>>>Beta v1.3 Feedback<<<(Released)

[Warspite96]

In addition to last post, I'm not sure if this was intentional but some of the gun/turret models have had major size changes in the most recent update, I've had to refit all of my British cruisers because the 4 inch and 8 inch gun models have massively increased and some don't even fit on the hulls anymore.

[MDHansen]

why does my 2 BB get moved to Messina after a battle in the Black Sea, and their port of origin is Odessa? 🤔

Odessa is high repair priority, Messina is low, not to mention 1500km away

[mrfox1918]

My ships still zig zag and move sporadically when trying to keep a battle line.

Still having the same targeting issues and guns not firing issues.

 

[MDHansen]

2 hours ago, MDHansen said:

why does my 2 BB get moved to Messina after a battle in the Black Sea, and their port of origin is Odessa? 🤔

Odessa is high repair priority, Messina is low, not to mention 1500km away

shamelessly quoting myself here, with a thought that sprung to mind.
what if...

Is it possible within the games parameters to have an option to set a TFs "home port" ? It could even be a hidden parameter, as in home port would be "last port anchored for atleast one turn/month", but it would be visible in the TF information window.

never mind, this would probably mess up more than it did good...
 

Edited May 4, 2023 by MDHansen

[RNV]

1 hour ago, mrfox1918 said:

My ships still zig zag and move sporadically when trying to keep a battle line.

Still having the same targeting issues and guns not firing issues.

 

Same, initially I thought it was because of poor steering technology / low engine power, but then I started getting it with modern BBs with geared turbines and electrohydro steering.

[idontfckingknow]

Speed is the best armor in this game

[Panzergraf]

9 minutes ago, idontfckingknow said:

Speed is the best armor in this game

Yeah, that target fast speed negative modifier ramps up at around 37 knots and really makes ships almost impossible to hit without really good accuracy to begin with.

[ijp8834]

7 hours ago, Warspite96 said:

That's.....true to an extent, but can you point out to me a time where a destroyer flotilla commander decided to risk his entire command to attack a force of battleships and cruisers as happens in this game? 

Again, it feels like you're getting your ideas on how destroyers operate based on battles like Guadalcanal or Samar or even Glowworm ramming Admiral Hipper, where destroyers were forced to engage much bigger ships because they had nowhere ro run or were caught by surprise and had to fight for their lives. Completely different to an independent destroyer command on the open sea trying to close down a battleship that very much knows they are there.

I can.

Samar.

To expand, the destroyers were not caught against the wall, they could have ran, and would have escaped, seeing that the Japanese fleet was limited in speed by Nagato spewing fumes from raw crude, and only the cruisers, Destroyers, and maybe Kongos had a chance of getting close to them.

I can think of another situation as well.

Surigao Strait. While most famous for being the last time Gun Armed capital ships formed battle lines and fought in combat, remember that the first parts of the battle were torpedo boat and destroyer ambushes.

Edited May 4, 2023 by ijp8834

[kineuhansen]

what ever happend with all the plans for the game its hardly finish lackings hulls and diffrent towers

[Nick Thomadis]

Beta Update v1.3 "Build 14"
- Fixed temporary scale issues for some French guns.
- Fixed LOD issue for one new tower.
- Fixed province highlight issues for Ukraine, Central Italy area, Honshu area.
- Fixed issue that could cause unmovable ships if they were in an ally port.
- Improved collider logic so that in several new hulls (and some old) the small caliber gun placements no longer obstruct the main guns, and can be used normally.
- Auto-Design optimizations to be more effective and faster.
- Ship motion due to waves optimized further.

PLEASE RESTART STEAM TO GET THE UPDATE FAST

[baltic1284]

38 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:

Beta Update v1.3 "Build 14"
- Fixed temporary scale issues for some French guns.
- Fixed LOD issue for one new tower.
- Fixed province highlight issues for Ukraine, Central Italy area, Honshu area.
- Fixed issue that could cause unmovable ships if they were in an ally port.
- Improved collider logic so that in several new hulls (and some old) the small caliber gun placements no longer obstruct the main guns, and can be used normally.
- Auto-Design optimizations to be more effective and faster.
- Ship motion due to waves optimized further.

PLEASE RESTART STEAM TO GET THE UPDATE FAST

What about the New US Heavy Cruiser unable to place the 8 inch properly on the aft bridge yower that are also new

[Warspite96]

17 hours ago, ijp8834 said:

I can.

Samar.

To expand, the destroyers were not caught against the wall, they could have ran, and would have escaped, seeing that the Japanese fleet was limited in speed by Nagato spewing fumes from raw crude, and only the cruisers, Destroyers, and maybe Kongos had a chance of getting close to them.

I can think of another situation as well.

Surigao Strait. While most famous for being the last time Gun Armed capital ships formed battle lines and fought in combat, remember that the first parts of the battle were torpedo boat and destroyer ambushes.

If you read earlier comments I mention Samar, surely you don't consider Samar the same as the "destroyer attack" mission? Those destroyers, while yes, theoretically "could have ran", it would have been absolutely absurd for them to do so considering they had direct orders from Sprague to screen the retreating escort carriers. Not even close to being the same as the mission in this game.

Same thing with Surigao Strait, it's not the same as the "destroyer attack" mission. The Japanese battleships were practically useless against that night ambush, and those US DDs and PTs were still part of an overall larger command consisting of cruisers and battleships, whereas in the "destroyer attack" mission you supposedly "ambush" much heavier ships alone with a bunch of destroyers in broad daylight when the battleship knows you are there and is fully capable of fighting back with full efficiency.

Edited May 5, 2023 by Warspite96

[o Barão]

4 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:

- Improved collider logic so that in several new hulls (and some old) the small caliber gun placements no longer obstruct the main guns, and can be used normally.

Nice!

 

If possible, apply the same solution to the modern USA hulls.

 

...and the Yamato hull.

[NewJediOrder]

6 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:

- Improved collider logic so that in several new hulls (and some old) the small caliber gun placements no longer obstruct the main guns, and can be used normally.

I think it's possible to remove all collider logic for all small caliber guns. And some towers which have gun mount can adopt this change. 

[Nick Thomadis]

4 hours ago, o Barão said:

Nice!

 

If possible, apply the same solution to the modern USA hulls.

 

...and the Yamato hull.

If you place the smallest guns, the 2-inches, it should work.

[Suribachi]

34 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:

If you place the smallest guns, the 2-inches, it should work.

I was unable to replicate @o Barão's issue with the USA hull until I placed a 9 inch gun far enough back on the bow.  Placing the gun more forward, even overlapping the smaller guns did not seem to replicate the issue.  Although, I just don't have time for a through test right now.

However, for the Japanese Modern Battleship II Hull, I was able to replicate the issue rather quickly.  When even the smallest 2 inch, single barrel gun was placed if the player tries to put a main gun onto the steel (grey) part of the stern, the firing arc is blocked by the secondary guns as well as the crane in the rear.  Placing the gun on the furthest back yellow mounting point as indicated by the gun makes the firing arc work as the developers intend with the secondary guns.

EDIT:  Just to be clear, I did not fully build out a ship, only placing the guns on the hull.  Knowing this, there may be another factor in deciding the firing arc.  I will test later today when I have more time.

Edited May 5, 2023 by Suribachi

[o Barão]

36 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:

If you place the smallest guns, the 2-inches, it should work.

 

10 minutes ago, Suribachi said:

I was unable to replicate @o Barão's issue with the USA hull until I placed a 9 inch gun far enough back on the bow.  Placing the gun more forward, even overlapping the smaller guns did not seem to replicate the issue.  Although, I just don't have time for a through test right now.

However, for the Japanese Modern Battleship II Hull, I was able to replicate the issue rather quickly.  When even the smallest 2 inch, single barrel gun was placed if the player tries to put a main gun onto the steel (grey) part of the stern, the firing arc is blocked by the secondary guns as well as the crane in the rear.  Placing the gun on the furthest back yellow mounting point as indicated by the gun makes the firing arc work as the developers intend with the secondary guns.

I failed to replicate the issue with the USA BBs, so I apologize for the report. But yes, the issue is present in the Yamato hull.

[SpootKnight]

Which is unfortunate because the Japanese Modern Battleship II hull looks great, but it's also had these other issues that make a 1945-configuration Yamato nigh-impossible to make and should a legal design be created, it still has the advantage of being able to shoot through itself.

[mrfox1918]

Did a random battle to test something....1927 year.

Had 3 of each class of ship aside from transports; ie, 3 BB 3 BC 3 CA 3CL and 3 DD vs just 3 enemy CL.

Wanted to see what would happen to my formation if all I did was set all the speeds to 20knts hoping they would all stay in formation.

After about 10-15 minuets in game time where all I did was change the speeds to set all ships to 20 knts... The picture presented is what my formation turned into... Did not turn any ship at all, did not change any formation orders or setting, did not change ANYTHING aside from setting everyone to 20 knts.

Is the formation system intended to do this?

For enemy context the 3 enemy CL are about 18,000 meters to the bottom left of the picture.

 

[Nick Thomadis]

Sev

1 hour ago, mrfox1918 said:

Did a random battle to test something....1927 year.

Had 3 of each class of ship aside from transports; ie, 3 BB 3 BC 3 CA 3CL and 3 DD vs just 3 enemy CL.

Wanted to see what would happen to my formation if all I did was set all the speeds to 20knts hoping they would all stay in formation.

After about 10-15 minuets in game time where all I did was change the speeds to set all ships to 20 knts... The picture presented is what my formation turned into... Did not turn any ship at all, did not change any formation orders or setting, did not change ANYTHING aside from setting everyone to 20 knts.

Is the formation system intended to do this?

For enemy context the 3 enemy CL are about 18,000 meters to the bottom left of the picture.

 

Several of your ships are in Screen order, so they are not expected to sail blindly forward  but respond to threats that may be a few km away. Maybe some torp threats also affect their effort to avoid them?

[Cborg1700]

Hello,

Would it be possible to request a change of the funnels for both the Spanish & Chinese Modern Dreadnought I. As it stands now the current funnels don't fit where it's indicated which would cause either a massive forward weight offset or a limited number of guns. Fantastic game that's come a long way.

Thank you.

[o Barão]

Issues with guns not firing.

If we have a quick firing rate gun (small caliber gun) this can, and probably will, cause issues with the main battery.

This is a major issue in the game that ruins the gameplay and needs to be prioritized.

Note the rate of fire in this example is modded, however I can guarantee the same issue will happen in vanilla game.

[baltic1284]

9 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:

If you place the smallest guns, the 2-inches, it should work.

Unfortunately no it didn't also the US New Heavy and Light Cruisers added also have the same problem with the 2 inch guns on the forward and aft bridge and the new US Heavy Cruisers cant use a 8 inch gun on the Aft Bridge upper portion to fit 4 guns on it at all just shows the guns placement but cant turn or anything wont even let you take it out.

[mrfox1918]

5 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:

Sev

Several of your ships are in Screen order, so they are not expected to sail blindly forward  but respond to threats that may be a few km away. Maybe some torp threats also affect their effort to avoid them?

I did not have them on avoid torpedos.  Do player ships auto avoid torps with that option disabled? 

 

Also ships still really seem to struggle keeping a battle line still.

Did a 3 BC vs 1 TR to test year 1927 range 50,000 km

cut their speed down to 28 knts waited a bit then did a 15-20 degree turn. waited a while in game time for them to reform. They never did.

 

Edited May 5, 2023 by mrfox1918
more info to present

[mrfox1918]

2 hours ago, o Barão said:

Issues with guns not firing.

If we have a quick firing rate gun (small caliber gun) this can, and probably will, cause issues with the main battery.

This is a major issue in the game that ruins the gameplay and needs to be prioritized.

Note the rate of fire in this example is modded, however I can guarantee the same issue will happen in vanilla game.

I have had this same issue forever. Even with low fire rate secondary guns OR if I just turned them off and mains set to aggressive fire, still nothing. I do not use mods and am on the build 14 for 1.3.

Turrets also like to be stuck and place and not rotate or train to target.

Have made in game bug reports for this issue with almost every post 1.2 update in game as well.

Edited May 5, 2023 by mrfox1918