Plazma

I haven't played the game since January 25 (when I received a warning) and I came back recently, but I still don't enjoy the game as much as some time ago in beta versions before submarines. But some features are very nice: I very much enjoyed the weather system, that is good! I see also the sub-forum for mods was created. Very good decision, thank you for that. But I see still problems like having one campaign per 2 major patches is problematic, and the stuck turrets are an issue that is still common in the game/after the patches. Additionally, I see these things: or AI running away are not important, and not addressed at all. (except trading) Did Game Labs have some kind of road map part 2 or right now you guys prefer to fix the bugs?

I mentioned it somehow 1 year ago. The accuracy is linked to the range. If you have a 50km range with a certain accuracy modifier, this accuracy will be significantly better at a 25km range (half of the maximum range). Conversely, if you have a 25km range, the accuracy will be very low at the maximum range but better at a 12km range compared to max distance 25km, but... that will be 1/4 max range for the gun with max range 50km and due to this worst performance. In other words, the accuracy bonus is offset by a short range, and the accuracy penalty is offset by a range modifier. The same situation applies to light and heavy shells. Heavy shells have the greatest range, and this is evident when you compare the AP shell with a range of 16.7km and the HE shell with a range of 15.4km. The accuracy for these shells is 0.2% vs. 0.4% at 15km. The range is one of the most significant factors affecting accuracy. I believe there is a function that maximizes accuracy at 1m and reduces it to 0% accuracy at the maximum distance. This function appears to be working as intended. The question is whether this is a "feature" and is designed to work this way, or if we have an issue with the bonus (possibly too low) or the function (possibly too sensitive to range but not sensitive enough to the accuracy bonus). Or we have better accuracy at 100m, but due to limited range we have a worse performance on long distances (1000m+) In other words: Range > Distance found > basic accuracy for gun > accuracy bonus like propellant. Ofc. this is more complex in the game, but a general rule is like the above.

Profit? Game Labs will don't have any profit from polishing this game, they want sell it and close the project as soon as possible. This game is unsuccessfully project from financial perspective, that is why they force adding new features, to be able to "finish" it as soon as possible. If we reach full release it will be good... Only mods/players will be able to fix it.

Fixed issues that could cause inconsistent penetration or conditions that made it very difficult to have full penetrations against the citadel armor. what about belt, deck etc? this is not fixed? Not often like before the fix, but still.. 0.21" of armor can block the shell that have 26.3" pen value... on 60 degree.

nvm

Components, you mean also bulkheads? I mean a part of the ship that is not a gun/tower/funnel. In my opinion that could be bad, because still the shells/torps are hitting something and because of that change the ships could very hard to sunk, especially in battles 1 vs 1, when they will show you all the time aft belt. Right now, the ships looks very resilient. Especially this is HUGE change, you need 2,5x more damage on the broken component and when the ship will be mostly damaged most of the shells will hit the destroyed components, so this will ended in very long dull battle. I would like test it first to reduced from 0.25 to 0.20. Also this ^^ this correlate with this above, I would like to suggest only changing one parameter at one time to better know what is what. Plus I feel like we ended to make a ghost ship, where the half ship not existing, low damage received, but still can absorbed the shells protect more vital part of the ship. Good! I wanted to highlight it on the main thread with patch 1.1. Anyway... I will test it later, because of block/pen bug that we have now in main branch of the game :C AMAZING JOB! I love this mod <3

I guess we have not one, but three or more issue with pen function and this start overlapping on the point that we are not able to found the main issue without looking on the code. But... I think I found the gremlin! 1. Maybe the main issue is with fuze time and AP shells not have chance to explode = blocked. When I used heavy armor and 1.1" gun with APBC II I have most of the time block result. (vs heavy armored BB). When I used 0.1 armor as the test target and APBC II, I have around 25%-30% of block! When I used HE APBC I I have 10-15% if block. The 0.1" can block any of these shells (or very much unlikely) The chance of block are similar to 20.9" gun! So no matter of pen value the chance of block increase with the fuze time! Other theory, unlikely they are the root cause, but I left them here: 2. Maybe ricochet chance are not related to the armor value and even 0.1" of armor can ricochet the shell even from 20.9" gun at 2km. Like the angel is 60 degree than means 75% of shots will be ricochet via RNG. But some reasons the game mark the shell as no penetrating = delete this shell and start using the penetration function instead of ricochet and the non exist shell have 0 pen value 0 dmg and the result is marked as blocked instead of ricochet. The ricochet when the shell can't penetration because of angel is good. The ricochet when the shell can penetration is marked as blocked instead??? Also wrong calculation the ricochet chance (unrealistic as only depends on the angle and shell type???) 3. Maybe belt and deck armor is swapped and instead of that sometimes we have a values for penetrating deck armor instead of belt? 4. Or the shell start penetrating the armor from other side of the ship and because of that is blocked or even penetrating this second layout of armor and the bool value swiped from true to false? Example: Shell penetrating the main belt from port side and the bool change the value to the true: shell_penetrating=true but this same shell penetrating the armor from starboard and the value is changed one time more to false? shell_penetrating=false ^^ this is so stupid, that I don't believe in the last theory, but man... If the devs don't simply put the RNG chance for pen for all the time I don't know what happens... But... If I use the HE shells and I have much often the better results, more realistic

not sure if this is it, but I tested right now and something interesting happens. 20.9" gun, at range 4.5km Capped-Ballistic II, TripleBase, TNT IV (180.4" armor pen value) vs 1" armor... actually aft belt armor. 4 hits: 1 Over-Pen 3 BLOCKED (on chat the proof) Also... 2" gun have a amazing pen value! 4 hits: 4 partial-pen vs at least 10"(+145%) of armor So I was right, that something is not okay: More photos: (In here I used, the HE with only ~100" pen value...) vs (1" and 0.1" of armor):

still, the error factor should be max 5%, not 500% Plus these formulas work in 80% of situation when you shot around 20 shells. Also I put lower value of penetration (the range was 2.0km and the value of penetration was at 2.5km) and highest value of armor. Anyway as I this is game and the values are not historical I used simply Pythagoras to calculate on what angel should be ship to have effective armor thickness 26.9" or more... and the ship should be almost in angel 80 degree towards to my ship to have this effective armor, but as you see on picture have a angel max 30 degree! (for me it is something like 10-15 degree) In other words the effective armor should be around 5"-6"? not around 27" or more... Like the pi number, this is not 3.14 but good enough, even if we take pi 3.1415926535 this is more accurate, but still this is not to close to 4. Yes and this is my main problem. Because this is RNG. We have most of the date and we should very close calculate the pen value. Even if we add a modificatory -/+10% RNG for penetration value/armor value for fun/game purpose and we start round the number very much like the pi from 3.14 to 3. still some shots should have 99.9% of chance to penetration the armor. If you have the armor 26.8" and the pen value for you shells 26.9" you should except 80% of shots or in pessimistic variant 50% of shots to penetrate. But when we increase the pen value to 28.9" the expectation should jump up to 90% or more. I feel like the game don't respect the shells that I used and simply we rolling the dice (d100) for penetration. I know that sometimes even if we have 99.9% chance of penetration we can get this 0.01% situation, but... this is not often. I know, but.. my question is, how I can calculate the success of penetration, or more preciously, the chance that 50% of shells will penetrate the armor? I posted the realistic calculating for fun and I am aware this is only game and the values could be much different or the formula, but still: What is stronger the shell that can pen 26.9" of armor or 2.4" of armor? How worth is putting your ship in different angel to have a additional protection? I need 10" armor pen or 30" armor pen?

I also wonder how at range 2.0km my 8.3" gun with pen value 26.9 at range 2.5km can't pen the 2.4" +53% Fore Belt (+no internal belt). I know the angel of project make a big difference, but... When I use simply formula to calculate the penetration value, I got angel must be less than 10.5 degree (on that angel the armor thickness is ~26.9). On that angel the project should ricochet plus the ship is more like 80-90 degree in front of my projects... almost parallelly course. Something don't make any sense for me... Also I found this in internet: https://www.alternatewars.com/BBOW/Ballistics/Term/AP/AP_Pen_Formula.htm and also I think the formula in the game is very far from what we have in real life (link above). Or maybe the pen value should be interpreted in other way? I feel completely lost... for me this could be not in mm or in " but in colors like 8" gun have a pen value: blue and 7" have pen value: pink or in the names of the animals, because this is that same helpful for me right now.

Found new bug. When ship start battle with example 10% structure have a max speed (example 30kn), but when received even 1 dmg (more than 0) the speed is adjusted and have example 80% of original speed (24kn). (Also this could explained the situation above in my post)

Posted January 3 Do you plan implement rudder again or it was removed forever? Also I noticed in the last patch the bug with ships to be too close in formation/breaking formation is back(probably need more testing): Please ignore the damage of the ships, that was on the start of the battle and somehow the more damaged ship close the distance. They don't get hit yet in this battle. Additional probably the ships breaking the speed limit (need testing).

Eh... the beginning of the battle:

One question, when and if the rudder steering will come back? We have now the RC patch, but this feature is disabled, for me this is little strange...

on the occasion. are you working on a torpedo launched in the wrong direction?