>>>Core Patch 0.5 Feedback Hotfix v90<<<

[Admiral Lütjens]

unrelated to the topic, but i want to share a photo , but it accepts a maximum size of 50kb , witch was note like this before HEELLLLP!!!

[Cptbarney]

Wasn't there a cruiser that had its entire bow blown off and managed to get back to port to be repaired? Think it was USS minneapolis, and theres also USS franklin that got bashed pretty hard as well. 

Oh and HMS eskimo as well. Dunno how long it took to repair each one, but i assume it took months maybe almost a year regardless all of them ended back in war or service regardless.

[CapnAvont1015]

4 minutes ago, Cptbarney said:

Wasn't there a cruiser that had its entire bow blown off and managed to get back to port to be repaired? Think it was USS minneapolis, and theres also USS franklin that got bashed pretty hard as well. 

Oh and HMS eskimo as well. Dunno how long it took to repair each one, but i assume it took months maybe almost a year regardless all of them ended back in war or service regardless.

There's a lot of cases of ships having large portions of it blown off and the Nation's navy still manage to repair it. It's quite impressive. Depending on the damage it could take months or more than a year. Case in point.

[1MajorKoenig]

54 minutes ago, Admiral Lütjens said:

unrelated to the topic, but i want to share a photo , but it accepts a maximum size of 50kb , witch was note like this before HEELLLLP!!!

I think your max allowed size if for ALL pics you posted. Meaning you would need to delete older ones - had the the same problem 

 

And yes - it is beyond silly 

[SodaBit]

1 hour ago, Admiral Lütjens said:

unrelated to the topic, but i want to share a photo , but it accepts a maximum size of 50kb , witch was note like this before HEELLLLP!!!

If you upload the image to imgur, you can copy and paste the direct link to the image in the post, and it will automatically display the image, regardless of size.

[Admiral Lütjens]

5 hours ago, 1MajorKoenig said:

I think your max allowed size if for ALL pics you posted. Meaning you would need to delete older ones - had the the same problem 

 

And yes - it is beyond silly 

 

5 hours ago, SodaBit said:

If you upload the image to imgur, you can copy and paste the direct link to the image in the post, and it will automatically display the image, regardless of size.

Thx guys😁

[neph]

6 hours ago, Admiral Lütjens said:

unrelated to the topic, but i want to share a photo , but it accepts a maximum size of 50kb , witch was note like this before HEELLLLP!!!

imgur my dude

[Evil4Zerggin]

17 hours ago, Draco said:

Made with excel?

Google Sheets, but that's basically the same for this purpose. I'll switch to numpy/matplotlib if I go further into the analysis.

[RedParadize]

@Draco About the deck pen chart... Good to know that for once historical and game balance argument are on the same page!

Edited October 8, 2021 by RedParadize

[TAKTCOM]

16 hours ago, Cptbarney said:

Wasn't there a cruiser that had its entire bow blown off and managed to get back to port to be repaired?

Of course, this was common.  USS Pittsburgh (CA-72) aka Longest Ship in the World. 

4 June 1945 for Puget Sound Navy Yard, arriving 16 July. Still under repair at war's end, she was placed in reserve on 12 March 1946 and decommissioned on 7 March 1947.

I also liked the case when the Soviet cruiser Molotov was hit by a torpedo which cut off 20 meters of ship stern.

I remember this incident because the Molotov was repaired using the parts of three unfinished ships, each of different  projects, one of which was a submarine, the second was another Kirov-class cruiser, and the third was project 68 cruiser who gave it stern.

Molotov was 26-bis project with a total displacement of about 9.5k, while Chapayev-class had a full displacement of about 14.3k. In general, these two projects had very little in common. However, somehow repair ended in complete victory:

-  speed, seaworthiness and maneuverability after repair actually not changed;
- repairs began in October 1942 and ended in July 1943, which I think is pretty fast.

[DougToss]

I think taking ships out of the war for that long would be worth a significant amount of points. The underwater damage to Scharnhorst and Tirpitz allowed the Arctic convoys to resume when they were out of action for half of 1942 and the winter of 43-45, respectively. I would guess the damage was roughly comparable to what might be caused by a torpedo hit in battle. I realize that time to repair, ability to make repairs, intelligence about damage done is all campaign stuff, but the calculation towards victory points would be the same. 

 

The only difference I can see in what is a victory on the tactical level or operational/strategic, is gaining or retaining control of the sea despite greater ship losses (Jutland). In isolation, the British lost the battlecruiser engagement, but the Germans returned home and not only didn't break the blockade, but didn't commit en masse to challenging it again.

That might be a good example too, because I think so far as the British knew, Lutzow was only damaged. I suppose that's true as well, because it didn't sink exactly, but was unable to return home with the amount of damage it had and was scuttled. Seydlitz barely made it home:

So, as far as points were concerned, if we ended the battle when they withdrew, do we count both of these ships sunk, neither, or some combination? At the time the battle ended there was no way for the British to know the state they were in. 

Something similar happened to Wasp in the Guadalcanal campaign as well, though maybe the Japanese could have guessed she world sink. 

Edited October 8, 2021 by DougToss

[madham82]

53 minutes ago, DougToss said:

So, as far as points were concerned, if we ended the battle when they withdrew, do we count both of these ships sunk, neither, or some combination? At the time the battle ended there was no way for the British to know the state they were in. 

Something similar happened to Wasp in the Guadalcanal campaign as well, though maybe the Japanese could have guessed she world sink. 

Think it goes back to a point I have made many times since getting the game. Control of the sea (i.e. the battle map) should be the only thing that counts as a victory (in campaign). That would leave your nation's intelligence service as the only way to know if something badly damaged made it back to port unless intercepted again. 

In custom/missions, it should be control of the sea first, then use a points calculation based on damage dealt/received and a bonus for ships sunk outright. Lots of ways to make this part work. 

[AurumCorvus]

57 minutes ago, DougToss said:

I think taking ships out of the war for that long would be worth a significant amount of points. The underwater damage to Scharnhorst and Tirpitz allowed the Arctic convoys to resume when they were out of action for half of 1942 and the winter of 43-45, respectively. I would guess the damage was roughly comparable to what might be caused by a torpedo hit in battle. I realize that time to repair, ability to make repairs, intelligence about damage done is all campaign stuff, but the calculation towards victory points would be the same. 

...

That might be a good example too, because I think so far as the British knew, Lutzow was only damaged. I suppose that's true as well, because it didn't sink exactly, but was unable to return home with the amount of damage it had and was scuttled. Seydlitz barely made it home:

So, as far as points were concerned, if we ended the battle when they withdrew, do we count both of these ships sunk, neither, or some combination? At the time the battle ended there was no way for the British to know the state they were in. 

As an example, RTW does calculate damage into victory/loss of a battle, and awards VPs to both sides based on damage. But honestly, I would be hesitant to award VP directly for leaving them in drydock/repairs. The real benefits are there, even though they are indirect, and I don't think tacking on VPs is needed. While a ship is in drydock, it can't earn points as a raider and can't contribute to sea control (both in terms of blockade and in terms of forcing you to decline battles). That's already a significant penalty, as all those activities affect your VPs already.

Secondly, I would definitely count it as "sunk/scuttled after battle", with a random chance applying when one of the bars is <5%, maybe amplified by crew and fires remaining.

[DougToss]

I hope you all like tables, because I was able to find some more: 

[Speglord]

Nick promsed us an update on the campaign patch for this week. Let's hope it comes out in the next hour or so...

[Commander Reed]

28 minutes ago, Speglord said:

Nick promsed us an update on the campaign patch for this week. Let's hope it comes out in the next hour or so...

He said MORE, he never promised. They could delay it if they wanted to.
And I wouldn't be surprised if they did, either.

Edited October 8, 2021 by Commander Reed

[neph]

With how quick to complain the community is, I think the campaign is best served late but welldone than still chewy in the middle.

[DerRichtigeArzt]

11 minutes ago, neph said:

With how quick to complain the community is, I think the campaign is best served late but welldone than still chewy in the middle.

The campaign is best served before the end of this year. 

[Nick Thomadis]

Hello all,

We understand your anticipation for the campaign and it is welcome.

The last patch which you all play has revealed very few remaining issues that we already sort out to fix in the next patch, including the optimization of auto-design (which is very important for the campaign). The next patch will include the campaign, finally.

The campaign is now receiving a major development to make the AI a sufficient opponent, on how to respond to player actions, generate strong fleets and pose a constant threat. Visuals of the campaign are currently of low priority and will not delay the development, as we focus mostly on gameplay elements. 

We will let you know more, once we finish with the last important stages of development and the campaign is in good shape to release.
 

 

[Skeksis]

...

Edited November 9, 2021 by Skeksis

[AdmER]

4 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:

Hello all,

We understand your anticipation for the campaign and it is welcome.

The last patch which you all play has revealed very few remaining issues that we already sort out to fix in the next patch, including the optimization of auto-design (which is very important for the campaign). The next patch will include the campaign, finally.

The campaign is now receiving a major development to make the AI a sufficient opponent, on how to respond to player actions, generate strong fleets and pose a constant threat. Visuals of the campaign are currently of low priority and will not delay the development, as we focus mostly on gameplay elements. 

We will let you know more, once we finish with the last important stages of development and the campaign is in good shape to release.
 

 

Thanks, and can we have some sort of ETA for this next update? Days ? ... few weeks .... hope not months ?

[Armchair_Admiral]

My casual observation is that smaller ships are harder to flood than I'm used to in the past.

[JHorsti]

Can we get some proper german WWI battleship/battlecruiser hulls and turret models instead of the 500th russian or chinese superbattleship? This game is called 'Ultimate Admiral: Dreadnoughts' and for almost 2 years now, you cannot recreate one single german High Seas Fleet capital ship.

[Werwaz]

4 hours ago, JHorsti said:

Can we get some proper german WWI battleship/battlecruiser hulls and turret models instead of the 500th russian or chinese superbattleship? This game is called 'Ultimate Admiral: Dreadnoughts' and for almost 2 years now, you cannot recreate one single german High Seas Fleet capital ship.

I think that in all there are only about 10 unique dreadnought hulls in the game, not counting modernized dreadnoughts

[Commander Reed]

This topic seems to have died down a bit. Who's excited for campaign? I am!