>>>v1.3 Feedback<<<(Latest Update: v1.3.9.9 Rx2)

[flaviohc16]

I'm playing a 1890 campaign, now I'm in 1927, I don't know why but the PC always takes 5+ minutes for every turn to load the "building new ships" even though there are only 4 powers left ( me/USA, Britain, France and Russia).

What is causing the bottleneck? I have see it got worse after 1925 or something like that

[German CL mk II guns]

Just started a new 1900 german campaign and designing ships and mark II guns for CLs are turreted version so yeah, you cannot basically desing a CL. I think this was a thing of past versions IIRC and now it came back.

[Zuikaku]

All of the light and secondsries are becoming turreted too early. Shielded guns (up to 140mm) were standard well into '20ies. 

[idontfckingknow]

-It is impossible for you to hit enemy heavy cruisers going destroyer speed(39kn) but enemy battleships can hit you destroyers who are faster and smaller

 

-Ungoverned Territories are immortal

 

-(suggestion) single turret small caliber guns should have an option to be non shielded to fit mounts better

 

[HaMaT]

Once more about the campaign start for Italy.

I have a design of the BB but I cannot build it because it's heavier than my Shipyard limit. What's the point?

[Abuse_Claws]

A suggestion: if a country is dissolved for whatever reason during war (economic collapse, losing all ports etc), make it so it actually loses the war before dissolving, maybe even with a hefty VP bonus to the winners, so that they can claim the now ungoverned provinces.

Other possible option (maybe even in conjunction with the previous) is to make invasions (land and navy alike) instantly succeed if the target country is dissolved, or at least give the attacker an option to keep going with the invasion instead of it just failing

Edit: as of right now (1927 in 1890 campaign) there are 32 'Ungoverned Territory' provinces on the map, making it the 4th largest country in the world.

Edited May 12, 2023 by Abuse_Claws
upd

[HaMaT]

Another mystical outcome. Why defeat?

[admiralsnackbar]

Ghost battles are still a thing and while I'm not categorically opposed to them. I need to know: ships on my side load into battle often incapable of making their flank speed. Does this impediment also apply to the enemy?

Because imagine spawning into a battle where you can only detect an enemy 5km away [because of bad weather] where your ships top speed is 21kts but is reduced to 17 whilst the enemy had a speed of 19kts and is still at 19kts. 

This is the third time where my ships, despite being fewer in number, end up trying to chase a fleeing enemy in bad weather and even after 2-5m of max time compression there's no contact. 

often times this is happening even when I am assisted with destroyers. 

 

[Durham Dave]

Poked a USA game, some weird goings on.

Ungoverned territory has the best internal security forces, no rebellion ever succeeded against them, so no nations came back.

Many countries whom had their navies wrecked seemed to get stuck in a building and scrap loop. They have little to no ships, so they start building a lot of ships. I don't know if them completing new ships triggered some sort of income saving flag, as it seems as soon as they complete them something would make them scrap them, and lay down more. Spain with only part of Spain left, building 40 ships at a time is like this, but Germany, with less colonies, but half of France and half of Spain is also like this though. I will have to check if anyone with a navy is doing this.

Again more battles where the enemy runs straight away. It's all well and good saying I have cornered a fleet, but with no coastline on the battlemap, I haven't really cornered them have I?

[Zuikaku]

Yes, AI running away before contact is a real problem.

[Durham Dave]

Oh, and US modern battleship 2 (I think) can't have any barbettes for some reason.

[Lima]

39 minutes ago, Durham Dave said:

Poked a USA game, some weird goings on.

Ungoverned territory has the best internal security forces, no rebellion ever succeeded against them, so no nations came back.

Many countries whom had their navies wrecked seemed to get stuck in a building and scrap loop. They have little to no ships, so they start building a lot of ships. I don't know if them completing new ships triggered some sort of income saving flag, as it seems as soon as they complete them something would make them scrap them, and lay down more. Spain with only part of Spain left, building 40 ships at a time is like this, but Germany, with less colonies, but half of France and half of Spain is also like this though. I will have to check if anyone with a navy is doing this.

Again more battles where the enemy runs straight away. It's all well and good saying I have cornered a fleet, but with no coastline on the battlemap, I haven't really cornered them have I?

+ illustration

Britain has tried to be reborn about ten times already, but every time it happened. The same can be said about all minors and majors.

[HaMaT]

23 minutes ago, Lima said:

Britain has tried to be reborn about ten times already, but every time it happened. The same can be said about all minors and majors.

Has happened to me all the time. The great nation couldn't just be reborn at all.

[German CL mk II guns]

all the guys who tested beta didn't point out these things? I got angry to my self now because this is the only time i didnt test beta

 

edit: question mark

Edited May 13, 2023 by Terminus Est

[Cborg1700]

On 5/10/2023 at 4:46 AM, Nick Thomadis said:

You can increase the Beam and try to constraint in using more funnels in this particular hull.

Hi,

As you suggested I maxed out the beam and still the funnel does not fit. Yes I also tried with the other funnels, the one pictured is the smallest.

[lrdplatypus]

11 hours ago, Zuikaku said:

All of the light and secondsries are becoming turreted too early. Shielded guns (up to 140mm) were standard well into '20ies. 

I would like to be able to choose between turrets and shields. The same gun was mounted in various ways depending on the available space on a hull in real life.

Some US destroyers had turreted front guns while the aft battery was just shielded. It would be nice if we had similar options!

Edited May 12, 2023 by lrdplatypus

[RNV]

5 hours ago, HaMaT said:

Another mystical outcome. Why defeat?

I would like to use this as an opportunity to remind the Team that the flag used for the Italian Navy is wrong and it should be the same used for the country (the Royal flag). The flag with the Merchan Republics ensign was picked after 1946, with the abolition of the Monarchy.

[SirTrafalgar]

4 hours ago, Terminus Est said:

all the guys who tested beta didn't point out these things. I got angry to my self now because this is the only time i didnt test beta

I pointed out the problems with the rebellions in the beta. And made several bug reports. Campaigns still need a lot of work and the rebellion mechanic is one of them. Rebellions by an organized force should always win in un governed territory. Rebellions were far to successful in the previous patch against minors and majors. The Ottomans basically fall apart in the first five years, now they have staying power but they need to get involved in wars too so their collapse makes sense rather than feeling like a scripted event without any historical context. 

Majors are to easy to collapse again since their economies are way too fragile. A war that destroys their entire fleet, because the AI is incapable of doing things players do to preserve their ships, usually ends up destroying the whole nation, which is historical but not fun for game play.  

12 hours ago, Abuse_Claws said:

A suggestion: if a country is dissolved for whatever reason during war (economic collapse, losing all ports etc), make it so it actually loses the war before dissolving, maybe even with a hefty VP bonus to the winners, so that they can claim the now ungoverned provinces.

Other possible option (maybe even in conjunction with the previous) is to make invasions (land and navy alike) instantly succeed if the target country is dissolved, or at least give the attacker an option to keep going with the invasion instead of it just failing

Edit: as of right now (1927 in 1890 campaign) there are 32 'Ungoverned Territory' provinces on the map, making it the 4th largest country in the world.

A variation of this is what should happen. A normal treaty should be signed with all territory, ships, and money claimed guaranteed to the victor. If in an Alliance the member who created the highest score makes their claims first (really that should be the way for wars in general) all unclaimed territories go to an un governed status. Then on the next full turn revolts will occur creating new minor or major nations.

Campaigns start breaking down at about the 20 year mark. Either your ships just generally outclass whatever the AI puts down that the campaign kind of seems pointless or countries collapse leaving you with limited options to engage with the AI. Loosing China and Russia while playing as Japan usually means being isolated as the Europeans and Americans don't tend to station their whole fleet in the Asian theater and the game just grinds down to a slog while you move your ships way far overseas to take European and American colonies. This makes playing from an 1890 or 1900 start date pointless. Heck anything before 1930 is dubious. What players want is some stability and the ability to play the long campaign if we so choose. Hell I know some people who would enjoy being able to play week to week or bi weekly rather than month to month to really stretch out their campaigns. 

[idontfckingknow]

Anyone else have weird Victory Points score. It was mentioned before that it is based on the the total cost of the ship. I lost a war due to an all out fleet battle, my fleet lost only one ship but I sunk all of the enemy. Ship isnt even far from each other.

[anonusername]

1 hour ago, SirTrafalgar said:

I pointed out the problems with the rebellions in the beta. And made several bug reports. Campaigns still need a lot of work and the rebellion mechanic is one of them. Rebellions by an organized force should always win in un governed territory. Rebellions were far to successful in the previous patch against minors and majors. The Ottomans basically fall apart in the first five years, now they have staying power but they need to get involved in wars too so their collapse makes sense rather than feeling like a scripted event without any historical context. 

Majors are to easy to collapse again since their economies are way too fragile. A war that destroys their entire fleet, because the AI is incapable of doing things players do to preserve their ships, usually ends up destroying the whole nation, which is historical but not fun for game play.  

A variation of this is what should happen. A normal treaty should be signed with all territory, ships, and money claimed guaranteed to the victor. If in an Alliance the member who created the highest score makes their claims first (really that should be the way for wars in general) all unclaimed territories go to an un governed status. Then on the next full turn revolts will occur creating new minor or major nations.

Campaigns start breaking down at about the 20 year mark. Either your ships just generally outclass whatever the AI puts down that the campaign kind of seems pointless or countries collapse leaving you with limited options to engage with the AI. Loosing China and Russia while playing as Japan usually means being isolated as the Europeans and Americans don't tend to station their whole fleet in the Asian theater and the game just grinds down to a slog while you move your ships way far overseas to take European and American colonies. This makes playing from an 1890 or 1900 start date pointless. Heck anything before 1930 is dubious. What players want is some stability and the ability to play the long campaign if we so choose. Hell I know some people who would enjoy being able to play week to week or bi weekly rather than month to month to really stretch out their campaigns. 

Destroying their entire fleet should cause them to surrender all their overseas territories (and possibly other concessions) instead of collapsing. Collapse should happen only from prolonged blockades or land invasions. It would neat if collapse was also changed to work more like Victoria II Great Wars where the losing country is reduced to their essential territories, their border territories given to neighboring powers, and their overseas bases auctioned off among their enemies.

[Bishotron]

8 hours ago, Zuikaku said:

Yes, AI running away before contact is a real problem.

if you run from battle, AND you have MORE ships than the opponent, you should incur heavy Point loss.

The amount of times I go against a fleet of, like, 30 TB or 50DD with say a dozen CA or BC's ..... And NEVER track down a single ship is maddening.

If the Ai flees with a superior force.... they should "lose" the battle and lose points

 

1 hour ago, idontfckingknow said:

Anyone else have weird Victory Points score. It was mentioned before that it is based on the the total cost of the ship. I lost a war due to an all out fleet battle, my fleet lost only one ship but I sunk all of the enemy. Ship isnt even far from each other.

its not just you, VP are based on Tech and Cost.  As such sinking 20 cheap AF cruisers from 1890 will net you maybe 100 points,

meanwhile loosing one Advanced High cost CL can lose you 3000 points.  Case in point, I went on a transport attack and lost a single CL that was apparently worth almost 3000points.  Thats almost three times the VP points I got for sinking an enemy BB.

Its absurd because it means the game currently PUNISHES you for teaching up and keeping your ships outfitted with new Technology. 

[Bishotron]

another note... 

How hard is it to simply give us OPTIONS to turn certain things ON or OFF?

Weather? ON/OFF
Forced Alliances? ON/OFF
Forced Battles? ON/OFF

I can list many more.. but I honestly wish there was a reason why more such features didn't have very basic choices for us to say YES or NO

[HistoricalAccuracyMan]

I don't know if anybody else has noticed this, but whenever I try to build a "Modernized" Texas on the new hull they added (so essentially, trying to build the USS Texas as she is right now/her WWII configuration), I get an absurdly high fore weight offset. I don't know if the hull needs to be tweaked or what, but I find that the new hulls that are made after the USS New York/USS Texas are hard to keep balanced at a decent/acceptable level.

[Nick Thomadis]

Hello Admirals,

We just deployed a hotfix patch with a significant set of fixes following up the major update v1.3. Please read below:

v1.3.1 Hotfix
https://steamcommunity.com/games/1069660/announcements/detail/6300017307877090123

[Zuikaku]

AI Ships running away without making visual contact or proper indentification ON/OFF 😉