"Naval Arms Race" mod overhaul. BETA 2.9.1 "Major Powers update"

[NathanKell]

3 minutes ago, Lamb Chop said:

I have the exact same problem with the "Upgrade Mark"
 

You goto Design, Refit, Hit the "Upgrade Nark" Save
Design shows mk.2 Guns etc.
Refit the actual ship.
The Actual ship is still Mk.I

Confirmed in multiple occasions

If it Helps, Brother Munro is having the exact same issue on his current Youtube campaign with his mod.
However, since I know that some of his mod files are based on yours, I though I would report it here.
I am abut to try with Tweaks and Fixes only, will report

 

Finally someone gives me _actual repro instructions_ rather than "it doesn't work!!!". So thank you.

I think that gives me enough to figure this one out.

[Lamb Chop]

3 minutes ago, NathanKell said:

Finally someone gives me _actual repro instructions_ rather than "it doesn't work!!!". So thank you.

I think that gives me enough to figure this one out.

I am in IT, without reproduction it is a user error

BTW, I am on NAR 2.5.0
Playing as Ottomans and I have modified the tecnologies and params a bit
Removed tonnage restrictions on hull techs,
Reduced the refit time in params

[Lamb Chop]

44 minutes ago, Lamb Chop said:

I have the exact same problem with the "Upgrade Mark"
 

You goto Design, Refit, Hit the "Upgrade Nark" Save
Design shows mk.2 Guns etc.
Refit the actual ship.
The Actual ship is still Mk.I

Confirmed in multiple occasions

If it Helps, Brother Munro is having the exact same issue on his current Youtube campaign with his mod.
However, since I know that some of his mod files are based on yours, I though I would report it here.
I am abut to try with Tweaks and Fixes only, will report

 

@NathanKell
Ok, I just did a quick test.

TL,DR. It is not NAR... It is the Tweaks and Fixes

Started a new Vanilla Campaign, Britain, 1900.
Only Tweaks and Fixes active.
Mk.2 13 and 8 Inch guns were 2 month research away.
Designed a nd built a BS with 13 & 8 inch mk.I's
Designed and built a CA with 8 inch mk.1's
Tech researched, refit the designs and refitted the ships with upgrade mark.
Design shows upgraded turrets.
Actual ship itself when click on view still shows mk. I

Saves are available if you like, before and after refit

[NathanKell]

36 minutes ago, Lamb Chop said:

@NathanKell
Ok, I just did a quick test.

TL,DR. It is not NAR... It is the Tweaks and Fixes

Started a new Vanilla Campaign, Britain, 1900.
Only Tweaks and Fixes active.
Mk.2 13 and 8 Inch guns were 2 month research away.
Designed a nd built a BS with 13 & 8 inch mk.I's
Designed and built a CA with 8 inch mk.1's
Tech researched, refit the designs and refitted the ships with upgrade mark.
Design shows upgraded turrets.
Actual ship itself when click on view still shows mk. I

Saves are available if you like, before and after refit

Uploaded a fix.

Turns out the way refitting worked was...not quite as I thought. But now grade data gets copied when you refit a ship. Sadly ships that have already been refitted will have the issue, and while I would like to write some kind of upgrader, detecting when it's in the bad state is...nontrivial. So I would say for now, with my apologies, please edit the save to change the ;1 (or ;2 or whatever) at the end of your turret part data lines to remove the ; and the number after it, on every ship you want the guns to be upgraded on.

[o Barão]

6 hours ago, StrikerDanger said:

Is this related to the collision/placement issue on hulls such as this one where the secondary should work (and the space dictates as much), but the game just goes "nuh uh" and highlights the barbette yellow and screams "placement issue"?

gun_expand_same_cal,0.25,gun's obstruction on the sides to same caliber guns,0.29,0.135,0.078335,0.43,,,
gun_expand_lower_cal,2,>= 4 inch gun's obstruction on the sides to lower caliber guns/torps,2.525,6.22,3.4,3.4,,,
gun_expand_lowest_cal,8,< 4 inch gun's obstruction on the sides to lower caliber guns/torps,5.5651,,,,,,
gun_expand_barbette,1.5,"gun obstruction on the sides of barbettes, disallowing shooting interference",,,,,,,
torpedo_expand,0.5,torpedo's obstruction on the sides,-0.2,0.515,0.41,1.1,,,

 

These modifiers from the params file are the responsible. But note that the "side" have a narrow angle.

[o Barão]

4 hours ago, Maximus Tyberius said:

I have a question: Why Chile and Brazil have the naval Jack in port cities and fleets instead of the national flag? Unlike The UK Chile and Brazil have always used the national flag as main flag and the naval jack only goes on the prow of the ships, and it's never displayed as "the flag of the navy" but as a sign of an officer on board... 

In UAD we have 2 flags for each country always at the same time. The country/government flag and the naval ensign/naval jack which can also change with the country government type.

In some countries the naval ensign is the same, but it is possible to also use the naval jack. In some situations I prefer to use the naval jack in others, like Argentina I prefer to use the naval ensign which is the same as the country flag.

*Note: If you open the flags folder you will see that I added more flags that are not being used. As an example the Argentina Navy Jack, or some fantasy A-H flags. You can add more and use what you want by editing the flags.csv file.

Edited Sunday at 08:03 AM by o Barão

[NathanKell]

On 9/13/2024 at 10:18 PM, Fyredrake said:

I presume this is not intended behavior? Gibraltar and the Cook islands being for free? XD

Save file please.

[sm0kin]

Seems like crew integer overflow.
NAR 2.5 / TaF 3.9.2

[overvaalmaaken]

Latest version of NAR and Tweaks and Fixes. Ottomans if are fascist have their name in all lower-case. Ottoman Caliphate would be good replacement for "the caliphate", as it was a claim of sultans.

[sm0kin]

Naval funds of the newly added nations are way too high as well (>320 trillion). Does the politics window just show wrong numbers for those nations or are they "real"?

[o Barão]

3 hours ago, sm0kin said:

Naval funds of the newly added nations are way too high as well (>320 trillion). Does the politics window just show wrong numbers for those nations or are they "real"?

I will need a screenshot.

[admiralsnackbar]

Two bits of constructive feedback on the mod.

But before I'll say i really enjoy it compared to vanilla and there are more improvements on this mod relative to my old balance mod for me to say that on net its better than the old rebalance mod. 

1. Tech research times feel too fast. -- For reference i have played as russia and china, by default I play with research budgets maxed out. I am able to attain something between a dreadnought and a superdreadnought type ship by about 1902. (22 knots, steam turbine, 13-14 inch 8-10 gun main battery). 

I know there are multiple levers affecting research times, so it might be down to the default research rates, the month values in the tech tree, or the multipliers associated with the research budget. The DIP mod by contrast feels more punishing in that a minor power at max budget will not be able to keep their technology at the same year. I think the optimal research speeds should be something of a compromise between these two. If you're going to allow a research budget to get you that far ahead the financial penalty for doing so should be much greater. 

As frustrating as DIP is with research one thing I think they get right is the feeling that you are budget constrained. As China I can slide everything to max and have a fleet i am comfortable with, which actually takes away from the enjoyment of the game. 

2. Consider upping the VP requirements associated with peace settlements. This is an issue with Vanilla as well but right now you can have your enemy asking for peace after sinking a single heavy cruiser. 20K is the default and from my experience something closer to 50-100K feels more appropriate. 
 

[sm0kin]

6 minutes ago, o Barão said:

I will need a screenshot.

 

7 hours ago, sm0kin said:

Seems like crew integer overflow.
NAR 2.5 / TaF 3.9.2

In my campaign, all newly added nations have greater than 300,000,000,000,000 funds and a 2^31 crew deficit (integer overflow?). All "major" (ger, eng, usa, etc.) nations have normal amounts of funds and crew.
It's a 1890 Japan campaign on legendary difficulty. I used TaF 3.9.0 in the beginning and updated the .dll, when the new version which fixed gun refits came along.

[Fyredrake]

9 hours ago, NathanKell said:

Save file please.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1SQEGjwAUn6cCcbaJOXASViH5MO3DS018/view?usp=sharing

Here you go 

[o Barão]

5 minutes ago, sm0kin said:

...on legendary difficulty.

Any higher difficulty above normal will bump all AI nations economies levels.

I am seeing crazy naval funds to spend. Are those normal values in comparison with the other big AI nations or they are just insane for the new nations?

 

18 minutes ago, admiralsnackbar said:

1. Tech research times feel too fast. -- For reference i have played as russia and china, by default I play with research budgets maxed out. I am able to attain something between a dreadnought and a superdreadnought type ship by about 1902. (22 knots, steam turbine, 13-14 inch 8-10 gun main battery).

o7 admiral!

 

One simple but important question. Did you focus in getting those techs earlier or just maxed out all in the finances tab?

Other players are seeing the same?

 

20 minutes ago, admiralsnackbar said:

2. Consider upping the VP requirements associated with peace settlements. This is an issue with Vanilla as well but right now you can have your enemy asking for peace after sinking a single heavy cruiser. 20K is the default and from my experience something closer to 50-100K feels more appropriate. 
 

I never touched those values but I am sure will take a look at them!🫡

[admiralsnackbar]

Just now, o Barão said:

Any higher difficulty above normal will bump all AI nations economies levels.

I am seeing crazy naval funds to spend. Are those normal values in comparison with the other big AI nations or they are just insane for the new nations?

 

o7 admiral!

 

One simple but important question. Did you focus in getting those techs earlier or just maxed out all in the finances tab?

Other players are seeing the same?

 

So I usually start my game in 1890 and what I do is start without a navy, max out the research and convoys, as my net naval budget increases I gradually add ships to the fleet. 

I make use of research focuses as well because unlike DIP it seems that the benefit to the individual research is as large or greater than the malus applied to other researches. 

[o Barão]

2 minutes ago, admiralsnackbar said:

I make use of research focuses as well because unlike DIP it seems that the benefit to the individual research is as large or greater than the malus applied to other researches. 

I gave more freedom to the player using the research tech tree so it feels more a rewarding experience, where in vanilla ideally we should never use the "focus", which from a gameplay point of view doesn't make much sense to me.

 

I will not touch that, because as I mentioned above, I want the player to feel interested in checking the research tech tree and making decisions about what should get, but I will try to find a way to slow down things in general.

[sm0kin]

8 minutes ago, o Barão said:

Any higher difficulty above normal will bump all AI nations economies levels.

I am seeing crazy naval funds to spend. Are those normal values in comparison with the other big AI nations or they are just insane for the new nations?

Only the new ones have bonkers crew and fund values.

[o Barão]

Just now, sm0kin said:

Only the new ones have bonkers crew and fund values.

Please, share your save file.

[admiralsnackbar]

2 minutes ago, o Barão said:

I gave more freedom to the player using the research tech tree so it feels more a rewarding experience, where in vanilla ideally we should never use the "focus", which from a gameplay point of view doesn't make much sense to me.

 

I will not touch that, because as I mentioned above, I want the player to feel interested in checking the research tech tree and making decisions about what should get, but I will try to find a way to slow down things in general.

agreed

[sm0kin]

8 minutes ago, o Barão said:

Please, share your save file.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1jmx8GqRVVDo7PW-9qQT-MRE1DDkzw9t_/view?usp=sharing

[o Barão]

33 minutes ago, sm0kin said:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1jmx8GqRVVDo7PW-9qQT-MRE1DDkzw9t_/view?usp=sharing

I started a quick 1890 campaign on legendary difficult and I am not seeing any issue. You did any file editing or save editing?

 

[o Barão]

BETA 2.7 "Major Powers update"- N.A.R. changelog:

• Increased by 20% the research technology difficulty.
• Increased by x10 the VP difference to trigger a peace negotiations event.
• Increased by x10 the minimum VP on prolonged wars to check for peace events.

 

I strongly suggest download the new Taf version which includes important fixes.

 

Note: The mod IMO is already fully playable and enjoyable at this moment. So I will slow down and go back to my normal day routine, and focus on delivering important updates only in the weekends unless there is an important thing to be fixed.

 

Summary of the work from previous weeks.

• New nations added, with historical flags, government changes, Admirals names and ship names.
• Many improvements to how AI design ships to improve the challenge and overall game experience.
• All major bugs fixed.

 

In the next weeks my focus will be on AI ship design, to be better and quicker.

 

Happy hunting!

 

Edited Sunday at 07:51 PM by o Barão

[sm0kin]

21 minutes ago, o Barão said:

I started a quick 1890 campaign on legendary difficult and I am not seeing any issue. You did any file editing or save editing?

No, I did not edit any files.
But I believe, the naval funds were normal at the beginning of the campaign. I don't know at which year/month in my campaign they got so ridiculously high for the small nations.

The crew numbers issue seems reproducible by starting a new campaign (in my case china/legendary/historical ai/own fleet/selective). In January 1890 the crew pool shows "0 (+-2147483648)" for the newly added nations. If I hit "next turn/month", the displayed crew pool shows "-2147483648(+0).

On the other hand, if I "Exit to Main Menu" before I end my first turn and reload the campaign, the crew values are fixed. This seems to only work on the first turn though. If I reload a campaign save from February 1890 the crew numbers remain at "-2147483648".

[MDHansen]

22 minutes ago, sm0kin said:

No, I did not edit any files.
But I believe, the naval funds were normal at the beginning of the campaign. I don't know at which year/month in my campaign they got so ridiculously high for the small nations.

The crew numbers issue seems reproducible by starting a new campaign (in my case china/legendary/historical ai/own fleet/selective). In January 1890 the crew pool shows "0 (+-2147483648)" for the newly added nations. If I hit "next turn/month", the displayed crew pool shows "-2147483648(+0).

On the other hand, if I "Exit to Main Menu" before I end my first turn and reload the campaign, the crew values are fixed. This seems to only work on the first turn though. If I reload a campaign save from February 1890 the crew numbers remain at "-2147483648".

This is the issue I had 1.5 years back when I started looking in to adding nations, but couldn't because "home population"*, and consequently no crew or proper army, is 0 because the province file was not loaded/used by the game, hence province editing wouldnt work. Until Nathan and TaF arrived.
The insane gdp is (most liekly) because you set crew funding to 0, wich would give you a trillion isk becaause it was counting the beans in positives, instead of spending on crew. (some code thing, dont ask me lol)
If you say you didn't edit the provinces.csv, then I'm not sure what could be wrong.

 

*ref your Greek and Portoguese home population

Edited Sunday at 08:46 PM by MDHansen