-=Thank you for the participation in our 6-month Roadmap=-

[Werwaz]

With 1.3.4 out, this would probably be my current list of things I would like to see fixed/improved

1. fix pitch and roll. they worked perfectly fine  before 1.3. 
2. add the newer nation specific towers to the older beta-era hulls
3. more large modernized dreadnoughts for more countries, like the chinese and austrian modernized dreadnought 2
4. unique chinese, austrian, and spanish hulls and towers. right now ,they are basically filler nations with only copy/paste hulls and towers from other nations.
5. mod/steam workshop support

[Kiknurazz91]

Add the ability to during a peace treaty that if the terms are not what we want then we can choose to deny the terms and either they agree to winners terms or continue the war. For example winner dictates what they want from the enemy such as territory or ships and even limiting their naval power just like the Treaty of Versailles did to Germany in WW2. If they do not agree then war continues. Make wars worth the time and effort.

[Kevik70]

The ability to select open or closed mounts for small caliber guns. Sometimes you try to upgrade your ships and the newer turrets are too big and ruin your designs. Or you just want to save weight and space and do not care for crew safety.

The ability to put torpedo tubes on barbettes. Or special barbettes/ mounting points for torpedos. Makes designs like the Mahan class possible. 

UK 6" gun that is modeled after the guns on the Town Class cruiser. The current Mk 4 6" looks horrid on a light cruisers. 

US 6" gun modeled after the guns of the Cleveland class cruiser. The New US Mk 4/5 6" does not look good on light cruiser hulls.

[clavernever]

On 5/28/2023 at 4:30 PM, Vaarsuvius said:

I do delete A from the ship list, but then I have A1 Refit and A1-C. And when I refit A1 Refit to A1 Refit-2 then I also have to refit any ships I made of A1-C, and I need to do a separate refit of A1-C so I'll have A1 Refit-2 and A1-C Refit so all my ships are upgraded. Unless you're saying that every time I refit a ship I should instead scrap all of the older vessels and only make new ships.

 

Or maybe there's some shenanigans you can do with names of classes to make it work out. I haven't figured it out yet.

I discovered a while ago that you can simply name your A1-C copy "A1" and it will be treated by the game the same as the original A1 design.
In UAD ship names are not unique,  and all ships that share the same root name will be treated as a single ship class for refit purposes.

As an example my design flow in a campaign would go as follows:
> [1900] - Design new Ex class and add it to my design list.
> [1902] - Right before a war, refit Ex to Ex (1902) to benefit from the latest tech.
> -------- Copy the Ex (1902) refit and rename it " Ex "
> -------- Look at the ship list. There will be two identically named Ex ship classes. Identify the old one by looking at the stats and delete it (you know what changes you made from the original to the refit, so telling one from the other isn't too hard; intentionally having a small tonnage difference helps speed this part up).
> -------- [Optional] After you're finished refitting your old ships to the new 1902 model, you can delete it and keep only the updated Ex design.
> [1905] - Refit Ex to Ex (1905) like you normally would with a newly created design. Notice all previous Ex class ships, no matter their refit name or year of creation will be updated to Ex (1905).

You can simply repeat the steps I mentioned whenever you want to create an updated design, you can even skip the process for a refit cycle and re-unify the class later down the line. You don't even have to create the Ex class by copying an existing design, so long as it's the same hull you can name it Ex and create a refit, and it will let you update all ships of that class to the new design.
Furthermore, if you made two different designs that share a hull (say for example two DD classes, one focused on guns and the other one on torps) you can copy the refit of class A, name it B and apply it to all ships of class B.  You'll still have classes A and B afterwards, but they will both have the design from A (refit).

Hope this helps. 

If anything, I think it speaks to the untapped potential there is in the currently implemented class system.
If the already available naming shenanigans were integrated into the UI, we could have significantly more ship design flexibility without requiring a rewrite of how classes work under the hood.

Edited June 1, 2023 by clavernever

[Bradley]

So there needs to be a exit refit back to the drydock. Because currently you go to refit a shit if you change your mind or something you have to exit back to the ship design tab and then go back into the drydock to start again, which is a major pain in the ass. And are there any plans to add in some kind of army management? Because at the moment the army doesn't do what i need it to, for example I was at war with China for 9 years in one playthrough and in the first year I conquered 2 territories but it did nothing after that. Same thing when Germany attacked northern France my army was busy trying to attack northern Italy, but there was no way for to say "stop attacking Italy and defend France' which when playing as France you would think is important. Also a nice feature would be to improve the way you move fleets, because currently its very clunky and in and out of screens to move things. And for example if you move one ship from your fleet you then cant move the rest of the fleet, I know it sounds cheap but a total war style movement system where you select the force you want to move and select where you to move it and view all the ship in the fleet in a simplified list which can expanded to what we see now. And make it so when you move one ship it doesn't stay where you're moving it from it exits the fleet so you can see both the main force and the smaller one separately. 

[Marshall99]

After few months passed, I started playing with this game again. 

I will talk about the potential of this game. This is why I came back:

I can design pre-dreadnoughts and some ironclad ships and play with them! This! There are almost no other games where you can do this. Yes I know...Rule the waves, but this game beats it graphically! 

I know that the game starts from 1890 and lots of players prefer modern ships. But, still, many of us enjoying this early time period. Lots of unique hulls, designs, pioneer ships. In my opinion some late ironclads would be very nice adition for the game. For example the italian Caio Duilio 1880 ironclad had four 450 mm guns. Yes, 450 mm guns! In 1880. Imagine how trollish that thing would be in this game. The british ironclads would be also very nice addition to the game. For example: HMS Inflexible, HMS Colossus, HMS Victoria, and the Admiral class ironclads. The Admiral class ironclads were in comission from 1887 so those ships would be perfect starter ships for Britain. Also these ships had open barabettes. 

And this is why modding support is very important. The dev team is small, and they can't model every single ship hulls and assets, but many mod makers can. Just imagine how many interesting ship hulls, turrets, guns, masts, towers could be implemented into this game.

In conclusion I would love to see some later ironclads and the modding support. 

[JaM]

Maybe quite unpopular opinion, but i would like to see shorter campaign -  We play as head of Naval Board, and early start of 1890 means that we can keep playing up till 1950, which is 60 years.. There is no way any country would have 20years old Head of Navy, and even less probable is for him to serve in same position till his 80ties...

 

So, my suggestion would be to shorten the campaign to let say 25 years tops, and give player summary when he achieves to retirement age. If you start at 1890, you would serve till 1915 and then campaign would end and you would see your results..

Right now, if I start 1890 campaign, when i hit 1915-1920 period, usually world is almost completely broken and lots of countries are dissolved, so most of the time i just quit such campaign and start over.. having option to "retire" to get the statistics, or have campaign end at 1915, would prevent that, and would also make choosing Era more viable due to limited duration of 25 years...

 

[Keunes]

I don't know if it has been suggested, but would it be nice to link the improve/worsen relations action to a task force in a certain area. So if i want to piss of the french, nothing personal, i would have to park a ship in a sea area with a french presence and generate an event. I'll sail there and through the politics screen select a relations action. It will then generate a message saying something like, "your cruiser tried to sail on a collision course with a french vessel and threaten a ram, relations -10".

Since i'm just an admiral, i figured the main way to show your diplomatic stance is with physical presence of your ships. maybe even let through an event sometimes where there actually was a collison and you lose some crew or even the whole ship.

[Admiral Hipster]

I would love for a modernized pre-dreadnought hull to be possible for Germany between 1920-1930.
It would make it much easier to recreate the Deutschland class.
I think it would be easy to implement since the hull already exists (or almost) in the game

Also superstructures more compatible with the Scharnhorst class and the H class.

Camouflages for ships would be an interesting addition.
I think it could give buffs to decrease detectability, while also decreasing the enemy's aiming speed.

I particularly find the aircraft carrier idea interesting. I know not everyone likes the idea but this implementation could be sold as a separate DLC.
Sorry for my english, it's not my native language

[Captain Vlad]

Greatly enjoying the changes to the campaign/zones of control, etc.  Some suggestions for the future are as follows, some of which may be repeated from my previous posts.

1> Additional hulls and/or components would be nice, as always.  To my perception, light cruiser-sized vessels, especially later era, could really use some diversification, even after the Atlanta was added.  I really like the Modern Light Cruiser Hull, but there's no more "national flavor" alternative for several nations.

Despite me talking about modern CLs above, in general I think the early game needs the most help here.

2>I really feel like the tonnage build limit for cruisers needs to be separate from cruiser hull types.  As is, it can be really difficult to build something like, say, HMS Powerful or the Jeanne D'Arc during the era they were actually built due to the way the cruiser tech tree currently works.

3>Larger secondaries on at least some CL hulls, especially earlier Armored/Protected cruisers, for similar reasons to the above.  Larger main batteries on older protected cruiser hulls would be welcome as well.

4>Have to echo other suggestions to have open/closed mount options for gun types to help prevent improving gun tech from screwing up designs.  The option to use older guns would work too, but I would prefer being able to use the higher tech guns in smaller-footprint open mounts.  There are already quad-mount open turrets in late game as a progression from triple turrets for some nations;  seems like the models for the guns could be adapted from those?

5>Greater interaction with minor nations, including wooing them into becoming my ally, would be great.  Being able to play as some of the minor nations would also be great, especially some that only appear if a major government collapses, such as India.  The South American countries would be great as further player nations especially considering the South American Dreadnought race.

6>Still feel being able to build hulls smaller than destroyers after torpedo boats become obsolete would be welcome.  Dedicated convoy escorts/ASW ships would be most welcome, and small minelayers/minesweepers would be a great alternative for play-throughs where you've decided not to worry about submarines.

7>Would still love some hull painting options/skins so I could get my Great White Fleet/Dazzle Camo/French Grey-Blue style on.

8>A small thing, but for those of us who love convoy raiding, it'd be nice to have an estimate of just how many transport ships your adversaries have and maybe estimations of how many you'd have to take out to start seeing effects.

Edited June 14, 2023 by Captain Vlad

[Suribachi]

Would like a feature to have spies gather information about campaign adversaries.  For example, in the log we get the message: "A-H laid down new ship: BB Starke of Karl class".

On its own, this message just adds noise.

If a spy can tell you even limited information about the new ship, such as what guns it has or its speed or some armor numbers, the player can begin to plan counters immediately instead of 5 years later (design and construction of new ship) when it is too late to field your counter.

[Hydrospade80]

I wish the Obsolete feature, where certain technologies get locked, was removed, or at least able to be toggled in the custom game. I think the feature is weird because ships like the USS New York and USS Texas had triple expansion steam engines yet their hulls aren't in the same time period as their engine type. The same thing happens with remaking ships like the USS Oklahoma and others. 

[Panzergraf]

Better smoke reports, please.
I want to know which of my ships is spotting the smoke. North of Ship A might be North-East of Ship B
If there are more smoke on the horizon, I want to know. Not just the closest.
Give me some sort of visual clue from each ship, similar to RDF but more vague.

Hunting convoys pre-RDF is such a pain.

[MDHansen]

Campaign with no end date. It's (probably?) easier than having more turns per year (26 or 52)

[Deadpan_Alpaca]

On 6/19/2023 at 6:07 PM, MDHansen said:

Campaign with no end date. It's (probably?) easier than having more turns per year (26 or 52)

I double this: being able to play just as long as there are enemies present, using all the endgame tech in the absurdly expensive ship designs would have been just perfect.

[Panzergraf]

Yeah, the 1950 end date could come with an option to keep playing, similar to the Total War games.

[Kiknurazz91]

1) An easier way to select multiple ships in your fleet menu rather than cntrl+click on each individual one so we can change the options available to change.

2) The ability to assign Fleet numbers to groups of ships. For example my 4BB, 6CA, 12CL, and 20DD can be named the 1st fleet and these fleet assignments will be effective until the player changes them. It would make it easier to manage than just simply taskforce and also have the Fleet number such as 1st above the ship icon on the campaign map.

3) If economic collapse happens during invasions or war the province should automatically go to the person invading it. Also reparations should still be given to the countries who were at war with the country that collapsed. 

4) No end date!

Edited June 23, 2023 by Kiknurazz91

[MDHansen]

Please, reduce the overall size of the UI and its contents. This is a quick and brute version, with no fine tuning or adjustments other than straight reduction in sizes.

Here is a few screens where Ive done:
Ship/Ports on campaign map reduced by 40%
ALL popup informations on campaign map reduced by 35-40%
in-battle popups reduced by 40%
Campaign Windows Nation/Log/Missions/Top Bar reduced by ~40%
Menus and Confirmation boxes reduced ~40%

This is simply done by Melonloader, and is only done live while playing the game. No core files was harmed in the process. I have to redo this process every time I run the game.

Edited June 26, 2023 by MDHansen

[Deadpan_Alpaca]

On 5/30/2023 at 8:55 PM, Kiknurazz91 said:

Add the ability to during a peace treaty that if the terms are not what we want then we can choose to deny the terms and either they agree to winners terms or continue the war. For example winner dictates what they want from the enemy such as territory or ships and even limiting their naval power just like the Treaty of Versailles did to Germany in WW2. If they do not agree then war continues. Make wars worth the time and effort.

I'd say, our "fleet mana" should be a currency to spare for such things as: 

a) peace treaties, by leveraging outcome to remove RNG out of equation - it is really infuriating to fight a bloody 2 year long war, sink literally each capital ships of the enemy navy and all that so that government decide that actually we don't need those provinces we demanded and had the score to claim;

b) invasions/alliances into minor nations - they are way too random and again, no way to control;

c) internal politics - let's assume, when our navy is influential, it may probably voice out support of certain political party or even join the discontent turning it into swift and fast revolution.

[Admiral Hipster]

Please, in the next update allow us to directly provoque and do aliances with minor nations.
I already play campaings that i didn't receive any kind of interation with another minor nation and that's frustrating. The game RNG is not good enought to offer an enjoyable playfull and even blocks our expansion plans along the campaing.

[LeGouzy]

I suggest making ships progressively less expensive and less flawed when many of the same model are built. This would reflect real life scale economies and gain of experience.

It would also be really nice to be able to choose which caliber of guns we want to improve through research.

[priiskda]

Allowing the victor to dictate terms can lead to a situation of extreme imbalance and potential abuse. For example, the Treaty of Versailles, negotiated after World War I, imposed such harsh conditions on Germany that it ultimately contributed to Adolf Hitler's rise to power and the outbreak of World War II. We must be careful not to repeat history and cause further instability. When I want to take my mind off history, I play online, find bonuses like Casino Extreme no deposit bonus, check it out, and then just have fun. As for using "fleet mana" as currency for diplomatic decisions, that's an interesting concept. It would allow more control over peace treaties and potentially shape the outcome according to the winning side's goals. However, there needs to be a balance between game mechanics and historical accuracy. We wouldn't want to reduce the element of unpredictability that is often present in wars and alliances.

Edited July 9, 2023 by priiskda

[Suribachi]

On 6/17/2023 at 5:28 PM, Suribachi said:

Would like a feature to have spies gather information about campaign adversaries.  For example, in the log we get the message: "A-H laid down new ship: BB Starke of Karl class".

On its own, this message just adds noise.

If a spy can tell you even limited information about the new ship, such as what guns it has or its speed or some armor numbers, the player can begin to plan counters immediately instead of 5 years later (design and construction of new ship) when it is too late to field your counter.

Going to expand on my earlier suggestion a bit.  The game should also have a "identification book" feature where the player can reference information about enemy ships that were encountered in combat.  Does not have to be anything too drastic, something similar to what we can see about our own ships in the Ship Design tab will suffice.  This way, a player does not have to either try and remember what they encountered or write everything down if they are playing seriously.

[HistoricalAccuracyMan]

Could you please re-visit the weight offsets on some of the new hulls...the newer US dreadnought hulls in particular (the hulls that allow us to "recreate" USS Texas to be even more specific)? It seems like no matter how much I try, I can't get a decently balanced ship. It always winds up being much heavier on the bow than the stern no matter what I try. It doesn't need to be much of a tweak either...just give it a bit more weight towards the stern and I think it will be fine.

[Altarotw]

After ~100h in game i have basically 4 requests that break my gameplay:

1) Ship pathing anomalies -  this is something that is game breaking late game (1910+), when there are large battles like 20-30 ships on either side there are always some strange ship behaviour when one ship in a squad runs away from battle instead of going in (i direct whole squad to manoeuvrer between ships in battle and 2 obey and one is 30 km away and goes in opposite direction). I mostly use the triangle formation for smaller ships and line for BB's, but i triangle very often AI overrides the squad directions, like I'm ordering the squad to turn right to go between ships and the AI forces the ship to turn left  (no idea why), for this error forcing manual full right rudder and preforming the turn seems to fix, it so it's not the "sticky rudder" but rather something with pathing.  Basically the pathing system almost every time tries to force the ship to go to maximum gun range and do long range artillery barrage, where my play style is to create few heavily armoured ships with single high caliber gun (Tank BB vs AI BB) and several fast light or semi-armored cruisers (guns for TB & DD + torpedoes for CA). This all implies that i fight in close quarters where the pathing systems tries to do it exactly opposite.

 

2) Squad leader auto change - when i have a fast ship chasing a BB to torpedo it in any formation, then single main gun hit from the BB force a squad leader change. So the leading ship that has any chance of releasing the torpedoes does 180' and fals back behind new leader. The new leader then have to catchup with BB only to do exactly the same after receiving one hit. There is basically no point in chasing BB in squad, you need to micromanage every ship to accomplish anything  

3) We need to be able to provoke/initialize invasion on minor nation on our own. It's infuriating i have to fight a war on another end of the world because all my "neighbours" are minor nations. 

4) Ungoverned provinces should be "free for all" invasion. I don't know what is the point of empire fall logic and implementation when, it's only solution is instant stop of any hostilities and moving all "ungoverned provinces" to un-invadable state (at least by the player, because it falls back to the minor nation war logic).

 

So when i play China I end up with Japan reduced to Honshu, Britan breaking up just after taking Australia and Spain breaking apart somewhere in the middle due to European war.  Russia is an easy one at least on pacific, but still i brekas apart just after taking everything east of central siberia. Then after taking the germany's islands there is basically no point in making any other war  elsewhere with any empire as i have basically whole pacific of "ungoverned territories" and minor nations but the game forces me to fight France, Germany or US.