"Naval Arms Race" mod overhaul. BETA v11.1 - for UAD v1.5.1.3

[o Barão]

44 minutes ago, flaviohc16 said:

@o Barão I have to agree with others, you might have overdone the nerfing of the economy.

Same set as I did in the last tests:

USA, 1890 START, Normal difficulty, so basically as easy as it gets.

Now I'm in 1914, like in the other tests.

I did 18 years of peace ( in the last 2 tests it was 14) and then went against Spain, I wiped all the colonies but I couldn't attack the core Territories because I didn't have the tonnage.

China and the USSR collapsed in 1910, Germany and Spain are not that far off ( China reformed).

I'm the most powerful nation on the planet, but I have 500k of ships, not even that new, and I'm barely breaking even, it's a bit too little IMHO, and I have the highest GDP at 60 billions, UK is at 50 and France at 35. This is basically 1/5 of the economy in the previous test and 1/25 of vanilla economy, it's a bit too aggressive, especially considering that I'm playing on the easiest difficulty and with the easiest nation, we should probably aim to have an economiy that is 3 times what I have now, so in the middle between now and the 1st test economy, maybe slightly more towards the 1sr test

The shipyard is good I would say, both in size and capacity, I'm at 50k tons in 1914 with 250k of capacity, in the first 15 years is very limiting, as it probably should be ( maybe we should start at 10k tons instead of 8k).

 

As always, here's the folder :

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1CVshMFio4G9gqnqAxx0wk0FT-PQux02n

Thanks for the detailed report. 👍

 

I like the GDP growth values, so I will bump instead the base income, province income and oil income for the next version.

 

"The shipyard is good I would say, both in size and capacity, I'm at 50k tons in 1914 with 250k of capacity, in the first 15 years is very limiting, as it probably should be ( maybe we should start at 10k tons instead of 8k)."

That is an independent value per nation, and it reflects what each nation could built around that time period.

Maine BB was a 6700 tons ship, so more or less close to that initial limit. No need for changes.

England as comparison starts with 13500 tons limit.

 

[o Barão]

BETA v5.9.6 N.A.R. changelog:

• Updated for UAD 1.5.0.2 OPT
• Base, province and oil income buffed.

[SpardaSon21]

3 hours ago, o Barão said:

Thanks for the detailed report. 👍

 

I like the GDP growth values, so I will bump instead the base income, province income and oil income for the next version.

 

"The shipyard is good I would say, both in size and capacity, I'm at 50k tons in 1914 with 250k of capacity, in the first 15 years is very limiting, as it probably should be ( maybe we should start at 10k tons instead of 8k)."

That is an independent value per nation, and it reflects what each nation could built around that time period.

Maine BB was a 6700 tons ship, so more or less close to that initial limit. No need for changes.

England as comparison starts with 13500 tons limit.

 

And in September of 1890 the USA laid down USS New York, which was just over 9,000 metric tons at full load.  Since I don't believe you can add 1,000 tons of dockyard size in nine months in 1890 you should probably boost the USA's starting dockyard size to where they can build a ship of that size at that time.

Edited March 15 by SpardaSon21

[o Barão]

5 hours ago, SpardaSon21 said:

And in September of 1890 the USA laid down USS New York, which was just over 9,000 metric tons at full load.  Since I don't believe you can add 1,000 tons of dockyard size in nine months in 1890 you should probably boost the USA's starting dockyard size to where they can build a ship of that size at that time.

You can build 500 tons in 6 months (USA starts with 8500 tons shipyard)

 

I will buff the shipyard to 9k for the next update, just so all you Americans can give me peace!

[o Barão]

BETA v5.9.7 N.A.R. changelog:

• Updated for UAD 1.5.0.3
• American shipyard buffed to 9000 (1890)

[flaviohc16]

So, reached again 1914, same set as before:

Usa 1890 start, normal difficulty, now it's the year 1914.

After 16 years of peace, wiped out the Spanish colonies, then Spain collapsed and i Gobbled it up (I love the fact that nations are more aggressive against ungoverned territories).   

Countries collapse way less and they do only after years of multi-front war, i would say that is good and realistic.                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Money are still tight i have my usual set of 16 CAs and 12 BCs (20k tons ones), just now i'm building 6 30k BCs, My gdp is 60 billions, with Germany at 66 and France nation at 50. The situation is better than before (1.5.02), but still during peace, i really can't have anything active and even now i'm running at a deficit with 500k tons mothballed and 200k tons under construction.

I still see 2 problems:

1) Imho the economy is still too taxing, as i said last time, i would prefer to have my gdp around the 120-150 billions mark by this time (25 years of playing), especially considering that i'm playing on the easiest difficulty with the easiest nation ( for the record, I'm Italian, but i like to go for world domination).

Maybe to not get the economy to snowball you could make every other parameter stay the same but just double the initial GDP of every nation at the 1890 start,

or increase the growth rate just a bit:  i would say that in the early 1900s a booming economy should grow 8-9% a year, meanwhile, i still haven't seen anyone grow at 7% with the latest modifications.

2) The shipyard is good in capacity (total tonnage)(250k total), but the size of the single max ship size keep snowballing: in 1914 i can already build 67k tons ships, when the max hull that i can have is 45-50k tons ( dreadnought 4), and in 3 years i will be able to build 80k tons ships, can someone keep one while decreasing the other without making a mess? Because the 1st 2 jumps are good:

you start with 8.5k in 1890,

then 11.5k in 1893,

then 15.5k in 1896,

Then it start to snowball:

21k in 1899,

25k in 1902,

32k in 1905,

39k in 1908,

51k in 1911, 

67k in 1914.

 

For the rest, i love this mod and i can't play without it.

 

As always, the folder

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/15oIX4xNe5GHnAoRK6y4qct7slhbsIDJs?usp=drive_link

 

[NathanKell]

@o Barão if you have a minute, could you explain the older accuracy system you had designed prior to 1.5? You mentioned it being a dual system? I presume that means either that small guns (i.e. <10 inches) behaved quite differently from larger ones, or that firing on small ships used different calculations vs. firing on large ships?

[o Barão]

3 hours ago, flaviohc16 said:

So, reached again 1914, same set as before:

Usa 1890 start, normal difficulty, now it's the year 1914.

After 16 years of peace, wiped out the Spanish colonies, then Spain collapsed and i Gobbled it up (I love the fact that nations are more aggressive against ungoverned territories).   

Countries collapse way less and they do only after years of multi-front war, i would say that is good and realistic.                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Money are still tight i have my usual set of 16 CAs and 12 BCs (20k tons ones), just now i'm building 6 30k BCs, My gdp is 60 billions, with Germany at 66 and France nation at 50. The situation is better than before (1.5.02), but still during peace, i really can't have anything active and even now i'm running at a deficit with 500k tons mothballed and 200k tons under construction.

I still see 2 problems:

1) Imho the economy is still too taxing, as i said last time, i would prefer to have my gdp around the 120-150 billions mark by this time (25 years of playing), especially considering that i'm playing on the easiest difficulty with the easiest nation ( for the record, I'm Italian, but i like to go for world domination).

Maybe to not get the economy to snowball you could make every other parameter stay the same but just double the initial GDP of every nation at the 1890 start,

or increase the growth rate just a bit:  i would say that in the early 1900s a booming economy should grow 8-9% a year, meanwhile, i still haven't seen anyone grow at 7% with the latest modifications.

2) The shipyard is good in capacity (total tonnage)(250k total), but the size of the single max ship size keep snowballing: in 1914 i can already build 67k tons ships, when the max hull that i can have is 45-50k tons ( dreadnought 4), and in 3 years i will be able to build 80k tons ships, can someone keep one while decreasing the other without making a mess? Because the 1st 2 jumps are good:

you start with 8.5k in 1890,

then 11.5k in 1893,

then 15.5k in 1896,

Then it start to snowball:

21k in 1899,

25k in 1902,

32k in 1905,

39k in 1908,

51k in 1911, 

67k in 1914.

 

For the rest, i love this mod and i can't play without it.

 

As always, the folder

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/15oIX4xNe5GHnAoRK6y4qct7slhbsIDJs?usp=drive_link

 

Again, thank you for the detailed report. Helps me a lot.

"i still haven't seen anyone grow at 7% with the latest modifications."

Ok a little raise, not by much.

 

"but the size of the single max ship size keep snowballing:"

Sure, I can nerf the snowballing effect. But it is important to understand that I don't want to force the player to always be upgrading the shipyard in fear of be losing something. That is not the point. But to keep thing more reasonable.

 

3 hours ago, NathanKell said:

@o Barão if you have a minute, could you explain the older accuracy system you had designed prior to 1.5? You mentioned it being a dual system? I presume that means either that small guns (i.e. <10 inches) behaved quite differently from larger ones, or that firing on small ships used different calculations vs. firing on large ships?

 

To make it short, in NAR, the bigger the gun, the more accurate will be, if we ignore the ROF accuracy bonus modifier implemented by the devs months ago.

There are some accuracy modifiers that the devs are disabling in the recent updates that I was using to create two different play styles. Most important were the modifier against small ships and big ships. The devs are replacing for a new accuracy system that is not available for us modders to do anything.

However, this is not a major issue, because I can still implement a semi realistic accuracy in game by editing this values hitChanceMaxRange,hitChanceCurver,hitChanceMult in the guns file. The problem is before it was easy to get what I want in a few hours. By using this method I will need days, in editing values, open the game, run tests, to get a reasonable result. (a pain in the ass)I don't have the patience to do that now, so I postponed for a later updated. 

[NathanKell]

8 hours ago, o Barão said:

To make it short, in NAR, the bigger the gun, the more accurate will be, if we ignore the ROF accuracy bonus modifier implemented by the devs months ago.

There are some accuracy modifiers that the devs are disabling in the recent updates that I was using to create two different play styles. Most important were the modifier against small ships and big ships. The devs are replacing for a new accuracy system that is not available for us modders to do anything.

However, this is not a major issue, because I can still implement a semi realistic accuracy in game by editing this values hitChanceMaxRange,hitChanceCurver,hitChanceMult in the guns file. The problem is before it was easy to get what I want in a few hours. By using this method I will need days, in editing values, open the game, run tests, to get a reasonable result. (a pain in the ass)I don't have the patience to do that now, so I postponed for a later updated. 

That makes sense, thank you! Can you explain a bit more about what was different between the two play styles? I don't understand how the ship size modifiers were used to make the play styles different. What is the intent there? That larger guns are more accurate in general but worse against small ships than small guns? Or something else?

[o Barão]

11 minutes ago, NathanKell said:

What is the intent there?

The ideas were too please all type of players. Some like to play quick battles with high accuracy values and just sink ships, others, like me, prefer to play a realistic battle simulation, well as real as it can be inside the game engine limitations and to try to represent how difficult it was to score hits. So by tweaking the ship size accuracy modifiers, it was possible to get both things by changing two values.

 

As I said in NAR, the bigger the gun more accurate will be, but it is a small progression, nothing crazy. There is no perfect gun. If you are in a BB being attack by small ships, most likely you will prefer to have good secondaries to deal with them and leave the big guns to fire against the enemy capital ships. A flood cause by 20" gun or 2" is still a flood at the end of the day, so quick guns are usually the best to deal with DDs or TBs. Also, as I mentioned before, there is a ROF accuracy bonus in game implemented by the devs, so it is normal to see smaller guns with better chance to hit the target now.

[Pappystein]

Downloaded mod today... researched 1100 Ton Destroyer... New Destroyer II is not available.  I can build 1100ton Destroyer I based boats, but Destroyer II is not located in this spot (Italy if it matters)  

If it matters this is a career I started after the end of the 1.5 beta.

[o Barão]

10 minutes ago, Pappystein said:

Downloaded mod today... researched 1100 Ton Destroyer... New Destroyer II is not available.  I can build 1100ton Destroyer I based boats, but Destroyer II is not located in this spot (Italy if it matters)  

If it matters this is a career I started after the end of the 1.5 beta.

The reason is the tech tree is global, equal to all nations, but the ships are not in most cases. In this example, the Italian destroyer II hull is a 1300 tons ship. So the moment you reach that step (1300 tons destroyers) you will see the DD II as an option to build.

[NathanKell]

6 hours ago, o Barão said:

The ideas were too please all type of players. Some like to play quick battles with high accuracy values and just sink ships, others, like me, prefer to play a realistic battle simulation, well as real as it can be inside the game engine limitations and to try to represent how difficult it was to score hits. So by tweaking the ship size accuracy modifiers, it was possible to get both things by changing two values.

 

As I said in NAR, the bigger the gun more accurate will be, but it is a small progression, nothing crazy. There is no perfect gun. If you are in a BB being attack by small ships, most likely you will prefer to have good secondaries to deal with them and leave the big guns to fire against the enemy capital ships. A flood cause by 20" gun or 2" is still a flood at the end of the day, so quick guns are usually the best to deal with DDs or TBs. Also, as I mentioned before, there is a ROF accuracy bonus in game implemented by the devs, so it is normal to see smaller guns with better chance to hit the target now.

Yup, that makes sense. As you can probably tell I also prefer basically as much realism as possible (hence the work I've done for Kerbal Space Program mods for the last ten years) which is why I gravitated to NAR but wanted to go a bit deeper.
When I get a sec I'll have to check out how the accuracy function in 1.5 works and what I should do to it. One thing I would definitely love to do is to handle range-finding better, i.e. proper ladder firing, and proper range limits and rate of fire limits for guns as determined by splash detection in current visual conditions (for those--I presume other than you  -- reading, what this means is that prior to radar, you couldn't shoot faster than you could spot the previous salvo's shots, so rate of fire was practically limited by time in flight for smaller weapons, and you couldn't shoot futher than you could distinguish shell splashes of a gun, so for example 6in guns might be able to fire to 20+ thousand yards but could only be realistically spotted to about 15kyds, if I remember the discussion of the Brooklyns and Atlantas right Friendman).

1 hour ago, Pappystein said:

Downloaded mod today... researched 1100 Ton Destroyer... New Destroyer II is not available.  I can build 1100ton Destroyer I based boats, but Destroyer II is not located in this spot (Italy if it matters)  

If it matters this is a career I started after the end of the 1.5 beta.

 

57 minutes ago, o Barão said:

The reason is the tech tree is global, equal to all nations, but the ships are not in most cases. In this example, the Italian destroyer II hull is a 1300 tons ship. So the moment you reach that step (1300 tons destroyers) you will see the DD II as an option to build.

@Pappystein note that if you take a different hull (i.e. Destroyer I), set it to minimum tonnage, full negative beam, and full negative draft, Destroyer II will probably show up. That's because the constructor values are globally applied so if Destroyer II with min tonnage / min beam / min draught is now less than 1300t, it will show up.

I encountered this in a US career when, IIRC, Modern Heavy Cruiser II wasn't showing up for me unless I did those steps, and then it did, and then I realized why.

[SpardaSon21]

@o BarãoYou wanted to know about feedwater vs/ fuel and here's a sheet for a proposed US BB with both water and oil at 2/3:

Feedwater appeared to be roughly 1/4 the weight of fuel oil, and stores for the crew just above the feedwater.  Those are long tons, not metric tons, So that's 3,525.683 metric tons if all three are at full capacity, for an overall range of 14,816km, or 4.202km of range per ton of oil, water, and ship's stores.  By comparison the steam engines, including electrical power supply, would have been at 3,962 metric tons for that top speed, or more than the range component.

Edited March 17 by SpardaSon21

[o Barão]

BETA v5.9.8 N.A.R. changelog:

• More improvements to the economy. It should be reasonable now.
• New ship hulls and parts imported from vanilla game. (part I)
• Nerf to the new Italians CL hull size and funnels capacity to be more realistic.

USA “Modern Light Cruiser II”' which is a very close recreation of the Brooklyn-class, as a special new detailed hull. It can be found in the light cruiser hulls from 1925 and has a displacement between 9,900 and 13,900 tons.
USA “Modern Light Cruiser III”' is a hull offering cruisers quite similar to the Cleveland-class. It can be found in the light cruiser hulls from 1939 and has a displacement between 11,250 and 15,200 tons.
USA “Modern Heavy Cruiser II”' occupies the previous place of Modern Heavy Cruiser II and the previous hull is renamed to “Modern Heavy Cruiser III”. The new hull offers cruisers quite similar to the Whichita-class. It can be found in the heavy cruiser hulls from 1935 and has a displacement between 11,500 and 15,900 tons.
Austro-Hungarian “Advanced Compact Cruiser”' which is a very close recreation of the HNLMS De Ruyter. This Dutch cruiser, which was made on a tight budget is speculatively offered as an alternative hull for Austria-Hungary, producing cruisers which could fit their ship arsenal if the nation had survived World War I. It can be found in the light cruiser hulls from 1925 and has a displacement between 6,900 and 8,900 tons.
Austro-Hungarian “Advanced Armored Cruiser”' is a speculative hull of a wide and robust construction that can be something between a small battleship and a cruiser. It can be found in the heavy cruiser hulls from 1926 and has a displacement between 12,000 and 19,000 tons.
Austro-Hungarian “Large Armored Cruiser”' is another speculative hull of a wide and robust construction that produces very durable warships but not very fast. It can be found in the battlecruiser hulls from 1929 and has a displacement between 22,000 and 29,000 tons.
Austro-Hungarian “Advanced Small Battleship”' is another speculative hull of a wide and robust construction that produces very durable battleships but rather slow. It can be found in the battleship hulls from 1929 and has a displacement between 32,000 and 39,000 tons.
Austro-Hungarian “Modernized Dreadnought I”' is a strong hull for battleships that focus more on resilience than on speed. It can be found in the battleship hulls from 1927 and has a displacement between 44,000 and 60,500 tons.
Spanish “Advanced Compact Cruiser”' producing cost-effective cruisers. It can be found in the light cruiser hulls from 1925 and has a displacement between 5,900 and 8,200 tons.
Spanish “Advanced Small Cruiser”' producing cruisers similar to the size of the Navarra-class cruiser. It can be found in the light cruiser hulls from 1925 and has a displacement between 4,500 and 6,300 tons.
Spanish and Chinese “Advanced Small Battleship”' is another speculative hull that produces cost-effective battleships. It can be found in the battleship hulls from 1929 and has a displacement between 23,500 and 32,000 tons.
Spanish and Chinese “Large Cruiser I”' is a speculative hull that produces cost-effective large warships. It can be found in the battlecruiser hulls (the previous hull was renamed to “Large Cruiser II) from 1929 and has a displacement between 22,500 and 28,000 tons.
Italian “Advanced Fast Cruiser”' producing cruisers very similar to the Montecuccoli-class. It can be found in the light cruiser hulls from 1935 and has a displacement between 8,500 and 10,900 tons.
Italian “Large Fast Cruiser”' producing cruisers very similar to the larger ships of the Condottieri-class. It can be found in the light cruiser hulls from 1939 and has a displacement between 10,350 and 12,900 tons.

[flaviohc16]

So, I kept going and, like last time, I arrived in 1931.

My GDP is around 300 billions, economy is still right and now I'm growing at 8.5%, but I have Persia, Iraq and Venezuela all either under my direct control or Allied, so it doesn't get better than this growth wise ( during war I grow at 4.5% ).

Other economies tanked hard due to continual war, with only Germany breaking 100 billions.

I can have only 1 millions tons of old ships and I have to be extremely careful or I will bankrupt me, even limiting research, keeping transport in the middle and Crew to 0%

In the last test we were at 1.2 trillion in 1931.

As I said before, I would like to have my economy twice as big as I have now for the date that I'm playing.

As always, here the folder

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/15oIX4xNe5GHnAoRK6y4qct7slhbsIDJs

Now I will love to try this new patch.

 

Also, completely unrelated, the last update broke the file converter, even with a clean install, it's only on my end?

 

[o Barão]

15 minutes ago, flaviohc16 said:

 

Also, completely unrelated, the last update broke the file converter, even with a clean install, it's only on my end?

 

It seems a vanilla error. Other players mentioned the same thing 

 

There were some small improvement to base & province income and wealth grow in the latest version. It will need a new campaign to test the changes. 

[o Barão]

BETA v5.9.9 N.A.R. changelog:

• Updated for UAD 1.5.0.4
• All the remaining ships missing from the update 1.5 added to the mod.
• Some of the new guns added (I was working on them when UAD 1.5.0.4 went live, so expect the others to be ready in a few days)
• From the devs changes to the economy, these two are being used: Reduced ship maintenance costs by -33.33% and increased TR losses effect in economy by about +15%.
• shipyard_start_increase,100,increase of shipyard per year after minimal year (only for new game) nerfed from 150 to 100, in vanilla is 250.

 

VERY IMPORTANT!!!!!!!!!

Due to changes I made to some ship parts and hulls, it is important to delete the save files to avoid any issues.

And if you want to hate me even more, I have some surprises in the work to be implemented next week and I will ask to delete them again. I need to be honest here.

 

Ships list of the remaining ships that were missing and added in this update.

Italian “Small Modernized Dreadnought”' is a hull which produces modernized battleships similar to the Giulio Cesare battleship. It can be found in the battleship hulls from 1929 and has a displacement between 24,000 and 29,000 tons.
Italian “Hybrid Destroyer II”' is basically the largest destroyer that the nation can build, at the size of a small cruiser. It can be found in the destroyer hulls from 1935 and has a displacement between 5,050 and 6,250 tons.
Spanish and Chinese “Hybrid Destroyer”' is a hull that is very big for a destroyer and small for a cruiser but can be useful for nations with a tight budget. It can be found in the destroyer hulls from 1935 and has a displacement between 4,750 and 5,950 tons.
Chinese “Large Torpedo Warship”'can offer experimental large ships which can fulfill a role that have never existed, to cover the sea with swarms of torpedoes against the enemy at the expense of smaller protection and gun firepower. It can be found in the battleship hulls from 1936 and has a displacement between 31,000 and 43,000 tons.
French “Advanced Modernized Battleship”' offers a good compromise for producing a battleship that is powerful but not overly expensive that uses superior fire control. It can be found in the battleship hulls from 1929 and has a displacement between 30,000 and 54,000 tons.
Japanese “Experimental Torpedo Cruiser II”' producing fast cruisers with the ability to host many side torpedoes. It can be found in the light cruiser hulls from 1930 and has a displacement between 7,100 and 12,000 tons.
Japanese “Modern Light Cruiser III”' producing capable all-around cruisers. It can be found in the light cruiser hulls from 1935 and has a displacement between 10,900 and 14,900 tons.
Japanese “Modern Heavy Cruiser V”' producing cruisers with advantages and disadvantages similar to the Atago-class. It can be found in the heavy cruiser hulls from 1939 and has a displacement between 14,400 and 18,900 tons.
Japanese “Modernized Battlecruiser”' offers not the fastest hulls for a battlecruiser but focuses more on resilience and number of secondary guns. It can be found in the battlecruiser hulls from 1929 and has a displacement between 42,500 and 57,500 tons.
Japanese “Modernized Dreadnought IV”' is another battleship alternative for the nation which is very resilient and a stabile gun platform but rather slow. It can be found in the battleship hulls from 1927 and has a displacement between 42,000 and 69,500 tons.
Japanese “Modern Battlecruiser II”' offers designs of versatile, very fast and powerful battlecruisers which though have not much resilience. It can be found in the battlecruiser hulls from 1935 and has a displacement between 38,500 and 54,000 tons.a
French “Modern Light Cruiser II”' is a speculative hull that can produce fast and reliable cruisers which though are expensive. It can be found in the light cruiser hulls from 1935 and has a displacement between 9,500 and 12,500 tons.
French “Modern Heavy Cruiser III”' is a speculative hull that produces powerful and expensive cruisers. It can be found in the heavy cruiser hulls from 1937 and has a displacement between 15,500 and 18,500 tons.
French “Flotilla Leader”' is basically the largest destroyer that the nation can build, at the size of a small cruiser. It can be found in the destroyer hulls from 1935 and has a displacement between 5,250 and 6,550 tons.
Russian “Flotilla Leader”' is the largest destroyer that the nation can build, at the size of a small cruiser. It can be found in the destroyer hulls from 1935 and has a displacement between 5,350 and 6,650 tons.~
Russian “Modernized Dreadnought I”' is a new hull which offers cost effective battleships. The previous hull took the name “Modernized Dreadnought II” and was enhanced with new parts and different scaling. The new hull can be found in the battleship hulls from 1919 and has a displacement between 27,500 and 35,000 tons.
British “G3 Battlecruiser”' offers the possibility to create similar gun and tower layout as the historical British design of the G3-Battlecruiser (the previous N3/G3 Battleship, has been renamed to “N3 Battleship and received some new towers).. It can be found in the battleship hulls from 1923 and has a displacement between 42,500 and 55,500 tons.

Edited March 20 by o Barão

[flaviohc16]

1 hour ago, o Barão said:

BETA v5.9.9 N.A.R. changelog:

• Updated for UAD 1.5.0.4
• All the remaining ships missing from the update 1.5 added to the mod.
• Some of the new guns added (I was working on them when UAD 1.5.0.4 went live, so expect the others to be ready in a few days)
• From the devs changes to the economy, these two are being used: Reduced ship maintenance costs by -33.33% and increased TR losses effect in economy by about +15%.
• shipyard_start_increase,100,increase of shipyard per year after minimal year (only for new game) nerfed from 150 to 100, in vanilla is 250.

 

 

I will arrive at 1914 with the 1.5.03 economy and the will swap to this.

I love/hate you, mostly love 🤣😘 

I'm having some small bugs with the 1.5.03:

 

Modern 2 secondary tower always present on all classes, even TBs.

 

Auto reload 2, oil 3 and ausiliary engine 5 missing.

 

And I would like to have, for the large cruiser and modern battle cruisers hull a bit more diversification in guns, because right now the can both have 15 in guns, and that makes the latter useless, I would limit the large cruiser ( the one with up to 37k tons displacement)  to 14 inch guns, and the modern battle cruiser ( up to 50l tons displacement) to 16 inch guns, so that there is a nice progression also with the Fast battleship ( last item in that tech tree line) that has maximum 18 inch guns

Edited March 20 by flaviohc16

[o Barão]

1 hour ago, flaviohc16 said:

I will arrive at 1914 with the 1.5.03 economy and the will swap to this.

I strongly recommend, in this update, to delete the files and start a new campaign to prevent any issues. Also your feedback about economy is important! I suspect that the players will like it, but I would need examples from a long run campaign to know for sure. See if there are still some changes in need.

 

1 hour ago, flaviohc16 said:

Modern 2 secondary tower always present on all classes, even TBs.

Auto reload 2, oil 3 and ausiliary engine 5 missing.

I am not seeing those bugs. Delete the files as I mentioned and try again. If still present, share me a screenshot.

 

1 hour ago, flaviohc16 said:

And I would like to have, for the large cruiser and modern battle cruisers hull a bit more diversification in guns, because right now the can both have 15 in guns, and that makes the latter useless, I would limit the large cruiser ( the one with up to 37k tons displacement)  to 14 inch guns, and the modern battle cruiser ( up to 50l tons displacement) to 16 inch guns, so that there is a nice progression also with the Fast battleship ( last item in that tech tree line) that has maximum 18 inch guns

If I do that, then players will be complaining why I am limiting their freedom when there is no reason to do that in the first place. Ship displacement is already a limiting factor for what you can do or not in any ship.

[o Barão]

BETA v6 N.A.R. changelog:

• Updated for UAD 1.5.0.4R
• All ships and guns have been imported and adapted to work inside NAR.
• Scrapping threshold increased to 100k from the previous 50k to help the AI to maintain a decent fleet size. Credits to @brothermunro for the idea. (*needs testing)
• English file was also updated.

 

[flaviohc16]

I'm still playing with the "old"  (1.5.03).patch, but I would say that this time the economy has been a overturned the other way around.

I'm in 1908, just started the war with Spain ( USA, 1890 start, normal difficulty,)

I'm already at 100 billions of GDP, growing at 13.5% during normal economy and 8.8% during war, but I have Persia that has discovered Oil as an ally.

Also I could build way more than before:

Before I could build 16 15ktons CAs and 12 25k tons BCs, and when at war I was in the negative with 25% crew, 60% R&D and 100% transport recovery ( transport at 200% but with the slider at the maximum to recover transport losses)

Now I built 36 CAs, 12 BCs and when at war I'm breaking even with crew at 50% and R&D and crew at maximum .

 

I will play up to 1914 to see how it works out. As I said before, the targhet GDP that I would want in 1914 would be 120-150 billions. Let's see where I end.

 

Then I will download the latest game and mod  patch to see how it works out.

[o Barão]

2 hours ago, flaviohc16 said:

I'm already at 100 billions of GDP, growing at 13.5% during normal economy and 8.8% during war, but I have Persia that has discovered Oil as an ally.

It went from 7% to 13.5%????? Damn, I only made a small change. Snowball effect. 😑

 

2 hours ago, flaviohc16 said:

Now I built 36 CAs, 12 BCs and when at war I'm breaking even with crew at 50% and R&D and crew at maximum .

Those are fair numbers. Try to provoke a war somewhere around WWI and see how the treasure can maintain the whole fleet at sea.

 

Thanks for the feedback!

 

 

[Pappystein]

I am having the opposite effect...  But maybe it is down to a different play style.   With the later updates I am struggling to field a force up to date in any nation I am playing unless I JSON my save and make some serious edits, to Technology and to finances.

I have tried Italy, UK, USA, and Japan.   In each case I was quickly outnumbered by my opponents.  I have tried with 200% transports, with 50 and 100% tech and with 33 and 50% crew.    

It could be bad luck but basically I am having an ecconomic collapse instead of a snowball.  The longer I play the quicker it is too hard to even field a fleet at all.   The costs of technology and the limitations on not building older hull types far outstrip my ability to pay for anything.

This may be because I take a more passive stance on foreign relations (I don't bully other nations into a fight ever year or 5)   *SHRUG*  

 

***EDITED BELOW***

Given the notes on the 1.505 update, it looks like I am not the only person having issues with Economic collapse instead of snowball....   makes me feel a tiny bit better

 

 

Edited March 21 by Pappystein

[o Barão]

1 hour ago, Pappystein said:

***EDITED BELOW***

Given the notes on the 1.505 update, it looks like I am not the only person having issues with Economic collapse instead of snowball....   makes me feel a tiny bit better

 

Could it be because you are always at war? Screenshots would help me a lot.