"Naval Arms Race" mod overhaul. BETA 2.9 "Major Powers update"

[DyonisX]

1 hour ago, dariusbei said:

The scaling on the Spanish Modern Heavy Cruiser II superstructure seems a bit off.

Top: Modern Tower I

Bottom: Mega Tower II

 

Hey step-ship, why is your right tower much larger than your left?

[bshaftoe]

Probably this has been answered before. Main guns have less accuracy than secondary weapons? (12 inch mk 2, 9 inch mk2 against 3/4/5 inch mk 2, all with coincidence mk 1) Or is it simply than faster firing weapons get quicker to a satisfactory firing solution due to cadence of fire, but main cannons will get there and surpass it eventually?

[o Barão]

1 hour ago, bshaftoe said:

Or is it simply than faster firing weapons get quicker to a satisfactory firing solution due to cadence of fire

This. In N.A.R. the bigger the gun, the more accurate will be. However, a few months ago, the devs implemented this new mechanic that makes small caliber guns with a big R.O.F. to increase accuracy much quicker. Which makes sense.

 

I don't remember if the main guns will eventually surpass the small guns in terms of accuracy. All the time, I will reach the point where the magical range found boost will be activated, and all hope in playing a simulation game is lost. If I am getting 70% accuracy with my main guns against a target at 15 km away, I am not worried if my secondaries have 80% accuracy. It is all fantasy bullshit at that point.

[DyonisX]

Oh so using smaller guns is actually meta?

[Desecrea]

7 hours ago, o Barão said:

Thanks! It will be fixed.

looked around in the parts file, might just be me, but even tho those towers are showing up in game, they are not part of the part options for that hull...

[StrikerDanger]

1 hour ago, o Barão said:

If I am getting 70% accuracy with my main guns against a target at 15 km away, I am not worried if my secondaries have 80% accuracy. It is all fantasy bullshit at that point.

What's the optimal accuracy percentage your aiming for with N.A.R? 25-30%?

[o Barão]

1 hour ago, Desecrea said:

looked around in the parts file, might just be me, but even tho those towers are showing up in game, they are not part of the part options for that hull...

Yes, I noticed. I need to check each tower individually to see if I can find the solution or can be something related to the hull info. In other words, is going to be a pain in the ass.

 

51 minutes ago, StrikerDanger said:

What's the optimal accuracy percentage your aiming for with N.A.R? 25-30%?

If is around x1 - x3 to what was possible IRL, I am happy. The problem is when the range boost magic show up, it will multiply the value by x10 times!!! +/- And I can't do anything about that. Well, I did lower the range found boost value in N.A.R. but the multiplier effect I can't do anything. It is a terrible mechanic that ruins any possibility of playing a simulation game.

 

2 hours ago, DyonisX said:

Oh so using smaller guns is actually meta?

Secondaries are always important. This being said, they are more important in 1890 and less in 1940.

 

 

 

[StrikerDanger]

4 hours ago, o Barão said:

. but the multiplier effect I can't do anything

So the only way for this to change is for it to be a change in the actual client, outside the mod itself?

[Fangoriously]

Thought id comment on the debuff from recoil, seems the most powerful factor in bonuses/maladies to accuracy, a mere -143.9 reduces accuracy to absolute 0. A range found of +143 hardly puts accuracy to 100%, even a bonus of +1430 wouldn't do that, its like any recoil penalty over 100% subtracts 100% accuracy from your guns.

Even on this 70000 ton super battleship, fireing 8 ~20in guns, it must shake the ship so hard everyone is thrown off their feet.

If you can tone this down, I would, Otherwise on future ship builds with especially large guns i wont waste the tonnage of having more than like 2 turrets.

[SpardaSon21]

The "Enhanced Modern Tower" and "Modern Tower" series of main towers for the US Modern Destroyer hulls lack any buffs to Communications Range.

EDIT: Neither do the "Modern Tower", "Enhanced Modern Tower", or "Heavy Modern Tower" for the two Advanced Destroyer hulls.

Edited July 30, 2023 by SpardaSon21

[Kerbo]

Would it be possible to remove old hulls going obsolete? there seems to be a mod on nexus that does that but not sure if it works in the current version and weather it can be integrated into the mod

[o Barão]

8 hours ago, Fangoriously said:

Thought id comment on the debuff from recoil, seems the most powerful factor in bonuses/maladies to accuracy, a mere -143.9 reduces accuracy to absolute 0. A range found of +143 hardly puts accuracy to 100%, even a bonus of +1430 wouldn't do that, its like any recoil penalty over 100% subtracts 100% accuracy from your guns.

Even on this 70000 ton super battleship, fireing 8 ~20in guns, it must shake the ship so hard everyone is thrown off their feet.

If you can tone this down, I would, Otherwise on future ship builds with especially large guns i wont waste the tonnage of having more than like 2 turrets.

Test the same thing in a custom battle with a 130k ton BB.  4 turrets with x2 20" barrels.

 

33 minutes ago, Kerbo said:

Would it be possible to remove old hulls going obsolete? there seems to be a mod on nexus that does that but not sure if it works in the current version and weather it can be integrated into the mod

If it is possible, yes. Just edit the "technologies" file to get what you want.

[Kerbo]

2 hours ago, o Barão said:

Test the same thing in a custom battle with a 130k ton BB.  4 turrets with x2 20" barrels.

 

If it is possible, yes. Just edit the "technologies" file to get what you want.

I mean within the mod, wouldn't be worth using on it's own without this amazing mod imo. though i am unsure of how it would affect the AI 🤔

[o Barão]

26 minutes ago, Kerbo said:

I mean within the mod, wouldn't be worth using on it's own without this amazing mod imo. though i am unsure of how it would affect the AI 🤔

In N.A.R. you will never see that. It is not only against the mod core idea, it is also the worst thing you can do for the gameplay. But, modders did that in the past, and I am sure you will see again when the game gets the 1.4 live version.

[Kerbo]

4 minutes ago, o Barão said:

In N.A.R. you will never see that. It is not only against the mod core idea, it is also the worst thing you can do for the gameplay. But, modders did that in the past, and I am sure you will see again when the game gets the 1.4 live version.

I see, thanks

[o Barão]

On 7/30/2023 at 8:16 AM, SpardaSon21 said:

The "Enhanced Modern Tower" and "Modern Tower" series of main towers for the US Modern Destroyer hulls lack any buffs to Communications Range.

EDIT: Neither do the "Modern Tower", "Enhanced Modern Tower", or "Heavy Modern Tower" for the two Advanced Destroyer hulls.

Good observation!

[o Barão]

0.9.5.3 N.A.R. changelog:

• Added radio stats for many modern USA DD towers (missing from stock game / fixed)
• Spanish Modern Heavy Cruiser II tower options fixed.

[flaviohc16]

can you revert, or do you know what parameter we have to edit to revert back the " 1 naval invasion per nation" that has been just added?

[bshaftoe]

On 7/29/2023 at 7:22 PM, o Barão said:

This. In N.A.R. the bigger the gun, the more accurate will be. However, a few months ago, the devs implemented this new mechanic that makes small caliber guns with a big R.O.F. to increase accuracy much quicker. Which makes sense.

 

I don't remember if the main guns will eventually surpass the small guns in terms of accuracy. All the time, I will reach the point where the magical range found boost will be activated, and all hope in playing a simulation game is lost. If I am getting 70% accuracy with my main guns against a target at 15 km away, I am not worried if my secondaries have 80% accuracy. It is all fantasy bullshit at that point.

Ok, then I am happy. Exactly like you, I know that 50+% could only probably happen in very specific circumstances in real life or super-close to "lab test" conditions (maybe stationary or non-"avoiding fire" targets, at exactly the sweet range spot with tense or at least semi-tense trajectory, thinking Bismarck when they were dead in water and pummeled by KGV and Rodney, or also Matapan, maybe?), but I mean, this is a game. It's a lot of fun. Hopefully at some point the magical bonus can be exported and then modified or maybe the bonus can be scripted some how.

But I wanted to know if I was doing something stupid (that I am, because I am constantly changing course, or the worst, changing targets, screwing the solution) or if there was some kind of bug.

Thanks for the quick response, man.

Edited July 31, 2023 by bshaftoe

[o Barão]

2 hours ago, bshaftoe said:

Hopefully at some point the magical bonus can be exported and then modified or maybe the bonus can be scripted some how.

I am almost sure it is a locked file in the core game files. I spent many hours messing around with all the accuracy modifiers in the "params" and I didn't have any luck, but maybe I miss something, could be.

 

2 hours ago, flaviohc16 said:

can you revert, or do you know what parameter we have to edit to revert back the " 1 naval invasion per nation" that has been just added?

That parameter is not available to us modders. But I am almost sure the devs will fix that issue.

 

NOTE: The dev mentioned it is already fixed in the latest update.

Edited July 31, 2023 by o Barão

[o Barão]

0.9.5.4 N.A.R. changelog:

• Updated to UAD v1.3.9.8r5

 

Edited July 31, 2023 by o Barão

[Nick Thomadis]

1 hour ago, o Barão said:

0.9.5.4 N.A.R. changelog:

• Updated to UAD v1.3.9.8r5
• Kiautschou Bay and Kwang-Chou-Wan are not home province.

 

Baron unfortunately changes on the config regarding province and port data do not apply, unless further changes are made to world scene. I assume you made those 2 provinces not Home due to their increased army size?

What was the problem for those provinces you wanted to fix?

 

EDIT:

If you are able to edit the World.scene, then please disregard my comment.

[o Barão]

35 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:

Baron unfortunately changes on the config regarding province and port data do not apply, unless further changes are made to world scene. I assume you made those 2 provinces not Home due to their increased army size?

What was the problem for those provinces you wanted to fix?

Thanks for the heads up!!

Yes, that was the problem reported by other players that I was trying to prevent to happen.

35 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:

If you are able to edit the World.scene, then please disregard my comment.

Probably not. Many weeks ago, I tried to nerf the Honiara port and buff Truk Atoll and Pearl Harbor without success.

Now I know why. These are only minor improvements anyway. Not critical. I will remove those changes.

Edited July 31, 2023 by o Barão

[admiralsnackbar]

Barao, which file is responsible for the default mark rating for a given weapon type (i.e. whether a gun with no length changes says, 5"/25 instead of 5"/35 or something?

[o Barão]

3 minutes ago, admiralsnackbar said:

Barao, which file is responsible for the default mark rating for a given weapon type (i.e. whether a gun with no length changes says, 5"/25 instead of 5"/35 or something?

In the "partsModel" file you will see this on top.

 

model_1,scale_1,max_scale_1,weight_modifier_1,caliber_length_modifier_1

model_2,scale_2,max_scale_2,weight_modifier_2,caliber_length_modifier_2

model_3,scale_3,max_scale_3,weight_modifier_3,caliber_length_modifier_3

model_4,scale_4,max_scale_4,weight_modifier_4,caliber_length_modifier_4

model_5,scale_5,max_scale_5,weight_modifier_5,caliber_length_modifier_5

 

This is what will set the default barrel length in game for all guns. However, I strongly advise first to set the model scale first and only then change the barrel length. The scale model will have an impact on the barrel length.