>>>v1.4 Feedback<<< (1.4.1.1 Opt x2 latest version)

[Drenzul]

5 hours ago, Suribachi said:

Unfortunately, you still cannot directly build refits still.  However, the game is smart enough to recognize that a direct refit and a copied design are the same ship so they can both be refitted to the same class again.  For those that do not know about this, there is an example below.

Example:
US cruiser of Helena class.  Refit to Helena (1895) -2.  Now copy design and call it Helena Refit for this example.  You can directly build Helena Refits.  When you go to refit again, refit the Helena (1895) -2 and it will now become Helena (1900) -3 or similar.  Now both Helena (1895) -2 and the Helena Refit classes can be refitted into the new design becoming one class again.

Kinda wonky, but it works.

Not sure if that is new in this patch cos it wouldn't work last patch I don't think. 
Kinda sucks through.

[Nick Thomadis]

34 minutes ago, Lima said:

@Nick Thomadis
Can you please comment on this? Like description says that Tube Powder I and light shells should have a positive effect on accuracy, but this is not the case. In fact, the  accuracy debuff from Tube Powder I is brutal.

 

Cannot type much now. It is self evident from your pictures. The High/Medium Burn propellants are very risky to explode but provide longer ranges and accuracy is affected accordingly. The lower burn propellants are the best compromise between safety and performance , depending on what you want to achieve..

[Lima]

14 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:

Cannot type much now. It is self evident from your pictures. The High/Medium Burn propellants are very risky to explode but provide longer ranges and accuracy is affected accordingly. The lower burn propellants are the best compromise between safety and performance , depending on what you want to achieve..

The thing is that range is not everything. I wouldn't say this if the game itself didn't mention "barrel erosion" in the description of propellants. For example, in the description of Cordite I it is said that "high barrel erosion affect accuracy". But in fact it is not. The description of Tube Powder I says that you get positive accuracy, although at a lower distance. But in fact, you get a deterioration in accuracy at any distance.

Also, light shells negatively affect accuracy, although their positive effect is indicated in the description.

Edited October 18, 2023 by Lima

[itolan1752]

As I knew. the "Muzzle Velocity" affect accuracy, too.

So Tube powder I's "-9% Shell Muzzle Velocity" could major reduce accuracy.

But light shell... maybe Shell Weight also affect accuracy?

Edited October 18, 2023 by itolan1752

[Nick Thomadis]

3 minutes ago, Lima said:

The thing is that range is not everything. I wouldn't say this if the game itself didn't mention "barrel erosion" in the description of propellants. For example, in the description of Cordite I it is said that "high barrel erosion affect accuracy". But in fact it is not. I mean, if it doesn't have any impact, it's just not worth mentioning it in the description.

Also, light projectiles negatively affect accuracy, although their positive effect is indicated in the description.

It is a mix of many variables. Barrel erosion is also working as everything else. 

[Lima]

1 hour ago, Nick Thomadis said:

It is a mix of many variables. Barrel erosion is also working as everything else. 

The very description of Tube Powder says that "barrel erosion" has a positive effect on base accuracy, although at a lower distance. But in fact, Tube Powder is inferior to Cordite at any distance.

And what about light shells?

I have nothing against this system, it's just strange that in the description you see a "positive effect on accuracy" but in fact the accuracy will decrease because of other modifiers.

Edited October 18, 2023 by Lima

[Lima]

18 minutes ago, itolan1752 said:

As I knew. the "Muzzle Velocity" affect accuracy, too.

So Tube powder I's "-9% Shell Muzzle Velocity" could major reduce accuracy.

But light shell... maybe Shell Weight also affect accuracy?

Cordite III has -6% MV
Tube Powder II has -5% MV

Cordite III is more accurate

[brothermunro]

It does seem a bit odd that range is a modifier propellants can have that don’t match their muzzle velocity. There’s no physical reason a shell fired by cordite should go further than a tube powder one if the muzzle velocity and shells are the same.

[Astor]

One thing I would like to point out is about shared design.

Can you please set those up in custom battles that both player and AI can select shared design when desiging yourself ships?

On AI side you can only use shared design with the selective/always option, but can't select manually the designs.

This would help a lot for tournament stuff and other things.

[kineuhansen]

any word on loading in 1.4 it feel like its freezing when i want to load 1 ai enemy battleship it take some time

[Lima]

Now I get a lot less fights in which the AI retreats from the very beginning of the battle. It's great.

But the situation described here happens quite often. Frankly, this is almost constantly done by the Italian AI. It does this in every situation when it does not have a battleship. It's fair that the Italian AI wants to maintain a greater distance, given its paper ships. It's not OK that it is trying to maintain a distance at which it is simply not able to return fire. I thought that the larger caliber of my guns might play a role in this, but this happens even with situations with my CLs vs CAs and like.

At the same time, other nations can aggressively attack, even if they don't have an advantage.

 

[Lima]

Stuck turrets video

EDIT: Stuck turrets champion, all the turrets are stuck

Edited October 19, 2023 by Lima

[Aldaris]

Feedback: Meeting engagements should be a LOT more common.

As it stands, it's sometimes almost impossible to provoke a battle. Even in a situation like this: there's a ton of german fleets around, some of them quite beefy.

And I've spent the last 9 months sailing my fleet up and down through that swarm, trying to get a battle. Any battle. No luck. That's just stupid. My ships are faster and more modern, I shouldn't have any trouble getting fights here, but that's not what is happening.

I understand missions are randomly generated if I've got my stuff sitting in port with sea control on. That's fine. But when I as the player actively spend the time to maneuver my fleets around, checking enemy course and destinations, setting up intercepts, and then nothing happens for 9 turns in a row, it feels bad.

Similarly, when an enemy fleet is blocking a choke point - why do I have to respect their area of control? Why can I not sail into that to fight that fleet?

Edited October 19, 2023 by Aldaris

[Nick Thomadis]

2 hours ago, Lima said:

Stuck turrets video

EDIT: Stuck turrets champion, all the turrets are stuck

If you have a save to send, we can check what might be wrong with those ships.

[Lima]

5 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:

If you have a save to send, we can check what might be wrong with those ships.

This bug is not limited to the campaign. Here, live footage of how it happens in a custom battle (look at 1:04). This bug happened with most of the ships in this campaign, only a modern battleship and a modern battlecruiser avoided it (probably because I try to keep them safe and they don't have to make swift maneuvers to evade torpedoes).

 

[Nick Thomadis]

Just now, Lima said:

This bug is not limited to the campaign. Here, live footage of how it happens in a custom battle (look at 1:04). This bug happened with most of the ships in this campaign, only a modern battleship and a modern battlecruiser avoided it (probably because I try to keep them safe and they don't have to make swift maneuvers to evade torpedoes).

 

You can send attach any save, custom battle, mission, shared design.

[Lima]

10 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:

You can send attach any save, custom battle, mission, shared design.

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/5b2tne9gc3ajbdkv40iix/1923-Austro-Hungarian-Empire-CL-Stuck_test_1.7z?rlkey=vsgvdi74foc1ez4yq847rbx26&dl=0

[Nick Thomadis]

Thanks, we will check and provide a solution.

[Suribachi]

On 10/18/2023 at 11:28 AM, Drenzul said:

Not sure if that is new in this patch cos it wouldn't work last patch I don't think. 
Kinda sucks through.

Been working for me for a few months now in 1.3.  Don't know if the feature is older because I refit my ships that way until recently.

[Astor]

I noticed the weapon getting stuck problem too. It appears but only to one specific class, that one happens to have 7.7" main guns. while my others with no problem have X.0" guns. I also noticed this behaivor with torpedo tubes getting stuck. So far saw it only once with underwater one.

[PhoenixLP44]

I think I have found a at least temporary fix to the stuck weapons glitch. You need to turn your ship a few times in each direction either with manual rudder or by clicking until you notice movement in the guns.

Can't say if it works every time but it worked for me twice now.

Just make sure you are at a certain range otherwise this will mean doom for your ship.

[Aldaris]

Here we go again, trying to bring an enemy fleet to battle. I've included date this time in the screenshot.

I've managed to bring them to battle in November. 6 turns of close range dancing to do it.

[Durham Dave]

Why do US modern battleship hulls have terrible pitch issues?

[Durham Dave]

Also, for the US semi-armoured cruiser IV the patch not says "like the St. Louis-class" except you still can't but anything larger than 3in guns in the casements.

[flaviohc16]

We should have a more dynamic war economy, because right now the best way to win the game ( aka have a bigger gdp) is not to play ( not going to war).

We should have something that somewhat follows what happens in land wars, when you are losing badly,  you have more conscription and that usually saves you ( but rightfully so destroys your economy).

Right now, when in war,  we have a flat " double the navy resources-half GDP growth", so +100% money/-50% GDP growth. We should have something different.

My idea, just to make an example:

During the 1 year of war, everything remains the same, after that, VP gets taken into account ( and they should be over a certain amount, lets say 50k, so you can't game the system by not engaging the enemy), at that point you look at the ratio between you and the enemy, and that changes you economy. TO give some random examples:

Up to 1:3 ratio ( let's say you have 60k VP, the enemy has 20K) everything remains the same, aka  +100% money/-50% GDP growth

From  when the ratio become from 1:3 to 1:5 ( so 100k:20k VP) the winning economy gets +66% money/-33% GDP growth, and the losing one gets it reversed +150% money/-66% growth, this is when the winning side it's starting to win and the enemy it's starting to get worried about losing the war, so the winning side it's starting to feel less pain and getting its economy spinning again and reducing the military budget, and the reverse for the losing one

 

From the 1:5 to 1:8 ( 160k:20K)the winning economy gets +50%money/-25% GDP growth, and the losing gets again the reversed +200% money/-75 % gdp growth

From 1:8 to 1:12 VP (240k:20k) the wiining economy gets +33% money/ -16.6% GDP growth, losing gets  +250% funds/ 83% growth

over 1:12 disparity, were basically one side is collapsing, and for the other the war it's just a minor annoyance, it could be: winning side +20% money/-10% gdp growth, and the losing side +300% funds/-90% gdp growth.

This could also be done taking into account GDP, and or population, so you don't have the insane situation where the USA is attacking a dying France that now has only small islands and still you get nuked with -50% GDP growt. 

IMHO this would make everything more dynamic, what do you think?