>>>v1.5 Feedback<<<(Latest version: v1.5.1.6)

[TK3600]

4 hours ago, HMS Implosive said:

Unfortunately, if I am not mistaken, the main armor deck in game is the weather deck, ie. armor deck cruisers are just ordinary armored cruisers with fancy name. Armor belt is everything of the ship side exept the extremities. The front belt is similarly entire nose section of the ship that is not part of the citadel and aft belt is everything aft of the citadel.

Similarly, I don't think the citadel shemes add actual armor plates inside the model but only add multipliers to the penetration and damage equations, thus improving survivability but not really changing the armor model.

It would be cool if we had more realistic armor regions. I suggested earlier this thread my idea of siplish yet more sophisticated armor layout; really wish the devs consider that.

 

edit: to answer your question: no, the armored deck doesn't protect the waterline, even though those protected cruiser IRL had such a feature.

From what I learned, the way citadel armor works is that 2nd layer works independently of previous. A 13in pen shell flying into 12in layer 1 do not weaken, it retains the full 13in penetration. Layer 2 gets a special modifier for armor efficiency instead.

In current game, first inner armor is useless and will never block anything, because its maximum thickness is limited by outer armor. Whatever outter armor cant stop, you dont have enough first inner layer to stop.

[TK3600]

Can we look into the turret armor formula? Very often I find the top armor of my main turrets has equal weight as the main deck armor, despite both having equal thickness. Obviously it would make no sense because turret top has less area than main deck. Because the weight of the armor scales to turret weight, it appears triple turrets of 14in and above suffer from this.

[TK3600]

I think underwater torpedo should have even less target signature. Consider it is literally under water. It cannot be seen. Therefore should not make ship easier to spot.

[XerMGGW-2]

11 hours ago, TK3600 said:

I think underwater torpedo should have even less target signature. Consider it is literally under water. It cannot be seen. Therefore should not make ship easier to spot.

Yet again, people can only be glad it's one of many things that are fixed in balance-targeted mods. But do mind that "signature" is tied directly to how often that ship part will be hit, so it cannot be null.

At this point, everyone can just go ahead and copy individual things from Mod Changelogs and paste them here, suggesting to the devs. 😬

[Nick Thomadis]

Hey Admirals,

Here is the latest small update which should fix and improve things you lately reported:

v1.5.1.4
https://steamcommunity.com/games/1069660/announcements/detail/4141701971809467699

[TK3600]

7 hours ago, XerMGGW-2 said:

Yet again, people can only be glad it's one of many things that are fixed in balance-targeted mods. But do mind that "signature" is tied directly to how often that ship part will be hit, so it cannot be null.

At this point, everyone can just go ahead and copy individual things from Mod Changelogs and paste them here, suggesting to the devs. 😬

It is an internal structure underwater. Unlike casemate there is no protruding barrel. Therefore it is like an aux engine, no signature affected. It should not make ship eaiser to hit either. There will be no shot that can hit underwater torpedo tube that otherwise wont hit the ship anyways.

[TK3600]

Can we have ships be immune to its own torpedo? During 1900-1915, DD hull speed is faster than torpedo speed. Often it makes DD run into its own torpedo it just fired forward.

[Suribachi]

2 hours ago, TK3600 said:

Can we have ships be immune to its own torpedo? During 1900-1915, DD hull speed is faster than torpedo speed. Often it makes DD run into its own torpedo it just fired forward.

Easiest way I know of to address that is to have a minimum arming distance the torpedo must travel before it becomes active and capable of damage.  If it were to hit something before traveling that distance it will be a dud 100% of the time.

[TK3600]

15 minutes ago, Suribachi said:

Easiest way I know of to address that is to have a minimum arming distance the torpedo must travel before it becomes active and capable of damage.  If it were to hit something before traveling that distance it will be a dud 100% of the time.

I mean, it would still mean running into own torpedo if you are firing forward. Perhaps they could just buff the 1905 torpedo speed, or nerf the optimal speed for early destroyers. They are faster than historical counter parts. Feels really silly for ship to be faster than Torpedo it carries.

[Markus1985]

Quote

- Improved campaign logic making very rare the possibility to trigger pointless meeting battles vs a lone AI ship which failed to escape. The AI ships will make a successful effort to escape most of the time.

Hi

I'm glad to hear that this is being worked on along the many other improvements.

 

Also I'd like to suggest four quality of life additions if possible. 

1. Add information in the introduction screen about the upcoming battle. In particular what time of day and weather conditions. 

Perhaps in addition to this having the two forces spawning closer or further away from each other, depending on if it's an ambush or if the weather conditions naturally change the spotting distance. 

 

2. A formation and status system for Taskforces. This has been requested before and I too think adding some sort of formation system to decide before the battle, as well as during operations when the taskforce is at sea between battles, which way the TF formation is setup would greatly improve and simplify how you prepare for the battle. Perhaps you could choose from premade ones as well as make your own, and choose between them in one of the TF screens where you choose their stance, aggressiveness etc.

Along the way how the ships are placed during the actual battle I'd also like to change the status of other things that appear later in the battle ui; for instance the aggressiveness of guns and torpedoes as well as turning them off entirely if I wish it so. These should also be general orders or class specific as well as their "stance" orders (bb, dd, screen, scout etc). 

And depending on if it's an ambush or not you'll have to use the formation and status' you've chosen before the battle was triggered, because it wouldn't make sense to change to many things since if it's a surprise encounter. 

 

3. Give an actual visual indicator to at what heading the enemy ship is spotted. For a long time now you've had the warning "Smoke spotted [insert compass direction]" . But I've always been wondering from what ship I should base my course corrections for. Is it from the flagship? But why does it take so long to find the enemy I've "spotted" for so long now.  

Hence why I'd suggest you to add some kind of visual indicator, an actual smokestack that appears on the horizon in the direction of this "spotted smokestack". It would make it a lot easier to hunt or run from that graphical element rather than a very general compass direction that doesn't update for said amount of minutes, during which you might end up steering in the wrong direction and miss this imaginary smoke stack you've been trying to chase for many in game minutes/hours. 

4. And speaking of time, I'd also like the time compression to be more generous. As of now the allowable time compression is decreased and limited the closer you get to the enemy. But this means that you still have to wait a considerate amount of time until you're actually spotting and are able to fire at the ship. This might not be as annoying as before since you've now limited the triggered battles where you could end up chasing a slightly or much faster opponent than your task force. But before this change you'd have many long annoying chases where you'd eventually could catch up, but due to the time compression getting slower the closer you'd get you'd end up having a very slow and annoying dead time between closing in on the enemy resulting in decreased time compression, but not actually seeing or being able to engage them.

Instead of this limiting of time compression that happens when you get somewhat close to the enemy but not actually seeing the enemy I'd like the compression to stay at the quicker settings as long as I don't see the enemy. Only after I spot them the compression could decrease to what it does now. 

 

Edited May 31 by Markus1985

[Panzergraf]

2 hours ago, Markus1985 said:

3. Give a visual indicator at what heading the enemy ship is spotted. For a long time now you've had the warning "Smoke spotted [insert compass direction]" . But I've always been wondering from what ship I should base my course corrections for. Is it from the flagship? But why does it take so long to find the enemy I've "spotted" for so long now.  

Hence why I'd suggest you to add some kind of visual indicator, an actual smokestack that appears on the horizon in the direction of this "spotted smokestack". It would make it a lot easier to hunt or run from that graphical element rather than a very general compass direction that doesn't update for said amount of minutes, during which you might end up steering in the wrong direction and miss this imaginary smoke stack you've been trying to chase.

I'd like to see "smoke spotted" with the same visual cue as we get from Radio Direction Finder (a green arrow from each ship to each radio contact), just a bit more vague.
RDF could then be updated to also include distance (with some error applied), and Radar should show us a rough estimate of the size of the contact (even early Radar should be able to distinguish between a DD and a BB, at least some of the time)

[DougToss]

On 5/27/2024 at 9:12 PM, TK3600 said:

From what I learned, the way citadel armor works is that 2nd layer works independently of previous. A 13in pen shell flying into 12in layer 1 do not weaken, it retains the full 13in penetration. Layer 2 gets a special modifier for armor efficiency instead.

In current game, first inner armor is useless and will never block anything, because its maximum thickness is limited by outer armor. Whatever outter armor cant stop, you dont have enough first inner layer to stop.

I think maybe an armour rework is in order? An x-ray view, at least in the builder, would go a long way, and so would arranging the armour layout of the hulls to be more sensible. An upside is that, as the hulls are all pre-designed and based on existing ships, it should be easy enough to make sure the armoured deck of a protected cruiser is present in protected cruiser hulls, and even various idiosyncratic national layouts can be modelled since ship hulls are assigned to nations anyway. 

I'd rate this as fairly important, since, for example, early protected cruisers should save a great deal of weight while retaining protection by moving to the historical arrangement, which the player would know (and be able to see) goes into the deck, rather than separate "belt" and "deck".

 

 

Edited May 31 by DougToss

[Nick Thomadis]

Uploaded Optimized version including the following:
- Further optimization on the Battle AI code. Fixed rare issue which could cause ship freezing on campaign depending on the amount of time played continuously and fps rate.
- Fixed rare issue which disallowed refitting a ship that had the same name with another class of ship.
Please restart Steam to receive the update properly

[TK3600]

On 5/31/2024 at 12:23 AM, Markus1985 said:

4. And speaking of time, I'd also like the time compression to be more generous. As of now the allowable time compression is decreased and limited the closer you get to the enemy. But this means that you still have to wait a considerate amount of time until you're actually spotting and are able to fire at the ship. This might not be as annoying as before since you've now limited the triggered battles where you could end up chasing a slightly or much faster opponent than your task force. But before this change you'd have many long annoying chases where you'd eventually could catch up, but due to the time compression getting slower the closer you'd get you'd end up having a very slow and annoying dead time between closing in on the enemy resulting in decreased time compression, but not actually seeing or being able to engage them.

Instead of this limiting of time compression that happens when you get somewhat close to the enemy but not actually seeing the enemy I'd like the compression to stay at the quicker settings as long as I don't see the enemy. Only after I spot them the compression could decrease to what it does now. 

 

Everyone ask for this but developer stubbornly refuse. I don't care what bugs arise this slow compression ruins game more than any bug it may produce.

 

Spending 5 minute to chase a retreating DD because game dont allow compression. If you auto resolve the lone DD magically sunk 2 of your battleship covered by 6 other destroyers. This is opposite of fun and it ruins game more than any bug thus far.

Edited June 1 by TK3600

[Nick Thomadis]

Uploaded Optimized version x2 including the following:
- Fixed a temporary problem of refit that came with the previous update.
- Fixed 3-Mast cruisers hitbox inconsistency not allowing them to receive belt hits.
Please restart Steam to receive the update properly

[TK3600]

Good news everyone, I saw on steam discussion board that "cannot build refitted ship bug is being resolved in 1.6."

For me this is the 2nd biggest issue with the game, and I thank developers taking time to resolve this.❤️

The biggest problem of course is the no time compression during combat as previously mentioned. I sincerely hope this one can be resolved. I believe this feature was previously available, but was removed due to some kind of problem some players experienced. In my view this solution was worse than the problem it tried to address. I will be glad if I can turn on generous time compression as a hidden option in menu. With warning attached so player know some problem may happen.

Thank you.

[Suribachi]

1 hour ago, TK3600 said:

Good news everyone, I saw on steam discussion board that "cannot build refitted ship bug is being resolved in 1.6."

For me this is the 2nd biggest issue with the game, and I thank developers taking time to resolve this.❤️

The biggest problem of course is the no time compression during combat as previously mentioned. I sincerely hope this one can be resolved. I believe this feature was previously available, but was removed due to some kind of problem some players experienced. In my view this solution was worse than the problem it tried to address. I will be glad if I can turn on generous time compression as a hidden option in menu. With warning attached so player know some problem may happen.

Thank you.

Good to hear.  Time compression in battle is another issue.  If that is addressed as well as minor nations being valid invasion targets during a war, I just might sink another 1000 hours into this game.  Currently at 1,129 hours.

[TK3600]

@Nick Thomadis

Question to developers, do you consider American Special Treatment Steel to be Krupp IV or Krupp V?

[TK3600]

I would like to report an odd bug. Any ship destroyed in final score board show as cadet crew. At first I thought "ok, they died cuz bad training", but when my ship that served for 20 years show up as cadet I realized it is bugged. Everyone in that fleet was veteran.

[TK3600]

I have an idea that fixes 'AI running away' complaints. Problem is not the running away, it is how it is communicated. Player could just be told if AI will withdrawl ahead of time.

Example:

1. Fleet encounter pop up like now.

2. Click fight > "enemy attempt to disengage!"

2a. If enemy do not disengage, fight start as normal. Player now anticipates a normal fight.

3. Two options: chase(battle starts), withdraw (battle skipped).

When players pick chase, they know they are getting a chasing fight, so they would not complain about AI withdrawling.

[Nick Thomadis]

Hello all,

You may receive another update which improves further the game. Here it is:

v1.5.1.5
https://steamcommunity.com/games/1069660/announcements/detail/4149583904649464093 

[TK3600]

Wooo, nice update!

I like the idea of improved formation system. I heard some players complain about ships becoming faster, but IMO as long as ship stay in formation properly not get stuck looping(bigger problem), I am all for some sliiiight cheat. But apparently it was resolved in a way without the speed cheat, interesting! Gonna have to test it with a 5x 36knot destroyer set up.

The ship hitbox change is interesting. Accuracy is generally going upward compare to 1.5.0.9, at least on paper. When the 1.5.1.0 accuracy rework hits, many players complained about never hitting anything. I suspect it is more about some kind of hit box bug, than actual listed paper accuracy. As far as I can tell, since forever, 25% listed acc in UI translate to about 15% in practice. It must have been a longstanding issue.

^ I suspect when devs said "radical fix on acc against ships with few secondaries", they broke some stuff, like the 3 mast cruiser hitbox. Hopefully this fix makes the return of 1.5.0.8 level of hitbox consistency.

Lastly, improved AI auto ship building. These I am always careful about. For example, couple update ago AI spam deck armor a lot. It made sense in 1930s, but in 1890 iron armor it was a huge waste of tonnage. What is good for one era is not good for another, and AI appears to not consider that. Until then, optimizing in one era most likely result in regression on other era.

Biggest issue of AI ships is always balancing. Either AI makes unbalanced ships that never hits, or it forcefully place lots of rear deck armor to balance its bad part placements. This is not an easy problem to fix, so I am curious how it will go.

[TK3600]

Honestly astonishing. Tis might be the most stable patch yet. Bravo!

[TK3600]

I also noticed AH BB2 hull suffer no belt hit bug back in 1.5.1.4. I wonder if thats fixed.

[TK3600]

Not in the patch note, but couple patch ago I reported Chinese secondary guns had inconsistent target signature. I think it was 1.5.1.0. It has been resolved.