreat. Doesn't really matter how close I put my fleet to theirs, they just get away. 

Blockading and commerce raiding are different things. If your economy is suffering from convoys raiders, are being raided you assign escorts, assign escorts. If the enemy refuses to attack escorted convoys or gets destroyed trying then you shouldn't suffer economically. Likewise if your ports are being blockaded outright by fleets near by, they should not be 'hidden' and scouts should not be needed. 

You need different mission types that are clearer (and more deterministic) about what a given TF is doing. And bear in mind that while a recon stat might make sense in the context of a real time game, we're talking about task forces often of massive size not being spotted over the course of an entire month, supposedly blockading an enemy fleet. 

These are the missions this campaign needs:

Blockade mission - Targets a specific port and blocks all trade. Any fleets in the port have to sortie a break out to be used elsewhere. Fleets outside can also try to lift the blockade but are not required to even if operating in the sea zone.  

Commerce Raid - Targets trade in the sea zone, benefits from recon stat. Attacker has the option but not the obligation to attack. if attacker declines the mission does not appear. Defender must either defend the convoy or abandon it (convoys get captured or destroyed in that case)

Fleet in Being - Stays in port, can deterministically attack attempts at blockading or can probabilistically get involved in defending the local sea zone if enemy task forces are spotted by scouts. May be forced to fight a battle if port strikes are made a thing in the game. 

Scout - Try to detect fleets operating in the area. Will only be forced to engage if they detect a fleet that is faster than they are. Nearby fleets in being or other scouting fleets can be pulled in to attack the fleet with some calculations made for the speed of the respective fleets. 

Convoy Escort - Protect convoys from subs or raiders in the sea zone. 

 

Edited December 2, 2022 by admiralsnackbar