>>>Beta v1.4 Feedback<<< [Final version released]

[Harwood_39]

9 hours ago, ijp8834 said:

I think a good solution to this would be an option to turn off research for AI countries, just giving them techs for the year in question in January of that year. This could be a toggleable option so if players prefer to play without it, they could leave it off.

I think that's a great option to have, especially if the player can toggle it on/off.  It would also make shared designs much easier to implement in that scenario, and if it's toggleable then players who aren't interested can leave it off.  

[Lima]

Losses in ground battles are practically irrelevant

In short, I think so because of my long observations, you can see the numbers here.

I decided to make this post after I saw how the loss of 8 million people in one battle had no effect on China. It was a battle in southern China with France and it was still far from over when peace was made, so I didn't take a screenshot.

You can say it's China, and that's fine. However, because of the new system of linking population growth to GDP growth, Communist China had negative population growth in wartime (without any battles). Therefore, these 8 million losses should have had a real impact on the population.

Without this battle, China lost a maximum of 20 thousand people per month.

During this battle, China lost a maximum of 43 thousand people per month.

At the same time, China's minimum losses during this battle amounted to 300 thousand per month.

As in my topic above, most of the losses simply disappear without a trace.

This time I checked the save file, and "southern_china" is the only province that has "PopulationLosses":490704.4. All other provinces of China have "PopulationLosses":0.0.

That is, the Chinese army, mobilized from all over China, lost 8 million people, but the losses were calculated only for the province in which the battle took place.

[HaMaT]

@Nick Thomadis Could you please check the identifiers of Japanese hulls? It seems like there are two the same. And it is possible to refit one into a second. The result will be the following

[killjoy1941]

6 hours ago, HaMaT said:

@Nick Thomadis Could you please check the identifiers of Japanese hulls? It seems like there are two the same. And it is possible to refit one into a second. The result will be the following

LOL

That's amazing.

[Nick Thomadis]

[Update 19]
- Polishes on the Auto-Design to produce even more effective ships.
- Fixed major old issue with the operational range not being consistent in battles, resulting in early fuel depletion. Rebalance of the operational range to fit the new code base.
- Campaign AI adjustments on the way it manages fleets and economy.
- Various fixes, improvements in hulls, repairs on new guns that were overweight, Many changes that would surely result in campaign errors. We have reset the saves to make them bug free. Saved Designs must be repaired or cleaned up by you (either manually or by using the updated internal tool, pressing the related button).
- Optimizations in the ship sinking animations.
- 3x New Naval Academy Missions (mentioned in the central thread).

Please Restart Steam to get this update fast.

Note: We will add at least 2x new missions and the patch should be ready for release, depending on your new feedback.

[MRweng121]

must optimize this game and simplify many things directly. I know a hardcore naval simulation is very attractive,

but your studio cannot keep this game smooth with a lot of calculations. Simplify hit calculations, simplify AI research, simplify economics, simplify diplomacy,just simplify the game.

Most of us actually don't care so much about the two decimal places, nor do we care so much about trillion or billions. Reducing the refresh frequency of some constantly changing values, the change in artillery accuracy caused by a speed of 31.1 km/h at 31 km/h is not as important.

If everyone is struggling with the bugs .loading time.and low fps，Who can immerse themselves in your unique game

[AdmiralObvious]

Are there going to be any balance passes for some of the earlier naval academy missions? Some of them are pretty insane to pull off early on in the list.

Like "undefended convoy" demands that you sink 20 transports in 10 in game minutes, or "sink the raiders" involving you taking a predreadnought up against 3 heavy cruisers each with tech advantage and a price point of your maximum, per ship.

I also noticed an instance in which the to hit chance on a target was acting like you'd see in a "visualized RNG generator" with the to hit chance rapidly changing per frame.

Edited October 12, 2023 by AdmiralObvious

[Dave P.]

Any idea when the "it takes like ten minutes to start a new campaign" bug might get fixed?

It's particularly annoying when we're on the beta branch and getting our saved games cleared out. (Which is fine in principle, but wow, I get bored easier than I used to.)

[o Barão]

2 hours ago, AdmiralObvious said:

Some of them are pretty insane to pull off early on in the list.

Like "undefended convoy" demands that you sink 20 transports in 10 in game minutes...

With all due respect, but that mission is one of the easiest you can possibly get from the academy.

Unless something as changed in the past months, and I am not aware, you only need to build many small and cheap CL and rush the enemy. Impossible to lose.

[Cryadis]

Need to say I really, really like playing UAD in current beta, so cudos there.

Could i request a function to save campaign designs to shared ship repository and also load from there ? Unless i miss it i personally would love it, as i tend to play around with starting effectively in a campaign and end up creating the same ship over and over again (although i always find something to make them even better).

[Nick Thomadis]

[Update 20]
- Optimizations affecting positively the fps performance in 3D battles but also the auto-design and campaign calculations.
- Old Italian "Battleship II" replaced by "Battleship III", a new model. This change can affect your ongoing campaign with critical bug, but it was necessary.
- Further AI campaign economy management adjustments.

Please Restart Steam to get this update fast.

[Nick Thomadis]

[Hotfix] uploaded including further optimizations and fixes.
Please Restart Steam to get this update fast.

[kineuhansen]

so i had this rear turret stuck in a custom battle i had early today in 1.4 beta and its was like that for the rest off the battle and good thing it wasnt the front turrets then it would be half my firepower out of action so need to have a look at

[GodWentAFK]

Turrets getting stuck and not rotating. Absolutely unacceptable that this is still an issue.

[GodWentAFK]

The campaign AI is not replacing obsolete ships nearly enough. This was supposed to be improved several months ago in a previous update; I'm not sure if it was never actually improved or if it has regressed with the beta. In the year 1930, the AI is still using pre-dreadnought era cruisers from the early 1910s (the campaign start date was 1920 ffs). 

It completely trivializes the game when the AI is using french floating hotel abominations in 1930, and I'm using 18,000 ton modern heavy cruisers with mk V 9" guns. 

The AI needs to replace their old ships MUCH more aggressively on legendary and hard difficulties. 

[MDHansen]

Im thinking built ships on obsolete designs should be auto-scrapped, within a few years after they are obsolete. Maybe the only way as i see it

[Harwood_39]

2 hours ago, MDHansen said:

Im thinking built ships on obsolete designs should be auto-scrapped, within a few years after they are obsolete. Maybe the only way as i see it

Only for AI Ships though - I still use my obsolete Hulls with upgrades through to the late campaign as either colonial fleets or as invasion fleet support - and they can still hold up in battles somewhat.

[AdmiralObvious]

18 hours ago, o Barão said:

With all due respect, but that mission is one of the easiest you can possibly get from the academy.

Unless something as changed in the past months, and I am not aware, you only need to build many small and cheap CL and rush the enemy. Impossible to lose.

Since the addition of poor weather, it's entirety possible for you to not even see half of the transports. Last time I tried it last night, it was midnight in a storm which didn't lead to a good result at all until I turret farmed with three cruisers, and only had 20 in game second left.

 

Before weather was added, sure.

Edited October 13, 2023 by AdmiralObvious

[Nick Thomadis]

[Update 21]
- Further optimizations in auto-design to be faster, keeping the effectiveness.
- Further optimizations in general. Turret rotation during battle should be sharper than ever. If you notice turret jamming, please make sure you have fully cleaned up your campaigns in previous patches, YOU DO NOT use any other saves that can affect fire arc for your ships.

This is a Release Candidate for the major patch. Further fixes will be made according to feedback, if needed.

Please Restart Steam to get this update fast

[PanzerMk34]

For the record, I don't even know how to mod the game without breaking it apart, let alone pulling off this "feat"

btw, I'm using tech year 1950 in custom battle

Edited October 13, 2023 by PanzerMk34

[Lima]

Is it possible to add the ability to build refits? Both player and AI will benefit from this.

[Aldaris]

20 minutes ago, Lima said:

Is it possible to add the ability to build refits? Both player and AI will benefit from this.

Oh god, please! It's so annoying not being able to do that.

Oh, my current destroyer design is suddenly overweight and unable to be built? Easy to fix, refit, done.

And then, I can't build that refitted version, meaning my next batch of destroyers will have to be a new class that's just a copy of the preceding one with some upgrades, and every time I wanna do a future refit, I now have to refit TWO completely identical classes instead of one.

I'm building a new class of battleships in two batches of two, and before I start the second batch, a new rangefinder becomes available? Yeah, I'll have to build them to the old spec anyway, wait for it to finish and commission before I can add the new rangefinders. Because refitted versions can't be built.

It's really bad, and should be quite simple to fix.

 

Edited October 13, 2023 by Aldaris

[Nick Thomadis]

[Update 22]
- Further optimizations in auto-design to be faster. Campaign turn times should be stabilized now.
- Fixed conditions of last Naval Academy mission now allowing multi-nation fleets.

Please Restart Steam to get this update fast

[Rucki]

3 hours ago, Lima said:

Is it possible to add the ability to build refits? Both player and AI will benefit from this.

I agree, it would be really very handy to be able to directly build refits.

[HopefullAdmiral0786]

Dear All,

Since my last posting, I have ran a number of campaigns and am currently engage as Germany starting in 1930. I am in full admiration for all of you who have tirelessly engaged in constructive feedback for the latest Beta 1.4 feedback, with lots of great comments and useful suggestions.

I apologise if this suggestion may come rather late in the process, or has been mentioned already, but one aspect of the game that I feel would really add some 'spice' to the game, would the ability to declare war and initiate an invasion, upon a minor power.

At the moment, one appears only to be able to initiate a war, (using increased tension option in the diplomatice screen, and/or place a large fleet off their coast) and then hope that the major power will get so annoyed, that they issue a diplomatic ultimatum message that ends up in a war.

However, in my view it would be great if one could initiate a conflict with a minor power, expand ones empire with a number of similar conquests, and then face a major power accordingly. For example, the Austro-Hungarian Empire declaring war on Serbia, which inturn resulted in WW1. Two decades later Germany initiating Anschluss as a covert invasion of Ausria, then Sudetenland, followed by the Czech Republic and then Poland, which of course resulted in Britain and France declaring war. Similar examples can be found with Japan and Korea in the late 1890-1900s etc.

Whilst I appreciate that in UAD, one plays as 'head of the nation's admiralty', and not head of state, however, at the moment, it only appears that one has to jump into a major power conflict without consuming the minor powers first, which is not always the way that history works, unless I am missing something witihin the game mechanic?

Now I appreciate that this might entail a substantial modification of the game engine, but it would be far more enjoyable, not to say realistic.

I look forward to any comments, and once again, I am in full admiration for all of you who are making constructive suggestions in improving the game.