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

[Guest]

AI is definately more aggressive in battles. crikey  I got caught hard 😬

[Seleukos of Olympia]

Yeah, battles have definitely improved.

[jw62]

Agree that the AI is really trying harder and even tries to torpedo rush me with TB's and LC's. They also move into engagement range instead of floating outside it. The long campaign seems smoother, but if you don't smack Britain continually their economy just goes on a blitz, you have to keep hammering them until half of their territories revolt or they become a game monster with a GDP exponentially leaping ahead and research as well. Can make for a good long term enemy if you "Farm" them right.

[o Barão]

4 hours ago, jw62 said:

 ...and even tries to torpedo rush me with TB's...

This is not correct. TBs and DDs all follow the same AI logic. Trying to create battle lines and copy the target speed. Also, approach angles are universal for all ships. There are no exclusive modifiers for them. You may have seen a situation where you got the illusion that they were trying something different, but no it was only a lucky coincidence.

Here as an example, you can see the AI creating battles lines and also copying the target speed and approaching slowly, giving me all the time in the world to murder one by one.

 

The issue is these values are universal.

approach_clamp,0.33,Lmit of direction/away approach angle for ship's far away. Must not be >1. The bigger the sharper turns to reach the desired distance.,0.5 [0.3~1],,,,,,
approach_clamp_torpedoes,0.5,Approach logic for ships armed with torpedoes. The bigger the sharper turns to reach the desired distance.,,,,,,,
approach_clamp_no_guns,0.4275,"Same, but if too far to shoot guns. The bigger the sharper turns to reach the desired distance.",0.95 [0.3~1],0.17,,,,,

 

If it was possible to have these 3 modifiers copied and used only for TBs and DDs with a different set of values, then it would be possible to make them hyper aggressive and deadly in the approach.

 

Edit: In fact, I only need this one

approach_clamp_torpedoes,0.5,Approach logic for ships armed with torpedoes. The bigger the sharper turns to reach the desired distance.,,,,,,,

Edited November 30, 2023 by o Barão

[Dave P.]

Noticed a strange bug. When I do a naval invasion, if it fails, the required tonnage to invade that territory again drops by ~100k tons (or to 0t for smaller provinces). So you reinvade and, wham, auto-win.

 

 

Also, the port capacity of any province captured this way is 0. If the enemy recaptures and I capture it back without failing, it gets reset.

Edited November 30, 2023 by Dave P.

[applegrcoug]

This is an interesting one...

I commissioned a whole bunch of destroyers at once.  So many, it depleted my crew pool.  I had to mothball a whole bunch of old destroyers to get enough to man the new ones.  

However, it seems to have reset all of my existing crews to cadets.  I just had a battle, on the screen before the battle, it listed my crew as veterans.  In battle, they were only cadets.  

[kineuhansen]

so the campaign loading is an issue i am at 1940 and my campaign freeze a while while loading

[jw62]

20 hours ago, o Barão said:

This is not correct. TBs and DDs all follow the same AI logic. Trying to create battle lines and copy the target speed. Also, approach angles are universal for all ships. There are no exclusive modifiers for them. You may have seen a situation where you got the illusion that they were trying something different, but no it was only a lucky coincidence.

Here as an example, you can see the AI creating battles lines and also copying the target speed and approaching slowly, giving me all the time in the world to murder one by one.

 

The issue is these values are universal.

approach_clamp,0.33,Lmit of direction/away approach angle for ship's far away. Must not be >1. The bigger the sharper turns to reach the desired distance.,0.5 [0.3~1],,,,,,
approach_clamp_torpedoes,0.5,Approach logic for ships armed with torpedoes. The bigger the sharper turns to reach the desired distance.,,,,,,,
approach_clamp_no_guns,0.4275,"Same, but if too far to shoot guns. The bigger the sharper turns to reach the desired distance.",0.95 [0.3~1],0.17,,,,,

 

If it was possible to have these 3 modifiers copied and used only for TBs and DDs with a different set of values, then it would be possible to make them hyper aggressive and deadly in the approach.

 

Edit: In fact, I only need this one

approach_clamp_torpedoes,0.5,Approach logic for ships armed with torpedoes. The bigger the sharper turns to reach the desired distance.,,,,,,,

Well they started out gaggled, i mean "screening" the heavies and then do so, popping smoke, and then when both sides are lining up for the traditional go to they were popping out and making runs. They sucked at if for sure, and dribs and drabs so I could pop them, but it was a legitimate try, it was "better"

Hey man, I'm just trying to say when it's positive to counterbalance when I say its negative, If it's improving then say so, and where it could be better.

You make a good point, and perhaps it could be implemented, I don't know, I don't have time to hack more than basic files anymore. Can you edit it and get it to work? If you can there are a couple other serious coders on this Forum. And you should ask Nick, polite and all, he could even get you into a discussion with the coder in house if you schmoozed it right, and I say that because we did it with Sonalysts and Fleet Command way back in the day and they gave me the keys to the 3d graphics so I could install ship and aircraft designs into the game.

[o Barão]

1 hour ago, jw62 said:

Hey man, I'm just trying to say when it's positive to counterbalance when I say its negative, If it's improving then say so, and where it could be better.

I agree 100% with you on this. In general, I like the improvements made to the AI in the last update.

 

1 hour ago, jw62 said:

Can you edit it and get it to work? If you can there are a couple other serious coders on this Forum. And you should ask Nick, polite and all

 I can't. This internal code from the game, and I don't have the skills to do that. I can only edit the parameters that are available to me. In this case, what I am suggesting would be to create a new dedicated parameter that is only exclusive to a specific class, well two, TBs and DDs, and this only the devs can do it. But I already mentioned this to Nick around 6 months ago.

[jw62]

2 hours ago, o Barão said:

I agree 100% with you on this. In general, I like the improvements made to the AI in the last update.

 

 I can't. This internal code from the game, and I don't have the skills to do that. I can only edit the parameters that are available to me. In this case, what I am suggesting would be to create a new dedicated parameter that is only exclusive to a specific class, well two, TBs and DDs, and this only the devs can do it. But I already mentioned this to Nick around 6 months ago.

I would think each class of ship would have it's own behavior sheet with editable parameters for adjustment. But this game feels more Grown than Planned, if you understand me. It's really creative, they have some very knowledgeable people trying to tie real life ship-building issues into a sim, probably on a really low budget, and let's not forget Wartime conditions. Even if some are not in the War zone, living as a refugee sucks. And lets not forget the pandemic just before that (literally killed me, I'm still recovering, and running four projects).

So write out your ideas/suggestions and message Nick again. They would have to do something like that to add carriers to the game, let alone aircraft, and I think, as someone who builds serially, that this is a really great first draft and could either be updated or a version 2, but they also have to make money, people need to eat. It's easy to spot things you would do if you could but they may be spread thin but they are trying.

Speaking of which I was going to write out my own fresh list of Map/Log/Task Forces/Info Panel and then add a choice or choice with chance to Reject a peace deal as too meager (looking at you Phillipines), and at least a suggestion that government might want to view some locale as a coaling station (looking at you Hawaii). But I'm too tired, long week.

I'd drop $30 for a DLC with a ton of mods and fix-ups or $60+ for a new from the ground up Version 2 with modules for aircraft carriers and aircraft/Subs/mines/torps/radar and maybe a rudimentary 1 v1 multiplayer jousting mode. And a usable Map

[killjoy1941]

2 hours ago, jw62 said:

I'd drop $30 for a DLC with a ton of mods and fix-ups or $60+ for a new from the ground up Version 2 with modules for aircraft carriers and aircraft/Subs/mines/torps/radar and maybe a rudimentary 1 v1 multiplayer jousting mode. And a usable Map

Give it five years or so. I highly doubt this project turned out exactly as Nick hoped it would. There are so many studio firsts in this title that I imagine the temptation to give it another go with a sequel will eventually be pretty high.

[StrikerDanger]

On 11/30/2023 at 1:05 PM, jw62 said:

The long campaign seems smoother, but if you don't smack Britain continually their economy just goes on a blitz, you have to keep hammering them until half of their territories revolt or they become a game monster with a GDP exponentially leaping ahead and research as well. Can make for a good long term enemy if you "Farm" them right

I've noticed this in the past. It's either Britain or France, or both, that go off and earn +10% GDP per year. Even if they come out of war a loser, they jump right back up to 12-15% GDP growth. It's a bit insane.

[Warspite96]

19 hours ago, applegrcoug said:

This is an interesting one...

I commissioned a whole bunch of destroyers at once.  So many, it depleted my crew pool.  I had to mothball a whole bunch of old destroyers to get enough to man the new ones.  

However, it seems to have reset all of my existing crews to cadets.  I just had a battle, on the screen before the battle, it listed my crew as veterans.  In battle, they were only cadets.  

Hmmmmmmmm, a few pages back I wrote that I had a bug where my veteran ships went back to being cadets for no reason, this my very well explain it!

[Nick Thomadis]

Uploaded optimized version x3 including the following:
- Further optimizations on auto-design, making the AI balance more effectively the firepower, protection, speed and range of its ships.
- Battle AI further improvements, so that it chooses effective fire distances in most if not all cases.
It is mandatory to restart Steam to get this update without possible issues. Steam may not update the game successfully for players who tend to leave their PC and Steam client open for a large amount of time

[Lima]

Quote

Why enemy submarines keep sinking my battleships?
The game simulates in an abstract way the importance -and annoyance- of submarine warfare. It is expected that battleships without sufficient escort to be very vulnerable against submarines. 

The ASW value of a task force is based on an average value taken from all ships of the task force. So if you have many battleships with low ASW and a few exceptional destroyers with very high ASW, the overall effectiveness of the task force against submarines is expected to be mediocre at best. The average value simulates the undesirable noise caused by bigger ships which conflict with the effort of detecting the stealthy submarines. 

In order to be more effective against very advanced and stealthy submarines of the enemy, it is advised to issue dedicated Task Forces, specific for hunting down and destroying submarines and not mix them up in  a large, less effective group.

If only it were all like that...

Sufficient escort - As a rule, I use 2-3 BBs in a TF (because AI battleships are terrible and that's enough). They are protected by at least 4-5 DDs per battleship. I try to use more DDs, my frequently used TFs composition is 2BB/BC 2CA 4CL 20-24DD. I have lost capital ships in such a TF several times.

Note that not all players can afford this, in part due to optimization problems with such a large number of ships in battle.

Dedicated ASW TFs - I use TFs of 1-2CL 2-6DDs. Most of the time, these ships have special designs with maxed ASW. These TFs did their job relatively well until the 1930s, but then lost their effectiveness dramatically. DDs eventually disappear from such TFs because they are just food for subs, their ASW is just that low.  In the 1940s, I create paper CLs with 6000-6500 ASW (they have practically no other weapons to maximize the ASW), but even such ships cease to be effective against subs in the late 1940s.

A problem unrelated to the results of the fights:

"Fighting" with subs is very frequent and incredibly boring. At the beginning of each turn, I get 5-7 mandatory fights in which I decide absolutely nothing, and just have to get through it. It really takes a lot of time, because by the end of the campaign it is not working too fast. And as I said, these battles do not affect the course of the campaign, because in the big picture these losses of ships don't matter to my Navy.

And this is actually my biggest complaint about submarines. I can put up with the loss of ships, I can put up with the absurd situation that my dozens of DDs cannot find a noisy ocean submarine from the 1920s with the help of latest sonars. But when the game gets boring...This is the worst thing that can happen to a game.

Edited December 2, 2023 by Lima
suuuuuuub

[Hasty R]

If I could make a strong suggestion (and others reading this, please back me up if you agree)...

Can you create an option in the settings to turn off fuel for AI? Lets face it, despite all the optimizations you've put in place (which are legion and I thank you for the huge effort!!), the reality is that AI sucks at fuel management and more often than not, I am fighting AI vessels in Low Fuel state. It's a huge disadvantage to them and if I have to choose between reality and a good naval battle, I would prefer to always have the AI in a normal fuel state in the battle.

Leaving the fuel concern for the human player is great. I base my strategy on which ports are available and design my ships with range in mind. I move my fleets with fuel limits guiding my strategy. But let's be honest, the AI does not do this and I'd rather have fun fighting capable AI that cheats than try to keep optimizing the AI to manage fuel.

Do others share this thought? I figure this would be an easier patch than to keep trying to improve the AI fuel management. Also, if it is an option in the settings than those who want the AI to manage fuel can leave it on. For those of us that just want a tougher challenge can allow the AI to bypass fuel management.

Thank you for considering this!!

[Lima]

Late-game issues

I called it "late game issues", because I didn't come up with a better name. Actually, these issues don't just show up at the end of the campaign. Issues with the giant tonnage may appear after 10-15 years in the game, and the issue of transport capacity will be constantly present on late starting dates.

Required naval invasion tonnage (it's 1949)

This problem often occurs with Britain/USA/France. That's just an insanely high tonnage. Of course, this allows you to finally spend useless money, but then you will have to spend a lot of IRL time moving this horde.

Shelling the port does not help the situation, since this mission is randomly generated and for an invasion of this province, for example, you need to shell three ports at the same time, which doesn't happen.

The inability to replenish the transport capacity

The growth rate of transport capacity decreases during the campaign and at some point becomes simply minuscule. It's quite funny, you could completely fill this capacity in the 1890s, but in the 1940s, with huge resources, it's just not possible.

And there's nothing I can do about it. I would be happy to build transports in my military shipyards for my own money, because I love logistics.

[casperwieik]

I was gonna post on the transport issue as well, since it's been bothering me to no end lately. Currently in a 1890 start US run where I 200%ed transports right away.

It's now 1918 with alot of wars and new conquests so transport losses are somewhat common. However I cannot get more then 0.13% at full investment now.

 

Another issue I am having lately is laser-guided ai BB. Last battle I (tried to) fought had an enemy BB with 80% accuracy on its main guns, where every other BB, mine and theirs, had around 6-8%. This is usually combined with a single shell dealing over 50% structural damage and over half the ship flooding.
Don't have a screenshot sadly since I restarted that save because HMS Bulwark sank one of my BB with every single salvo...

[casperwieik]

Scratch that, tried the battle again, same result. British laser guided early dreadnought hammering away at any chance I'd have at winning this decisively in my favour battle by sheer number and firepower.

 

Seems to happen to main caliber guns on the sides of the ship, although if they are of different calibers (Brits also had some dual caliber BB around) it doesn't happen very often. Still, very annoying bug that makes battles around this era very unfair.

[Hasty R]

16 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:

Uploaded optimized version x3 including the following:
- Further optimizations on auto-design, making the AI balance more effectively the firepower, protection, speed and range of its ships.
- Battle AI further improvements, so that it chooses effective fire distances in most if not all cases.
It is mandatory to restart Steam to get this update without possible issues. Steam may not update the game successfully for players who tend to leave their PC and Steam client open for a large amount of time

Having just played two large battles now with the latest optimization (and for full transparency, I am using the fantastic NAR mod), I just want to say that you guys nailed the new aggressive AI!!! Well done!

The AI CL's dove right in and put up a torpedo screen on my BB's. The AI CA's and BB's brought down range until it was an absolute slugfest at 3-4 km range. Fantastic stuff. Tougher battles now versus a much more aggressive AI. Nicely done and it makes the battles much more enjoyable!!

Also, another plug for the idea to allow an option to switch off AI fuel effects (i.e. unlimited AI fuel) which would also add a nice challenge to battles, as yet again there were AI ships in Low Fuel state.

[Hasty R]

One other thing as I am throwing up the comments. I've read a number of comments about air power and the potential for adding it into the game. I would just offer this cautionary observation. For those that have played "War on the Sea" by Killerfish, they included air, sea, and submarines in that game and air power just dominates the equation. That is also historically accurate, as naval warfare in World War II evolved fairly quickly into air power and escorts (for reference, in game turns, Pearl Harbor to Midway would be just 8 turns - three major carrier events and no surface action). Battleships played a very minor role in naval combat throughout the war (the Germans used them as raiders and the Japanese only got their BB's involved once their air power was depleted after Philippine Sea, and Solomons was only cruisers and destroyers at night to re-supply troops; finally, the British and Italians fought 1 total surface action across the entire Mediterranean conflict). So while it adds historical accuracy, I would suggest that adding in air power to the game would actually make it less fun. This game is a giant Tsushima / Jutland simulator and that is a blast. I think any mission creep (like more detailed ASW or air power) would only take away from what is the core of the game.

[StrikerDanger]

I have no idea if I'm the only one experiencing this, but I cannot, under any circumstances cancel an alliance with another nation. I'd like to have a chance to recover my nation's economy, but my ally (The USA) has been in a state of perpetual war since ~1896. And despite my efforts to want to cancel the alliance, the button is always grayed out.

[flashmozzzgg]

A lot has been written here about the toxicity of submarines.

I will write too.

We have: a strike group with 12 newest DDs (there are already fewer of them in the screenshots). Sonar 2 technology and level 4 depth charges. The enemy has 7 SS built 1920-1921. And they're just destroying my TF! Several CA, 11 DD were lost, but the enemy lost 1 SS. 1!

 

Dear developers. You have repeatedly referred to "reality" and "historicity", choosing them at the expense of gameplay and fun. So look at reality! In reality, the Atlantic is just littered with scrap metal from the german SS. The Baltic Sea became the grave for dozens of submarines of the Soviet Union. Submariners were limited to several sunken battleships and single cruisers without protection. The task of submarines is to sink convoys, not the player's fleets. In the game, it doesn't matter how modern a destroyer is in your fleet, what kind of sonar and depth charges they have. The submarines will destroy them all.

It looks like spoilers are disabled on the forum, so I'll leave only 4 screenshots.

Screenshots:

 

 

Edited December 3, 2023 by flashmozzzgg

[Lima]

It seems that the ships of the minor countries aren't being repaired

Another player reported this problem to me. He said that ships of minor countries don't go on a new mission after receiving damage first time and many such damaged ships can be found in the save file. Below are two of the most obvious examples from my save file. These ships participated in battles in 1951-1952, currently it's 1954, but they are still under repair.

[DieselPower]

I'd like to thank the devs for fixing the battles, now the AI tries to fight properly.

I'd also, once again, like to bring up the issue of submarines being a huge detriment to this game.  They aren't adding anything other than frustration.  I understand they were implemented so that we had to build our ships taking their threat into account, but when you escort a BB with 4 CL and 6 DD with the most modern ASW available, with ships having ASW ratings over 1500 each, and they STILL can't detect submarines from 1920, and get sunk, something is off.

 

I can't even send a TF to attack an enemy without saving 100 times beforehand and hoping that my one or 2 capitol ships don't get sunk and hand the war to the enemy in VP.

 

Please, give us the option to turn subs off,  or figure out a way to weigh our escorts to counter them better than it is.