>>>Beta v1.1 Feedback<<< [RC 6]

[Skeksis]

37 minutes ago, admiralsnackbar said:

Yes i think manual rudder was finally removed as Nick said they planned on doing once the ship turning was set to a level they thought acceptable. 

Biggest problem with removal, is we can't brainstorm the issue, can't offer insight or clues into the cause.

I don't believe it was "misuse by a large number of players", more likely only a few and it's actually the other way around, a large number of players use the feature as intended. And it's a large number of players who miss out, not the few.

Edited January 8, 2023 by Skeksis

[Gsam]

This game is not even close to ready for release.

I am now in 1910 and the feedback from the USA.

1) Fuel issues are maddening.  Trying to figure out distances, where you can refuel, how far between ports. etc... Absurd

2) Ships Seem to want to go to wrong places even when you are clicking on someplace else. I have ships in the med, I am try to send them to San Diego,  and it keeps trying to dock them in panama.

3) Trying to invade minors. Mexico is an ally of Germany who I was at war with. I blockaded both ports in Mexico and had my fleets set to invade, nothing happens for turns and turns.

4) Turns are taking way too long.  When I have HOI4 running on the other monitor because it takes so long to process turns, you have a problem.

5) Research still seems too slow despite having one of your 3 vials dedicated to certain tech trees. You really need to redo technology as a whole.   Why do I have to research a bunch of crap I don't want to get to what I do.  For example.  Why do I need to research light cruisers and heavy cruisers in the same "cruiser" line.   Why can't we break these down.  If I want to rush battle cruisers at the expense of my DD's or light cruisers, let me.  I don't want triple turrets for my secondary guns. I want the ability to put 5 main guns on my ships.  IRL would people making ships say "OH! Sorry, We cant work on putting a 5th main gun turret on our ship because we have not yet figured out how to put triple turrets on a ship"   Scrap what you have, and redo it.

6) There is no national flavor at all. The only thing that feels different is the flag and what ports you have.  Really need to differentiate the countries to add replay ability.

7) The lack of a wraparound map is brutal.  Gotta fix that or implement it.

8.) Totally unclear how to get trade agreements or ally status with minors.  The AI can do it.

9) The political system is not good at all.  Certain countries are just going to like you at all, despite going for the non historical setting. They are always going to ask you to ally, by declining you get a huge boost to naval status and they are still your friends. Meanwhile to try and improve relations you fail like 90% of the time and it hurts you....  Come on.  Not even worth engaging in that.

10) Ship Flaws.  I made 16 ships. 6 of them were flawed.   That is insane. I am talking so flawed that they had to be scrapped. More than 10% defect.  I understand trying for ship variety, but damn thats brutal. You almost have to build an extra 40% of what you need for your fleet so you can delete the ships that come out hot garbage.  If that is something you want to have in game, can we develop a ironworkers slider where we can spend extra money to have better workers and reduce flaws? Or Incorporate that into dockyards as we increase the size? Make it a research thing?   How about letting us have positive outcomes too?  Ship X was made exceptionally well. +5% speed or something.

Edited January 8, 2023 by Gsam

[Fangoriously]

34 minutes ago, admiralsnackbar said:

The accuracy bonuses from crew training at max are something are 30%, you have tons of other bonuses and maluses active at the same time (the sum total of which i think leads to hit rates that range from insanely poor to impossibly accurate) which are equal to or in a few cases greater than 30%

That max of +30 is just modest window dressing, here's how big an impact its actually having

when your ship is selected, and you mouse over your target, a few other stats appear in the column on the left. Most notable is that huge +780 'range found' bonus to accuracy. Just from a 'regular' trained crew, giving a mere +11.5 constant bonus, far from a vet's +30. Vets can get this number over +1500.

The second of my BBs has a modestly trained cadet crew, giving a constant -8.1 accuracy "bonus". They have fired numerous salvos and still don't have a fix on the target, yielding a further -37.1 range finding 'bonus'. I actually quite like the system this way, there really would be this large a gulf in capability in someone crew that barely understands whats going on and those that have a year at sea.

 

Keep in mind any tool tip you mouse over with accuracy tables is showing what clueless cadets could do with the guns, be unafraid of the supposed poor accuracy of 16in+ guns, as long as you have your crew at least up to 'regular' level. Also the single or double digit accuracy bonuses from using long barrel main guns on your ship is a joke compared to triple and quadruple digit 'range found' bonuses from crew. Never waste tonnage on long barrels, chop them down till they have a max range you find acceptable, then pair them with stereoscopic range finders. If your guns only reach out to 20km, then thats considered 'long range' by the game, and you reap maximum benefit wile also being physically at relatively close range, were accuracy was already going to be pretty good. Also, long barrels will have you hitting mostly the thickest belt armor, short barrels will drop shells perpendicular on the thin deck. Did i mention short barrels also reduce reload time too?

[The PC Collector]

4 minutes ago, Gsam said:

3) Trying to invade minors. Mexico is an ally of Germany who I was at war with. I blockaded both ports in Mexico and had my fleets set to invade, nothing happens for turns and turns.

That's because that's not what "invade" is for. Invade is meant to set the fleets on actively chase transport and attack ports. Currently there is no way to actively target minors for invasions. Which in my opinion is a huge flaw, but that's another topic.

 

6 minutes ago, Gsam said:

Why do I have to research a bunch of crap I don't want to get to what I do.  For example.  Why do I need to research light cruisers and heavy cruisers in the same "cruiser" line.   Why can't we break these down.  If I want to rush battle cruisers at the expense of my DD's or light cruisers, let me.

I fully agree on this. BCs should be either moved to the BB tech line, or to their own line, and the cruiser line should be splitted between light and heavy. Currently that tech fall behind time the second you're not prioritising it because there is simply too much clutter on it.

 

7 minutes ago, Gsam said:

6) There is no national flavor at all. The only thing that feels different is the flag and what ports you have.  Really need to differentiate the countries to add replay ability.

Yeah, things feel too genertic at the moment. That's because the game is missing like 90% of hulls that aren't german or brit, and even a lot of those. It will eventually fixed, but for now I personally see reasonable that they focus on make the game work before adding fluff.
 

 

10 minutes ago, Gsam said:

10) Ship Flaws.  I made 16 ships. 6 of them were flawed.   That is insane. I am talking so flawed that they had to be scrapped. More than 10% defect.  I understand trying for ship variety, but damn thats brutal. You almost have to build an extra 40% of what you need for your fleet so you can delete the ships that come out hot garbage.  If that is something you want to have in game, can we develop a ironworkers slider where we can spend extra money to have better workers and reduce flaws? Or Incorporate that into dockyards as we increase the size? Make it a research thing?   How about letting us have positive outcomes too?  Ship X was made exceptionally well. +5% speed or something.

There is already one tech which reduces flaws. But yeah, early ship are going to almost always be garbage due to flaws. Which, if you read a bit about ships on the 1890s, is actually pretty accurate. Ships on that era very rarely were actually adjusted to their original design or specs, and some of them were so flawed that had indeed to be scrapped. Case of, for example, the Reina Regente class, which had so poor ocenagoing capabilities that the lead ship sank on a storm, and the other two were scrapped after a service life of only 5 years and countless refits and modifications trying to solve it, because their bouyancy was so poor that even using them as training ships was deemed too dangerous.

[admiralsnackbar]

1 hour ago, Fangoriously said:

That max of +30 is just modest window dressing, here's how big an impact its actually having

when your ship is selected, and you mouse over your target, a few other stats appear in the column on the left. Most notable is that huge +780 'range found' bonus to accuracy. Just from a 'regular' trained crew, giving a mere +11.5 constant bonus, far from a vet's +30. Vets can get this number over +1500.

The second of my BBs has a modestly trained cadet crew, giving a constant -8.1 accuracy "bonus". They have fired numerous salvos and still don't have a fix on the target, yielding a further -37.1 range finding 'bonus'. I actually quite like the system this way, there really would be this large a gulf in capability in someone crew that barely understands whats going on and those that have a year at sea.

 

Keep in mind any tool tip you mouse over with accuracy tables is showing what clueless cadets could do with the guns, be unafraid of the supposed poor accuracy of 16in+ guns, as long as you have your crew at least up to 'regular' level. Also the single or double digit accuracy bonuses from using long barrel main guns on your ship is a joke compared to triple and quadruple digit 'range found' bonuses from crew. Never waste tonnage on long barrels, chop them down till they have a max range you find acceptable, then pair them with stereoscopic range finders. If your guns only reach out to 20km, then thats considered 'long range' by the game, and you reap maximum benefit wile also being physically at relatively close range, were accuracy was already going to be pretty good. Also, long barrels will have you hitting mostly the thickest belt armor, short barrels will drop shells perpendicular on the thin deck. Did i mention short barrels also reduce reload time too?

Assuming the range found bonus is multiplied by the skill level rather than being separate, yes, that's too large. But in general  "Range Found" going from 0 [or negative if finding the range] up to 1500%, effectively drowning out all other bonuses/maluses seems to be a bigger issue than the 30% base from veterans. 

Like, if that bonus was *constant* by Veterancy at 1000% that would still have the issue of drowning out the other bonuses/maluses combined, which is obviously not good. This is one advantage to the war on the sea system where you have a certain shell dispersion pattern and then a %Solution -- An absolutely perfect firing solution would not imply that the shells can hit any target at any range with almost 100% hits (As sometimes happens) But 100% solution at a relatively close range almost guarantees that you get at least 1 hit per salvo. 

 

Edited January 8, 2023 by admiralsnackbar

[Skeksis]

Oh no, Britain collapses, was warring with them, some meaty battles too...

Here's the previous January...

 

Looks like Britain wasn't doing too well, almost 4 billion in the red, picking fights with... well... everyone. Spain dissolved too early aswell. Something amiss here. Britain, a major nation should be better at finances. Sent in-game file. 1910 campaign start.

Also, if a nation dissolves while you're fighting them, shouldn't you get a crack at some of their stuff? you know we were the victor! 🤔

Edited January 8, 2023 by Skeksis

[Lima]

1 minute ago, Skeksis said:

Oh no, Britain collapses, was warring with them, some meaty battles too...

Looks like Britain wasn't doing too well, almost 4 billion in the red, picking fights with... well everyone. Spain dissolved too early aswell. Something amiss here. Britain, a major nation should be better at finances. Sent in-game file too.

Also, if a nation dissolves while you're fighting them, shouldn't you get a crack at some of their stuff? 🤔

Due to the large number of ports in different regions, Britain is losing a lot of convoys. Among a dozen more or less lengthy campaigns, Britain has always disintegrated for me.

[Skeksis]

23 minutes ago, Lima said:

Britain is losing a lot of convoys.

I see. Haven't played Britain for awhile but I guess anyone playing Britain would find this out. 

But on the other hand, the AI (Dev's!) should be balancing the 'fleets' combat abilities, including the ability to protect against regional transports losses. I.e. not to overextend - not to engage in so many wars.  

Edited January 8, 2023 by Skeksis

[Lima]

Problems with the fleet of minors.

Minors do not scrap ships. They don't buy new ones. During the war, they will use outdated ships that will not be very useful to me. However, since I control the fights, their loss is unlikely. So they will have these ships forever. If I want to do business by specifically losing these ships, I will lose VP.

[The PC Collector]

I'm starting to be a bit tired of this nonsense of AI giving what they want instead of what you asked for. We should get and option to restart the war if such thing happens.

Edited January 8, 2023 by The PC Collector

[Lima]

6 minutes ago, The PC Collector said:

I'm starting to be a bit tired of this stupid nonsense of AI giving what they want instead of what you asked for. We should get and option to restart the war if such thing happens.

I want to overthrow the government and establish a dictatorship. I have hundreds of hours in Victoria 2, I can definitely handle it.

[AdmiralBert]

Naval Invasions: Could it be made clearer what the chances of success / progress of the operation is? In my current USA campaign, I wound up at war with Soviet Russia, and decided that in lieu of the Phillipines (neutral due to Spanish collapse early in the game), Vladivostok would be an excellent base for a Pacific Fleet. So, I sweep the local seas of opposition (not hard, Russia has been struggling for a while), get 100,000 tonnes of boat in place, and begin the invasion!

Seven turns pass where I have double the required tonnage in the operation area...and I get one line pop up telling me the invasion has failed. No detail, no explanation, just GG NO RE. It is even more infuriating if this happens with a minor power, as we're dependent on RNG to give us the opportunity to invade in the first place.

Peace Treaties: If I make a demand, and my opponent rejects it, the war shouldn't end with my being forced to take cash money instead. I should also get the option to demand 'home' provinces off of the enemy; it is particularly annoying in my current USA game, because due to the UK & Spanish collapses almost all of provinces in South East Asia are 'neutral' and therefore cannot be conquered, meaning I have no good ports available to base things out of as the Japanese/Russian major ports cannot be demanded.

[The PC Collector]

Bug feedback: Panama channel disappears if you take Panama from the US

[TAKTCOM]

17 hours ago, Plazma said:

In my opinion the CA is more like BB than CA and the BB is more like CA than BB. 

While the Austro-Hungarian hulls set is the worst and AH is one of the last factions worth playing at the moment, this  comment is... pretty historically accurate. For example

The Austro-Hungarians built compact, heavily armed, but also decently protected and NOT slow ships. The Italians were faster, but everyone else - GB, France, the Yankees and the Russians were about the same speed, or slower.
With all this, their ships were also quite seaworthy and most surprisingly, cheap.

These are real masterpieces of shipbuilding, almost unnoticed. You will see the skill of Austro-Hungarian engineers when you compare AН warships with ships of similar size and tonnage. 

What are the chances of a pre-dreadnought 7-8 kilotonn cruiser of any nation when meeting SMS Sankt Georg, with its 240x2,  190x5, 150х4, 200mm armor and speed of 22 knots? Yeah, good luck.

6 hours ago, Pappystein said:

The British losses were due to shock transmitted through the hull to the magazines...

Wasn't the detonation due to the fact that all the blast doors were removed for maximum rate of fire, which was discovered by expeditions to the wreckage of the Jutland battlecruisers?

[PainKiller]

4 hours ago, Skeksis said:

I see. Haven't played Britain for awhile but I guess anyone playing Britain would find this out. 

Me for example. I start a campaign, go into a war (usually with the german as it's the easiest) because i have those shiny ships for a reason. Baaam, transport losses on almost every sea as i have colonies basicly everywhere. This is not a problem, as i was just prepared for that, i had built 130 ship exactly for this reason. I send task forces out to almost every sea area .....okay okay good good, we have less transport losses.......but now literally everyone start to hate me over time, and at one point or another go into war with me.....okay fine, i can handle this.......Beat everone's a**-es everywhere, get lot of money and even more ports. And at this point the problems starts to escalate. Since my ships have to go to repair time to time, it's impossible to protect the transports everywhere all the time. Slowly, but surely, those small transport losses add up, and i start to get into a war spiral, where even if i try my best to not to be at war (with pollitic tab influence, and getting my ships all home to britan so i don't influence on other waters) Despite transport building slider is in +100%, my transport capacity is just 50%, having huge GDP losses. That's where my campaign is at the time, I'm spending a lot of money now to try to be at peace with everyone. It's looking good, as long as i have money, i'll probably need like 2-3 year without war to rebuild my transports. 

i want to say that i have no problem with anything i just wrote down, i just wanted to give a summary how my campaign looks like and what the experience is. I quite like it.

That being said, i'm pretty sure the AI has a hard time doing the right thing. As we know they are not very good at..not being in war

Edited January 8, 2023 by PainKiller

[Admiral Donuts]

I still get the Austria-Hungary and Italy hostility on my Japanese a** minding my own business, with none of their fleets anywhere outside the Med.

I don't understand that.

[Lima]

We don't have a land border, but it doesn't matter.

[Darth Khyron]

Something curious occured several times now. I am producing light cruisers for several allies. None of these have switched sides or cancelled an alliance so far. My opponent is, among others, allied with Denmark, to whom I have never sold said light cruisers.
In several battles now, I went against exactly these light cruisers on the enemy's side, flagged as danish vessels. Allied ships of the opponent's side should also use names of the producing enemy nation, but these used the names I gave them.

[Xteam25Boyz]

20 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:

Yes it is known, a good reminder, we will fix this.

Maybe we can manually imporve the port capacity (of course it will affect build capacity) just like RTW?

[AdmiralBert]

2 hours ago, TAKTCOM said:

Wasn't the detonation due to the fact that all the blast doors were removed for maximum rate of fire, which was discovered by expeditions to the wreckage of the Jutland battlecruisers?

It was a layering of issues all stacked on top of one another. Extra charges were being stored in the handling passages, flash doors had been removed, some (but not all) of the British BCs weren't armoured to withstand capital ship calibre shells, and the charges themselves formed crystalised particles on the bags which if not scrupulously cleaned led to explosive dust being left all over the places you don't want explosive dust.

Question: When does the Panama Canal come into operation? Also, would it be possible to have this information displayed in game?

[Suribachi]

15 hours ago, Plazma said:

Could you give me something except the wiki about it? I don't get the joke, but I had the feel that is some creasy story about  it  

Basically, CV-6 USS Enterprise, like her sister CV-5 Yorktown, survived hits that both the Japanese and the Americans thought would sink her.  The Japanese would announce that they sunk her only for her to return angrier than before.  This happened three separate times.  Each time, the crew performed the repairs at sea, with dry dock repairs mostly only happening during her retrofit in 1943.  She earned her nickname "The Grey Ghost" due to this.

To this day, the Yorktown repair crews are the stuff of legend, especially in the US Navy.

Edited January 8, 2023 by Suribachi

[Suribachi]

15 minutes ago, AdmiralBert said:

Question: When does the Panama Canal come into operation? Also, would it be possible to have this information displayed in game?

IRL was August 1914, I believe that is reflected in game as well.

[Suribachi]

4 hours ago, AdmiralBert said:

Naval Invasions: Could it be made clearer what the chances of success / progress of the operation is?

I agree with having the chance of success, this can help save personnel for an invasion that would actually work.  Progress is already in game however, once it has begun, if you hover over the mission diamond on the map, not on the left side list, it will show how many turns are required and how many have already passed.

[Mike5556]

Could we please have more options to invade minors. Also game works better. It would be nice to increase colonies as it was done.

[Plazma]

10 hours ago, Gsam said:

This game is not even close to ready for release.

I am now in 1910 and the feedback from the USA.

2) Ships Seem to want to go to wrong places even when you are clicking on someplace else. I have ships in the med, I am try to send them to San Diego,  and it keeps trying to dock them in panama.

3) Trying to invade minors. Mexico is an ally of Germany who I was at war with. I blockaded both ports in Mexico and had my fleets set to invade, nothing happens for turns and turns.

I can confirm only 2) and 3) with the note that invading system is little strange... I tried it on the major nation and I can put a big amount of naval force close to the empty port (island) and nothing happens. For fun I send 60% of my naval force to one point tonnage was around 150000t and nothing happens. 

 

Someone also mention the 8" 12" guns, ye... this should be fixed... 

4 hours ago, TAKTCOM said:

The Austro-Hungarians built compact, heavily armed, but also decently protected and NOT slow ships. The Italians were faster, but everyone else - GB, France, the Yankees and the Russians were about the same speed, or slower.
With all this, their ships were also quite seaworthy and most surprisingly, cheap.

Hmm... This is very interesting. Actually I went in little different direction, because:

1. My AH BB doesn't exist, I don't find any of my design useful, especially when I don't wanted fight vs Italy. Anyway I understand the geo-location of HA and possibility to use short range ships, especially BB.

2. I don't build compact, I maxed the CA, because I resigned from BB. But also I thinking to build a small compact CA mostly for taking down CL/TB/DD and for cost oriented purpose.

3. My ships are not cheap, I assumed that the ship must wining all the time, because I don't have ports to handle more ships, so small fleet, but elite. 

 

Anyway this is very interesting that AH don't focused on long range BB and also I never as AH do that. 

 

Btw. why you have the opinion that the AH is the worst nation at the moment? They are for me boring, but somehow in 1900 they are pretty good and funny. I enjoy them the most at this moment (compared to FR, JP, USA, German, Chine)

And thank you for give us the historical fact, waiting for more  

 

Also first time I want to recreate some ship or at least try construct similar ship to SMS Sankt Georg. 

 

4 hours ago, PainKiller said:

Me for example. I start a campaign, go into a war (usually with the german as it's the easiest) because i have those shiny ships for a reason. Baaam, transport losses on almost every sea as i have colonies basicly everywhere. This is not a problem, as i was just prepared for that, i had built 130 ship exactly for this reason. I send task forces out to almost every sea area .....okay okay good good, we have less transport losses.......but now literally everyone start to hate me over time, and at one point or another go into war with me.....okay fine, i can handle this.......Beat everone's a**-es everywhere, get lot of money and even more ports. And at this point the problems starts to escalate. Since my ships have to go to repair time to time, it's impossible to protect the transports everywhere all the time. Slowly, but surely, those small transport losses add up, and i start to get into a war spiral, where even if i try my best to not to be at war (with pollitic tab influence, and getting my ships all home to britan so i don't influence on other waters) Despite transport building slider is in +100%, my transport capacity is just 50%, having huge GDP losses. That's where my campaign is at the time, I'm spending a lot of money now to try to be at peace with everyone. It's looking good, as long as i have money, i'll probably need like 2-3 year without war to rebuild my transports. 

Yes, exactly. The TR no matter what region have this same amount of weight. Let's say the UK want chocolate from Africa nothing more they send no one or two TR, but 10% always! The TR should be protected and have only trade in safe waters (aka waters without Germans) or when the transport capability will hit 90% only import grain, oil/coal and steal, nothing more. 

If not possible to do it, let's give the opportunity to left the country and consolidate the imperium (let's make a India free, because we are not able to have influence here anymore and we must focus on peace and protect the more important regions). 

 

2 hours ago, Darth Khyron said:

Something curious occured several times now. I am producing light cruisers for several allies. None of these have switched sides or cancelled an alliance so far. My opponent is, among others, allied with Denmark, to whom I have never sold said light cruisers.
In several battles now, I went against exactly these light cruisers on the enemy's side, flagged as danish vessels. Allied ships of the opponent's side should also use names of the producing enemy nation, but these used the names I gave them.

Welcome to free market, what do you want my dear customer? Cacao? Cotton? Guns? Rum? Slaves? or maybe the deadly superior LC from Denmark, don't ask from where we have these things or from where the Denmark have this LC 

 

1 hour ago, Suribachi said:

Basically, CV-6 USS Enterprise, like her sister CV-5 Yorktown, survived hits that both the Japanese and the Americans would sink her.  The Japanese would announce that they sunk her only for her to return angrier than before.  This happened three separate times.  Each time, the crew performed the repairs at sea, with dry dock repairs mostly only happening during her retrofit in 1943.  She earned her nickname "The Grey Ghost" due to this.

To this day, the Yorktown repair crews are the stuff of legend, especially in the US Navy.

Nice