admiralsnackbar Posted January 25, 2023 Author Share Posted January 25, 2023 10 minutes ago, o Barão said: Not an issue, but new campaign 1890 Germany and my shipyard is 12k, I read the changelog and noticed that you increased to 20k the shipyard. Well is too much IMO but still is not working. shipbuilding capacity or max shipyard size? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDHansen Posted January 25, 2023 Share Posted January 25, 2023 Looking good so far. Also, if you need another test subject when it comes to guns, let me know. Got plenty of time on my hands next 2-3 weeks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vyprestrike Posted January 25, 2023 Share Posted January 25, 2023 Updated the game to 1.1.1 and the mod to 0.4. Due to broken penetration, last update the game/mod was struggling to hit full pens and overpens. This update is now allowing more pens, but there's a strange issue with deck vs belt prioritization. Keeping the same ship/guns/shells, some battles only allow me to hit belt, even when I'm >30km, while other battles only allow me to hit deck, even when I'm <10km away. It's like the game is flipping a coin between belt and deck and my main guns are only allowed to hit that part of a ship for the whole battle. This issue is affecting my main guns only, secondaries don't seem to be affected. AI ships also don't seem to be affected either. I'm playing 1940s custom battles as 1 French BC vs 1 British BB. Maybe this issue could be custom battle or year specific, I'm not sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o Barão Posted January 25, 2023 Share Posted January 25, 2023 7 hours ago, admiralsnackbar said: shipbuilding capacity or max shipyard size? 1890 Germany, max shipyard 12k. Is this correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TachiKaze Posted January 25, 2023 Share Posted January 25, 2023 (edited) Absolutely Loving this mod and what it's done, feels like i finally have to make design choices and not meta picks, Keep up the great work @admiralsnackbar Edited January 25, 2023 by TachiKaze 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admiralsnackbar Posted January 25, 2023 Author Share Posted January 25, 2023 (edited) 6 hours ago, o Barão said: 1890 Germany, max shipyard 12k. Is this correct? My parameter affected the shipbuilding capacity, i'll make that more clear in the changelog. The idea is that, as a function of GDP/max shipyard you can build more ships in total not necessarily bigger ones. Edited January 25, 2023 by admiralsnackbar 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o Barão Posted January 25, 2023 Share Posted January 25, 2023 2 hours ago, admiralsnackbar said: My parameter affected the shipbuilding capacity, i'll make that more clear in the changelog. I see. I got confused from my poor English. But still, I think this change is not needed. If we look at the screenshot I posted, we will see that Germany is capable of 85k tons already in 1890. If we take into consideration the naval arms race between Germany and Great Britain and how many pre-dreadnoughts they could launch every year, it is clear that this is already too much for this time period. Not a bad change, only that is not needed and is a little fantasy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admiralsnackbar Posted January 25, 2023 Author Share Posted January 25, 2023 3 minutes ago, o Barão said: I see. I got confused from my poor English. But still, I think this change is not needed. If we look at the screenshot I posted, we will see that Germany is capable of 85k tons already in 1890. If we take into consideration the naval arms race between Germany and Great Britain and how many pre-dreadnoughts they could launch every year, it is clear that this is already too much for this time period. Not a bad change, only that is not needed and is a little fantasy. you might be right, i'm going to have to continue to release updates even without changes to keep up with the hotfixes, so i might revert that change. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neph Posted January 25, 2023 Share Posted January 25, 2023 Do you expect 0.4 to work with 1.1.2? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admiralsnackbar Posted January 25, 2023 Author Share Posted January 25, 2023 (edited) 6 minutes ago, neph said: Do you expect 0.4 to work with 1.1.2? The new resources.assets file for 1.1.2 likely [haven't checked yet] changes thing from 1.1.1 meaning that attempting to replace it will undo the 1.1.2 fixes. (And the last thing I want is for people to complain to nick about bugs that were actually fixed by him but they don't know that because they used my mod) I have to look at the timestamps of edited files and recreate the resources.assets from the 1.1.2, sadly i have to do this any time a hotfix comes out which is why I waited for live to release the build. I wasn't anticipating more hotfixes on a daily basis like before. But still the last two hotfixes have fixed some serious issues so i can't complain. I will try to get a v0.5 out before midnight eastern time [1/25]The good news: is that the mod is quite popular,The bad news: dropbox has suspended me for using too much bandwidth due to the downloads for the mod. Edited January 25, 2023 by admiralsnackbar 10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDHansen Posted January 26, 2023 Share Posted January 26, 2023 LE GASP! a sneaky update Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neph Posted January 26, 2023 Share Posted January 26, 2023 Is there any way you can AGRESSIVELY increase spotting values? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admiralsnackbar Posted January 26, 2023 Author Share Posted January 26, 2023 (edited) 20 minutes ago, neph said: Is there any way you can AGRESSIVELY increase spotting values? I think so. The long and tedious approach is to go through parts.txt and edit the tower spotting values of every single one, which would take several hours. I would be more comfortable doing this if I knew the formula for detection in game and could somehow map that to a more "trigonometry based system". Another approach would be to create or edit an existing technology at the beginning of the game and give it psuedo radar-like powers which increases tower spotting by a certain percentage. Note that this is going to probably be added to the tower spotting modifiers of other technologies which might have certain "unbalancing effects". Like if Radar II increases tower spotting by 100%, that's 100% of the base, but in this theoretical universe we might have already boosted tower spotting by 50%, so it's 1.5x default and 2.5x with radar Edited January 26, 2023 by admiralsnackbar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neph Posted January 26, 2023 Share Posted January 26, 2023 Could probably write a quick python script to crawl parts.txt & alter every value Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baboulinet Posted January 26, 2023 Share Posted January 26, 2023 How odd it is to see proper and detailed patch notes on this forum heh ! Good work by the way. That's the kind of modifications I was doing for myself, but this is more torough, love it. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admiralsnackbar Posted January 26, 2023 Author Share Posted January 26, 2023 (edited) 8 hours ago, neph said: Could probably write a quick python script to crawl parts.txt & alter every value As soon as I learn to code in python In all seriousness though there was someone on this thread who described using a script to edit the text files. I have a rough Idea of what I would want. Go through the towers values and find the minimum and maximum spotting values in the game, adjust all values by a scalar. It occurs to me though that weather in the game alters the detection range [by a negative percent] -- i wonder if it's possible to alter it by a positive percent and then adjust the values relative to eachother so that the relative differences between the ranges are preserved. That would acomplish the above without a python script. Edited January 26, 2023 by admiralsnackbar 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senta95 Posted January 26, 2023 Share Posted January 26, 2023 This mod is just awesome, keep it up. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madham82 Posted January 26, 2023 Share Posted January 26, 2023 9 hours ago, neph said: Could probably write a quick python script to crawl parts.txt & alter every value 1 hour ago, admiralsnackbar said: As soon as I learn to code in python In all seriousness though there was someone on this thread who described using a script to edit the text files. I have a rough Idea of what I would want. Go through the towers values and find the minimum and maximum spotting values in the game, adjust all values by a scalar. It occurs to me though that weather in the game alters the detection range [by a negative percent] -- i wonder if it's possible to alter it by a positive percent and then adjust the values relative to eachother so that the relative differences between the ranges are preserved. That would acomplish the above without a python script. I think a 50% boost to the surface detectability of every hull would go a long way to improving it. Then go from there to see if Tower spotting needs to be tweaked. I think the underlining mechanics work, just way to low to produce real world spotting distances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neph Posted January 26, 2023 Share Posted January 26, 2023 6 hours ago, admiralsnackbar said: As soon as I learn to code in python In all seriousness though there was someone on this thread who described using a script to edit the text files. I have a rough Idea of what I would want. Go through the towers values and find the minimum and maximum spotting values in the game, adjust all values by a scalar. It occurs to me though that weather in the game alters the detection range [by a negative percent] -- i wonder if it's possible to alter it by a positive percent and then adjust the values relative to eachother so that the relative differences between the ranges are preserved. That would acomplish the above without a python script. It's really incredibly simple. If you can point me at where parts.txt lives I'll give it a swing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admiralsnackbar Posted January 26, 2023 Author Share Posted January 26, 2023 27 minutes ago, neph said: It's really incredibly simple. If you can point me at where parts.txt lives I'll give it a swing you'll need the unity asset bundle extractor, you're looking in resources.assets for a textassets called parts, the pathID as of 1.1.2 is 8194 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o Barão Posted January 26, 2023 Share Posted January 26, 2023 "...Features include new weather and graphical environments, UI polish, improvements on the spotting system and many new ship models. We will also create a special thread where you can help us list what is mostly bothering you, so we can try to fix it...." https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/1069660/view/3653017023922886169 5 hours ago, madham82 said: I think a 50% boost to the surface detectability of every hull would go a long way to improving it. Maybe it's better to wait and see what the devs will do? This being said a 50% boost can be a nice improvement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madham82 Posted January 26, 2023 Share Posted January 26, 2023 43 minutes ago, o Barão said: "...Features include new weather and graphical environments, UI polish, improvements on the spotting system and many new ship models. We will also create a special thread where you can help us list what is mostly bothering you, so we can try to fix it...." https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/1069660/view/3653017023922886169 Maybe it's better to wait and see what the devs will do? This being said a 50% boost can be a nice improvement. Yep I saw that, so they at least acknowledge it is a problem. Maybe they took some notes my post in the main thread. I know we aren't the only ones who have complained either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anonusername Posted January 26, 2023 Share Posted January 26, 2023 (edited) 16 hours ago, neph said: Could probably write a quick python script to crawl parts.txt & alter every value awk or perl are better for this; both are specialized specifically for this kind of bulk text manpulation, awk moreso than perl. Python is the world's most popular dumpster fire, and personally I will only touch it for significant quantities of money. Currently I just use a shell script and sed since unpacking and repacking the asset file is too much trouble for the edits I want to make. If I was properly unpacking it, I would probably use awk. (I could write my own unpacker in c++, but I can do 99% of edits I want without bothering.) #!/bin/zsh UAD_DIR='/home/REDACTED/Documents/games/steam/steamapps/common/Ultimate Admiral Dreadnoughts/Ultimate Admiral Dreadnoughts_Data' UAD_ASSETS="$UAD_DIR/resources.assets" UAD_BACKUP="${UAD_ASSETS}.bak" declare -a GUN_MARKS GUN_CALIBERS declare -ia MARK_STARTS MARK_ENDS CALIBER_OFFSETS GUN_MARKS=( "Mk-I" "Mk-II" "Mk-III" "Mk-IV" "Mk-V" ) GUN_CALIBERS=( "9-inch" "10-inch" "11-inch" "12-inch" "13-inch" "14-inch" "15-inch" "16-inch" "17-inch" "18-inch" "19-inch" "20-inch" ) # Taken from secondary gun techs. MARK_STARTS=( "1890" "1893" "1910" "1919" "1930" ) MARK_ENDS=( "1890" "1902" "1919" "1929" "1940" ) # Taken form main gun techs. CALIBER_OFFSETS=( 0 # 9in 0 # 10in 0 # 11in 0 # 12in 5 # 13in - 1895 21 # 14in - 1911 27 # 15in - 1917 29 # 16in - 1919 34 # 17in - 1924 37 # 18in - 1927 39 # 19in - 1929 41 # 20in - 1931 ) generate_gun_years() { local -i ncals=${#GUN_CALIBERS[@]} for ((i = 1; i <= ${#GUN_MARKS[@]}; ++i)); do for ((j = 1; j <= $ncals; ++j)); do local -i coff=${CALIBER_OFFSETS[$j]} local -i syear=${MARK_STARTS[$i]} local -i eyear=${MARK_ENDS[$i]} local -i year=$(( $syear + ($eyear - $syear) * $j / $ncals )) # "Minimum Year" for calibers which are not invented at game start. local -i myear=$((1890 + $coff + 2 * $i - 1)) # Don't allow bigger guns to hit high marks too fast [[ $year -lt $myear ]] && year=$myear echo ${GUN_MARKS[${i}]} ${GUN_CALIBERS[${j}]} guns $year done done } apply_changes() { local line; while read -r line; do [[ ${line:0:2} != "//" ]] && sed -re "$line" -i "$UAD_ASSETS" done } # Applies changes in a single sed call. apply_changes_opt() { local line while read -r line; do echo -e '\055e' "'$line'" done | xargs sed -r -i "$UAD_ASSETS" } cp "$UAD_BACKUP" "$UAD_ASSETS" apply_changes << 'EOF' s/,south_carolina_hull_a,/,dreadnought_hull_c,000/ s/(tech_budget_boost),110/\1,120/ s/(tech_budget_max),35/\1,50/ s/(research_progress_base),1.5/\1,1.8/ s/(research_late_years_to_double),25/\1,10/ s/(hide_research_below),66/\1,20/ s/(fuel_battle_max_throttle_mod),1.05/\1,0.50/ s/flaws\(3.5\)/flaws(5.0)/ s/reload\(27.5\)/reload(50.0)/ s/reload\(20\)/reload(40)/ s/reload\(15\)/reload(30)/ s/reload\(10\)/reload(20)/ s/penetration\(1.5\)/penetration(015)/ s/penetration\(-2.5\)/penetration(5.00)/ s/penetration\(-5\)/penetration(10)/ s/(Dunnite.*shell_damage)\(10\)/\1(25)/ s/gun_damage\(\+17.5;-15\)/gun_damage(+5.0;-5.0)/ s/torpedo_damage\(\+20;-20\)/torpedo_damage(+5;-5.0)/ s/gun_damage\(\+20;-20\)/gun_damage(+5;-5.0)/ s/ap_ricochet_chance\(7.5\)/ap_ricochet_chance(-10)/ s/ap_ricochet_chance\(10\), /ap_ricochet_chance(-15),/ s/ap_ricochet_chance\(15\), /ap_ricochet_chance(-20),/ s/ap_ricochet_chance\(20\), /ap_ricochet_chance(-40),/ s/(^gun_length_firerate_min,0.)275/\1100/ s/(^gun_length_firerate_max,-0.)15/\110/ s/(^over_penetration_threshold,)2/\13/ s/(^over_penetration,0.0)85/\135/ s/(^armor_damage_threshold),0.15/\1,0.15/ s/(^no_ricochet_threshold),1.5/\1,1.1/ s/(weight\(tower_(main|sec);)-2\)/\1-1)/g s/(weight\(tower_(main|sec);)-3.5\)/\1-2.0)/g s/(weight\(tower_(main|sec);)-5\)/\1-3)/g s/(weight\(tower_(main|sec);)-6.5\)/\1-4.0)/g s/(weight\(tower_(main|sec);)-8\)/\1-5)/g s/(weight\(tower_(main|sec);)-4\)/\1-2)/g s/(weight\(tower_(main|sec);)-7\)/\1-4)/g s/(weight\(tower_(main|sec);)-9\)/\1-5)/g s/(weight\(tower_(main|sec);)-10\)/\1-06)/g s/(weight\(tower_(main|sec);)-11\)/\1-06)/g s/(weight\(tower_(main|sec);)-13\)/\1-07)/g s/(weight\(tower_(main|sec);)-15\)/\1-10)/g s/(weight\(tower_(main|sec);)-20\)/\1-12)/g s/(weight\(tower_(main|sec);)-25\)/\1-15)/g s/(weight\(tower_(main|sec);)-7.5\)/\1-5.0)/g s/(weight\(tower_(main|sec);)-12\)/\1-08)/g s/(^lose_provinces_threshold,0).3/\1.1/ s/(^war_min_duration,)5/\11/ s/(^war_wealth_growth_add,-0.00)55/\115/ s/(^war_inflation_add,-0.0)12/\103/ s/(^instability_damage_ratio,0.0)65/\115/ s/(^peace_treaty_chance_per_month,)20/\160/ s/(^player_decision_chance_fight,)-15/\1-50/ s/(^peace_min_vp_difference),10000/\1,05000/ s/(^major_nation_threat_chance,0).1/\1.9/ s/(^spread_close,0).85/\1.65/ s/(^min_battle_lines_spread),1050/\1,0750/ s/(^damage_section_spread_mod),0.975/\1,0.500/ s/(^destroyed_section_damage_penalty),0.25/\1,0.15/ s/(^war_naval_budget_mult),2,mu/\1,1.2,/ EOF generate_gun_years | \ # This works because the first capture group is greedy and catches up to the last space. sed -re 's/(.*) (.*)/s\/(\1),1...\/\\1,\2\//' | apply_changes_opt Edited January 26, 2023 by anonusername Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admiralsnackbar Posted January 27, 2023 Author Share Posted January 27, 2023 V0.6 changes (for 1.1.3)It is difficult to keep current with a daily update schedule, being quick about this limits my ability to guaranty that campaigns and battles are not broken. I very quickly checked my own campaign and custom battles to make sure they could launch properly, but that is no guaranty. Please be kind to me if something breaks, just revert to vanilla and inform me about it. Updated files to allow for compatibility with latest hotfix (1.1.2). Some small differences from v0.3 in terms of the what is changed from vanilla. If not mentioned assume it’s the same as before: Accuracies Detection range modifiers for weather have been “on-leveled” so that the relative differences between them are preserved, but the new “base detection” is 1.5x what the base detection is. @neph Anecdotally looks like it’s working but it’s the sort of thing that is insanely hard to test. Feedback on this ‘change’ is very strongly requested. Will adjust based on feedback and also possible future changes as needed. Params Anything I noticed that was altered between 1.1.3 and 1.1.2 I have deferred to. I’ve squeezed some of the gdp modifiers to be closer to vanilla again. If national economy collapses stop happening I may remove them completely for the next version. Chance of peace/war after you make your choice is still 90% 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neph Posted January 27, 2023 Share Posted January 27, 2023 8 hours ago, anonusername said: Python is the world's most popular dumpster fire I think I literally said this verbatim to a coworker today, no love lost with me 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now