Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

"Naval Arms Race" mod overhaul. BETA v11.2 - for UAD v1.5.1.3


o Barão

Recommended Posts

@Nick Thomadis sorry to bother you, but I need assistance with a little issue.

The explosives 4th and 5th will become eventually obsolete at some point in the game.

I am almost sure that I have no way to change this, but maybe I am wrong.

  • Is it possible to change this with the files I have atm at my disposable. If yes, how?
  • If not, is it possible to give me access to the file that controls what components become obsolete in the game?

Thank you.

 

UPDATE: No need, I already found the solution. 😉

Edited by o Barão
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BETA v3.0.6 N.A.R. changelog:

 

---Important update---

OBUKkjK.jpg

Pricic Acid, TNT and Dunnite will not become obsolete anymore.

 

TNT was used by the Germans all the way to WWII, the same can be said by the Americans with the Dunnite, and Pricic acid was used by the Japanese until 1930. :)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • o Barão changed the title to "Naval Arms Race" mod overhaul. BETA v3.0.6 - for UAD v1.4.0.8

Well to be clear I am providing feedback certainly not demanding change

 

That said, I have some observations.

 

while for Mk4 british guns 6 inch and up the gunhouse design taken from the KGV BBs is fine, good even, it is just too large.

- for a twin MK4 6 inch it is just absurd how big it is

- And when I went to refit my 8 inch gunned CAs to Mk4 this turret was too big yet again.   By 50 percent?   It went way up in size to the triple turret 8 inch mk3s

 

To be entirely clear,the gunhouse is good.   The british 6 and 8 inch gunhouses were NOT some bulky barrel,they were flat.   So it is IMO the best gunhouse.   Just in every instance it is too large or way too large.

 

The rejigged 5.25 style gunhouse is much better, thank you.   I still fell it may be a little oversized?   I stuck a pair of twins on an old cruiser and they looked bigger than the bridge.   In with a shout for sure, ,aybe still 20% oversized?

 

As I said I am not requesting changes, simply making observations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the subject of submarines, can someone explain why there's a correlation with higher submarine stealth and lower tech submarines?

Conversely, I've noticed that like recon values, ASW values appear to be higher for smaller ships.  Is this part of the vanilla game, or should this be addressed in future mod versions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MDHansen said:

any chance you can tell me the secret 🙂

Magic. :D

 

In the "components" we have the weight modifier. Since the beginning, I always thought this was related exclusive to the AI decision what component should use when designing a ship. But since I never found a way to tell what component becomes obsolete or not, I decided to take a chance and change this values to see what would happen. And voilà, was here all the time. I changed all the components I want to be available to 45, and now they will not become obsolete.

explosive_0,,explosives,$component_name_short_explosive_0,1,$component_name_short_explosive_0,$technology_desc_projectile_explosive_7,,
explosive_1,,explosives,$component_name_short_explosive_1,2,$component_name_short_explosive_1,$technology_desc_projectile_explosive_8,,
explosive_2,,explosives,$component_name_short_explosive_2,45,$component_name_short_explosive_2,$technology_desc_projectile_explosive_9,,
explosive_3,,explosives,$component_name_short_explosive_3,45,$technology_name_projectile_explosive_10,$technology_desc_projectile_explosive_10,,
explosive_4,,explosives,$component_name_short_explosive_4,45,$component_name_short_explosive_4,$technology_desc_projectile_explosive_11,,
explosive_5,,explosives,$component_name_short_explosive_5,45,$component_name_short_explosive_5,$technology_desc_projectile_explosive_12,,
explosive_6,,explosives,$component_name_short_explosive_6,45,$technology_name_projectile_explosive_13,$technology_desc_projectile_explosive_13,,
explosive_7,,explosives,$component_name_short_explosive_7,45,$component_name_short_explosive_7,$technology_desc_projectile_explosive_14,,
explosive_8,,explosives,$component_name_short_explosive_8,45,$technology_name_projectile_explosive_15,$technology_desc_projectile_explosive_15,,
explosive_9,,explosives,$component_name_short_explosive_9,45,$technology_name_projectile_explosive_16,$technology_desc_projectile_explosive_16,,

 

1 hour ago, GrantK said:

I still fell it may be a little oversized?   I stuck a pair of twins on an old cruiser and they looked bigger than the bridge.   In with a shout for sure, ,aybe still 20% oversized?

If you are comparing different components from other ships, you will always find something to nitpick. All components have a size scale modifier, and some are scale down versions to fit smaller ships and vice versa, add the guns, and we have situations that does not feel right.

 

With the thousands of components I have at my disposable to edit, it is easy to go crazy if I did everything I wanted to do.

If it is good enough, then is good, period. 😉

 

1 hour ago, diceman624 said:

...can someone explain why there's a correlation with higher submarine stealth and lower tech submarines?

The smaller the sub, the easier it is to remain undetected.

 

1 hour ago, diceman624 said:

Conversely, I've noticed that like recon values, ASW values appear to be higher for smaller ships.  Is this part of the vanilla game, or should this be addressed in future mod versions?

It is part of vanilla game and there is nothing wrong with that. ASW should always more effective in smaller ships. Smaller ships have the maneuverability to align the ship for depth charges runs, and can always lower the speed quicker to use the sonar to detect the subs in the vicinity. In capital ships, you as captain would not want to be without moving with enemy subs nearby.

 

This being said, in NAR, CL and bigger ships have the scout planes upgrade that will buff the recon and ASW values.

Edited by o Barão
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, o Barão said:

Magic. :D

 

In the "components" we have the weight modifier. Since the beginning, I always thought this was related exclusive to the AI decision what component should use when designing a ship. But since I never found a way to tell what component becomes obsolete or not, I decided to take a chance and change this values to see what would happen. And voilà, was here all the time. I changed all the components I want to be available to 45, and now they will not become obsolete.

explosive_0,,explosives,$component_name_short_explosive_0,1,$component_name_short_explosive_0,$technology_desc_projectile_explosive_7,,
explosive_1,,explosives,$component_name_short_explosive_1,2,$component_name_short_explosive_1,$technology_desc_projectile_explosive_8,,
explosive_2,,explosives,$component_name_short_explosive_2,45,$component_name_short_explosive_2,$technology_desc_projectile_explosive_9,,
explosive_3,,explosives,$component_name_short_explosive_3,45,$technology_name_projectile_explosive_10,$technology_desc_projectile_explosive_10,,
explosive_4,,explosives,$component_name_short_explosive_4,45,$component_name_short_explosive_4,$technology_desc_projectile_explosive_11,,
explosive_5,,explosives,$component_name_short_explosive_5,45,$component_name_short_explosive_5,$technology_desc_projectile_explosive_12,,
explosive_6,,explosives,$component_name_short_explosive_6,45,$technology_name_projectile_explosive_13,$technology_desc_projectile_explosive_13,,
explosive_7,,explosives,$component_name_short_explosive_7,45,$component_name_short_explosive_7,$technology_desc_projectile_explosive_14,,
explosive_8,,explosives,$component_name_short_explosive_8,45,$technology_name_projectile_explosive_15,$technology_desc_projectile_explosive_15,,
explosive_9,,explosives,$component_name_short_explosive_9,45,$technology_name_projectile_explosive_16,$technology_desc_projectile_explosive_16,,

Been right in front of my eyes aswell then. Was looking at the components file again today on another matter.. lol

Thanks👍

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  20 hours ago, GrantK said:

I still fell it may be a little oversized?   I stuck a pair of twins on an old cruiser and they looked bigger than the bridge.   In with a shout for sure, ,aybe still 20% oversized?

If you are comparing different components from other ships, you will always find something to nitpick. All components have a size scale modifier, and some are scale down versions to fit smaller ships and vice versa, add the guns, and we have situations that does not feel right.

 

Yes of course.   I tend to base a fair bit of immersion on the actual visuals of the ships.   So I react perhaps a bit over.   And the Mk4 resize for 5 inch and smaller is a success, I thank you for that.   All my old BBs took the new resized mounts successfully and looked OK as well, and I can use these to refit the old 1900 light cruisers as well.   Success!

 

However as an observation the KGV gunhouses as used in the two MK4 British applications I ran into, (going from a mk3 6 inch twin to a Mk4 6 inch twin, and going from MK3 8 inch triple to a MK4 8 inch triple), are a little or a lot beyond nitpick, they are not doable, physically cannot fit.   Its that otherwise admirable choice of the KGV style gunhouse (which is by far closest to what the real cruiser gunhouses looked), somehow the scaling is off by too much to be usable.  I think probably triple in plan dimensions for the 6 inch is fair, and close to double for the 8 inch triple.   Both by volume are 'ginormous' increases.  I have a hunch I am looking at a fixed dimension not tied to the gun size.   I might be able to measure somehow, objectively, it strikes me the 6 inch gunhouse is the same size as the 8 inch gunhouse which in turn may be identical in absolute dimensions to the 14 inch gunhouse from the KGV?   Not sure if that is useful information nor is it proven in any sense.   

 

If it is useful I could go through a series of custom battles and determine if this is systemic or specific?   The answer might be, I would guess, that everywhere in the british line when you transition to the KGV style gunhouse with the MK4, probably from 6 inch to 9? inch inclusive, you have an unusable upgrade which blocks refitting of ships.   Something like.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/26/2023 at 1:24 PM, GrantK said:
 

 

If it is useful I could go through a series of custom battles and determine if this is systemic or specific?   The answer might be, I would guess, that everywhere in the british line when you transition to the KGV style gunhouse with the MK4, probably from 6 inch to 9? inch inclusive, you have an unusable upgrade which blocks refitting of ships.   Something like.  

 

So I fiddled around building CLs CAs and BBs, but without an actual length dimension it is difficult or impossible to determine what sort of scaling problem is occuring?   Oddly for a ship builder game, I could not locate a summary of actual hull dimensions.   So you end up guessing your CL is what? 3/4 the length of the BB?   And then compare screen dimensions in a common view of the gunhouses.   It didn't work.   It did seem rather as if the gunhouse is fixed in size and does not vary with gun size.   But that is an impression and not objective information.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • o Barão changed the title to "Naval Arms Race" mod overhaul. BETA v3.0.7 - for UAD v1.4.0.8 Opt
7 hours ago, Arcane said:

Love the mod but I keep losing capital ships to subs even tho there are multiple CLs and DDs with the best anti sub tech in the fleet. Is that intended or can I do anything about that?

Send patrols ahead to clean the waters, I guess.

About the capital sinks being sunk, well that is realistic, but I don't know what you are seeing. I can only tell you atm the mod is using the stock values for the sub mechanics, with the difference that in NAR we have the scout planes that will help against subs.


I am playing a campaign atm after some months, is still in the first years, and I am not rushing, so no subs atm. But I am looking for things that can be improved, and I will pay attention to how subs plays in the game.


By the way, anyone is seeing allies not helping you in the wars?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, brothermunro said:

In my Italy campaign my ally Egypt regularly has ships assisting me in battles with the odd CL or DD (which is all I sold them)

Good, I should have mentioned that I was talking about major nations. I provoked a war against Russia with A-H being allied at the same time Germany and Italy.  They did nothing, no declaration of war. Germany eventually went to war with Russia some turns, but it was because the fleets were raising tensions somewhere. Italy does not care, is friends with everybody.

 

1 hour ago, Guest said:

It seems new localization file required after NAR 3.0.7 / 1.4.0.8. opt update.

Thanks for great mod anyway!Local-Needing.png

Yeah, I saw that. I will take a look at that when I have the time. 👍

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, o Barão said:

By the way, anyone is seeing allies not helping you in the wars?

I've had my major Allies USA, Britain and France helping me in my Spanish campaign, the issue is they only seem to help in blockades and land invasions. Haven't had any of their ships reenforce me in battles despite being nearby.
--
Also amusing bug I've encountered playing as China in a 1920 Campaign just unlocked the Modernized dreadnought I . Cant be built because I have no available funnels.  
--
Just some feedback but Subs are busted. Even with multiple dedicated ASW ships in my fleets I've never been able to detect a submarine group before it could destroy or significantly damage my ships. Honestly it got so bad about every two-five in game years I'd go into my save and delete every ones submarines. Losing to something I can counter is fine losing to something that I can't is bogus.  

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the japanese campaign there are several issues with our beloved Yamato-Hull.

1. Picture: The main gun in front of the slope has a 360 degree fireing arc. Also barbetts and weapons can't be fitted properly on the slope (could be prevented if barbette model goes a few meters into the hull instead of sitting on top or if the barbette mounts on the slope are lower).

2. Picture: The rear main gun gets obstructed if weapons are placed on the rear mounts (even with the smallest secondaries). Main gun should be able to have a clear shoot above the tiny gun that is about the size of the search light. Maybe the rear mounts can be fake lowered somehow without really lowering them or we can get barbettes than only increase the height by a bare minimum, just enough to shoot over small 2" or 3" guns.

3. Picture: The barbette mounts just behind the outer gun mounts are completely useless. No matter how wide the beam gets, they stay so close to the gun mounts, that not even the smallest barbette fits. Maybe push them more to the center and make multiple rows to have flexibility when placing a barbette. Is it possible to get special barbettes that can "fuse" with the rear/main tower so that we can place multiple guns (yamato-style)?

Yamato 360 degrees.png

Rear Main Gun Obstruction.png

Useless Barbett Mounts.png

Edited by MasterBurte
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/25/2023 at 7:25 PM, o Barão said:

BETA v3.0.6 N.A.R. changelog:

 

---Important update---

OBUKkjK.jpg

Pricic Acid, TNT and Dunnite will not become obsolete anymore.

 

TNT was used by the Germans all the way to WWII, the same can be said by the Americans with the Dunnite, and Pricic acid was used by the Japanese until 1930. :)

I don't think i am the only one who thinks that the game mechanic of things getting obsolet is completely useless. If the technology isn't good enough anymore you don't have to force the player to not use it. It is in his best interests. It happened multiple times that i run into economic issues where i couldn't afford any new BBs because i was forced to use expensive engines rather than having a work around with the use of older techs that are much cheaper. Can you just remove this mechanic for good?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi there, first time commenting here.  Currently playing through the Japanese campaign and have just unlocked Modern Heavy Cruiser II, went to go and design an early Furutaka - class however the hull has no available main towers. Is there a fix available for this?  Playing on the most recent version for 1.4.0.8.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, MasterBurte said:

In the japanese campaign there are several issues with our beloved Yamato-Hull.

1. Picture: The main gun in front of the slope has a 360 degree fireing arc. Also barbetts and weapons can't be fitted properly on the slope (could be prevented if barbette model goes a few meters into the hull instead of sitting on top or if the barbette mounts on the slope are lower).

2. Picture: The rear main gun gets obstructed if weapons are placed on the rear mounts (even with the smallest secondaries). Main gun should be able to have a clear shoot above the tiny gun that is about the size of the search light. Maybe the rear mounts can be fake lowered somehow without really lowering them or we can get barbettes than only increase the height by a bare minimum, just enough to shoot over small 2" or 3" guns.

3. Picture: The barbette mounts just behind the outer gun mounts are completely useless. No matter how wide the beam gets, they stay so close to the gun mounts, that not even the smallest barbette fits. Maybe push them more to the center and make multiple rows to have flexibility when placing a barbette. Is it possible to get special barbettes that can "fuse" with the rear/main tower so that we can place multiple guns (yamato-style)?

Yamato 360 degrees.png

Rear Main Gun Obstruction.png

Useless Barbett Mounts.png

1 and 3 are things that only the devs can edit. I don't have direct acess to the 3D models.

About 2, the trick is where you place the turret.

BIZz1la.jpg

There are some positions where the main turret will ignore the secondaries around, if I am not mistaken there are other hulls where the same thing happens.

 

21 minutes ago, MasterBurte said:

I don't think i am the only one who thinks that the game mechanic of things getting obsolet is completely useless. If the technology isn't good enough anymore you don't have to force the player to not use it. It is in his best interests. It happened multiple times that i run into economic issues where i couldn't afford any new BBs because i was forced to use expensive engines rather than having a work around with the use of older techs that are much cheaper. Can you just remove this mechanic for good?

 

Not interested. Obsolete mechanics or hulls happens for a good reason. Not only to be realistic but to also force the AI to use the best tech available, well in theory at least. But don't worry, I hope, unless the devs want to give us another update, to have the mod ready in a few weeks. After that, you will probably see versions of my work made by other modders with those options.

 

11 hours ago, Roachbugg said:

Just some feedback but Subs are busted. Even with multiple dedicated ASW ships in my fleets I've never been able to detect a submarine group before it could destroy or significantly damage my ships. Honestly it got so bad about every two-five in game years I'd go into my save and delete every ones submarines. Losing to something I can counter is fine losing to something that I can't is bogus.  

I prefer to see screenshots to make sure. I am playing a campaign atm after many months to see how the game mechanics are working to see if it needs some changes, but I still didn't reach the submarine's time period.

 

By the away, anyone is having an issue with AI ships in battle without fuel. "Low fuel" status. I am seeing in all my battles and is ruining my experience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BETA v3.0.8 N.A.R. changelog:

  • Japan Modern Heavy Cruiser II without main towers in the campaign issue fixed.*
  • China Modernized dreadnought I without funnel in the campaign issue fixed.*

 

I didn't have the time to test but should be working now.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • o Barão changed the title to "Naval Arms Race" mod overhaul. BETA v3.0.8 - for UAD v1.4.0.8 Opt

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...