NAR Alpha 1 for UAD 1.7

[Walayimuna]

You changed how barbettes work, now you can place them a bit off-center, I really like that.

Can the same be done with funnels?

[Draco]

On 1/7/2025 at 9:41 AM, Walayimuna said:

On another note, I feel like an American in WW2, my torpedo boat just launched a torpedo, the torpedo turned and hit my own torpedo boat, same one that launched it

I for one think it is amazing that that can happen in game, but I get why it might be too much realism for some people

[Walayimuna]

is there anything that can be done about torpedoes?

Because they suck, a lot, the entire control of firing torpedoes is dreadful.

AI simply doesn't know when it is the optimal moment to fire them.

I'm so, so tired of rushing in, being under 500 meters from a target and my ship not firing torpedoes at all, then it moves past 2 kilometers, they fire, and the enemy just dodges.

Or even worse, when you have multiple launchers that can fire at the same angle, and only one of them fires, that means clearly the computer understands it should fire the hello kittying torpedoes, but doesn't because who the hello kitty knows.

Sometimes you need to circle the enemy multiple times for the torpedoes to fire ONCE, that is even if they fire, I been in a few combats where my ships did not fire torpedoes at all.

Ideal scenario: have a way to aim and fire torpedoes manually, but probably out of the possibilities of modding, at least for the time being.

That not being feasible, I'm unsure what else can be done to fix the issue, maybe list exactly what the computer uses to determine if and when to fire so people can understand better how to workaround this awful torpedo system.

 

Edited 21 hours ago by Walayimuna

[Peksern]

@o Barão I know there is the arcade accuracy mod, but generally I do like the historical accuracy and range. Yet sometimes especially in 1910 to 1920 it feels like the accuracy is a bit too low. Common battle range even with Dreadnought V hulls  is less than 10 kilometers, is that supposed to be?

As an example, I compared  the range and effective range ingame and by values of wikipedia - even though I am not quite sure, if all there is correct at all.

USA - 40.6cm/45 Mark 1
Ingame (1915)
Maximum range: 19.6 kilometers (with SPD, heavy shells)
Effective range (above 1% hit chance): 10 kilometers
practically common battle range: 7.5 kilometers

Historical (as Wikipedia says for this gun)
Maximum range: 32 kilometers
effective range: 21 kilometers

USA - 30.5cm/45
Ingame (1906, ingame only Mark 2)
Maximum range: 15.4 kilometers 
effective range (above 1% hit chance): 5 kilometers
practically common battle range: 3 kilometers

Historical (at this time already Mark 5, like on USS South Carolina)
Maximum range: 27 kilometers
effective range: 19 kilometers

These examples makes me wondering, if arcade accuracy (and therefore range, I guess?) might be less non-historical than I thought. I'm just a bit confused. Could you tell more about what you do think about that? ❤️

 

Edited 20 hours ago by Peksern

[flaviohc16]

22 minutes ago, Peksern said:

@o Barão I know there is the arcade accuracy mod, but generally I do like the historical accuracy and range. Yet sometimes especially in 1910 to 1920 it feels like the accuracy is a bit too low. Common battle range even with Dreadnought V hulls  is less than 10 kilometers, is that supposed to be?

As an example, I compared  the range and effective range ingame and by values of wikipedia - even though I am not quite sure, if all there is correct at all.

USA - 40.6cm/45 Mark 1
Ingame (1915)
Maximum range: 19.6 kilometers (with SPD, heavy shells)
Effective range (above 1% hit chance): 10 kilometers
practically common battle range: 7.5 kilometers

Historical (as Wikipedia says for this gun)
Maximum range: 32 kilometers
effective range: 21 kilometers

USA - 30.5cm/45
Ingame (1906, ingame only Mark 2)
Maximum range: 15.4 kilometers 
effective range (above 1% hit chance): 5 kilometers
practically common battle range: 3 kilometers

Historical (at this time already Mark 5, like on USS South Carolina)
Maximum range: 27 kilometers
effective range: 19 kilometers

These examples makes me wondering, if arcade accuracy (and therefore range, I guess?) might be less non-historical than I thought. I'm just a bit confused. Could you tell more about what you do think about that? ❤️

 

If you think that a 1906 12inch gun or a 1915 16 inch gun could reliably hit something at 19-21 KMs....I have a bridge to sell you.

 

During the battle of Jutland (1916) the effective range  during the battle was was between 6 and 11k yards, or 5.5 and 10kms.

 

You could have the lucky shot, but you also have those in UAD.

[Walayimuna]

31 minutes ago, Peksern said:

@o Barão I know there is the arcade accuracy mod, but generally I do like the historical accuracy and range. Yet sometimes especially in 1910 to 1920 it feels like the accuracy is a bit too low. Common battle range even with Dreadnought V hulls  is less than 10 kilometers, is that supposed to be?

As an example, I compared  the range and effective range ingame and by values of wikipedia - even though I am not quite sure, if all there is correct at all.

USA - 40.6cm/45 Mark 1
Ingame (1915)
Maximum range: 19.6 kilometers (with SPD, heavy shells)
Effective range (above 1% hit chance): 10 kilometers
practically common battle range: 7.5 kilometers

Historical (as Wikipedia says for this gun)
Maximum range: 32 kilometers
effective range: 21 kilometers

USA - 30.5cm/45
Ingame (1906, ingame only Mark 2)
Maximum range: 15.4 kilometers 
effective range (above 1% hit chance): 5 kilometers
practically common battle range: 3 kilometers

Historical (at this time already Mark 5, like on USS South Carolina)
Maximum range: 27 kilometers
effective range: 19 kilometers

These examples makes me wondering, if arcade accuracy (and therefore range, I guess?) might be less non-historical than I thought. I'm just a bit confused. Could you tell more about what you do think about that? ❤️

 

It can reach 15km, it does not mean you can aim effectively at 15km.

The rangefinders used in 1906 where an early version of the Bausch and Lomb, they had an effective range of 3.000 yards

They could potentially be used up to 7.000 yards, not accurate beyond that.

At 15km that rangefinder would probably return this:

 

[Peksern]

11 minutes ago, flaviohc16 said:

If you think that a 1906 12inch gun or a 1915 16 inch gun could reliably hit something at 19-21 KMs....I have a bridge to sell you.

 

During the battle of Jutland (1916) the effective range  during the battle was was between 6 and 11k yards, or 5.5 and 10kms.

 

You could have the lucky shot, but you also have those in UAD.

Well, I found different information on the wiki: The battle cruisers begun their fire at about 15 kilometers. I'm not quite sure, but it seems, they did hit at this range too - after some targeting salvos of course.

But if I am wrong, it's fine to me. Yet I posted some data about effective range. And as I understand, effective range does mean the range, where hits are kinda "common". Or am I completely wrong about that?

Edited 20 hours ago by Peksern

[PalaiologosTheGreat]

By any chance, could you or NathanKell put back the small barbettes on ships? Or find a way to make it so that the AI can't use them, but Shared Designs and the player could?

[Walayimuna]

Can you modify tooltips on battle preview, to show more information?

Because going into a battle not knowing the status of your ships, their current structure integrity, ammo and fuel levels is really frustrating.

[o Barão]

15 hours ago, Walayimuna said:

You changed how barbettes work, now you can place them a bit off-center, I really like that.

Can the same be done with funnels?

It was Nathan who made that possible with TAF.

2 hours ago, Peksern said:

 Common battle range even with Dreadnought V hulls  is less than 10 kilometers, is that supposed to be?

For me, yes, it should, but you can change that. Open shipTypes file and look for "optimalEnemyDistance" modifier. If I am not mistaken, the closer this value is to absolute "1" the more the AI will want to be at maximum gun range in combat.

1 hour ago, PalaiologosTheGreat said:

By any chance, could you or NathanKell put back the small barbettes on ships? Or find a way to make it so that the AI can't use them, but Shared Designs and the player could?

At bold is where the problem lives. This was made a few months ago already, and in the last attempt to try to understand what it was possible to do, I removed all the barbettes from a ship class and made the AI to design some ships to see what would be the result. Didn't work, the AI would still use some barbettes. Now, I never fully understand how the randParts file (if you are interested to try, that is the file responsible for the AI design logic) so maybe there is a better solution.

[o Barão]

2 minutes ago, Walayimuna said:

Can you modify tooltips on battle preview, to show more information?

Because going into a battle not knowing the status of your ships, their current structure integrity, ammo and fuel levels is really frustrating.

For me, is exactly the opposite. To know that info in battle is really frustrating and cheating. Well not cheating because the game allows, but is 100% unrealistic and make the battle much easier for the player.

But answering to your question, maybe it is possible, but I don't know how. The only thing I added to the game related to tooltips was the tower night modifier that you can see in the shipyard.

[Walayimuna]

10 minutes ago, o Barão said:

For me, is exactly the opposite. To know that info in battle is really frustrating and cheating. Well not cheating because the game allows, but is 100% unrealistic and make the battle much easier for the player.

But answering to your question, maybe it is possible, but I don't know how. The only thing I added to the game related to tooltips was the tower night modifier that you can see in the shipyard.

To know the status of my own ships? you think it's cheating to know the status of my own ships, not the enemy, my own, if they are combat capable, before the battle?

I'm taking about this window:

The ships there, my own ships, have low fuel, but I will only know that once the battle starts, there is no info about it anywhere that shows their battle readiness status.

Edited 17 hours ago by Walayimuna

[rossi191]

3 hours ago, Peksern said:

Well, I found different information on the wiki: The battle cruisers begun their fire at about 15 kilometers. I'm not quite sure, but it seems, they did hit at this range too - after some targeting salvos of course.

But if I am wrong, it's fine to me. Yet I posted some data about effective range. And as I understand, effective range does mean the range, where hits are kinda "common". Or am I completely wrong about that?

the British battlecruiser had better range than the Germans at Jutland but it still wasn't very accurate and in this game range is the same for all nations so in the sense of realism i would guess it is set to roughly what all nations were capable of not to what the British could achieve with there more modern ships

[o Barão]

46 minutes ago, Walayimuna said:

To know the status of my own ships? you think it's cheating to know the status of my own ships, not the enemy, my own, if they are combat capable, before the battle?

I'm taking about this window:

The ships there, my own ships, have low fuel, but I will only know that once the battle starts, there is no info about it anywhere that shows their battle readiness status.

I apologize. I understood that you were talking about the enemy ships. Sorry.

About your question. I don't think it is possible, but if it is, then probably the solution will in the stats file.

[Peksern]

3 hours ago, o Barão said:

For me, yes, it should, but you can change that. Open shipTypes file and look for "optimalEnemyDistance" modifier. If I am not mistaken, the closer this value is to absolute "1" the more the AI will want to be at maximum gun range in combat.

Sorry, that's not exactly what I mean. By the battle range I mean the range, at which there is a effective hit chance. So its more like the range I choose by myself, if I can. Everything more far away just doesn't make sense.

Compare with the historical stats I searched in the post before.  I'm not sure if these ranges are historically really accurate for battleship guns in the mentioned time period.

Edited 14 hours ago by Peksern

[o Barão]

24 minutes ago, Peksern said:

Sorry, that's not exactly what I mean. By the battle range I mean the range, at which there is a effective hit chance. So its more like the range I choose by myself, if I can. Everything more far away just doesn't make sense.

Compare with the historical stats I searched in the post before.  I'm not sure if these ranges are historically really accurate for battleship guns in the mentioned time period.

Damn, two comments in one day where I fail completely to understand the English writing. 😭😓

Let's go back and read again what you wrote:

• Range of the weapons?
• Effective hit chance?

The range of the weapons follow for the most part the UAD vanilla values. Note that in the second example you gave, there is a big difference in the range due to the fact that you are using the coastal variant, which had more elevation. But yes, is possible to improve the ranges with values more close to real life.

If you are interested in doing this, I would recommend using navweaps website to get the data you want.

Then open the guns file. You will see these modifiers for all calibers: "range_1,range_2,range_3,range_4,range_5" Those are the base range for all calibers before the modifiers.

 

Now, hit chance is a complete different matter. I did some research about hit rates in some reports to use as foundation for the accuracy realistic model being used in NAR, but I can't say that would be exactly how it worked IRL.

Note that there are many modifiers in the game to take into consideration when we are talking about hit rates:

• Target size
• Target speed
• Target maneuvering
• Sea state
• Wind
• Clouds/fog
• Sun
• Light
• Radar quality if available
• Spotter plane quality if available
• Range finder quality
• Shell type
• Gun barrel
• Propellant
• Splashes from own guns
• Splashes from other guns
• Funnel smoke
• Turret barrels (how many)
• Modifiers from the towers
• Modifiers from the hull
• Crew quality

So when you say is 1%, is against what, in what conditions and using what technology?

But if you are interested in tweaking the accuracy values, again in the guns file you will see: hitChanceMaxRange,hitChanceCurver,hitChanceMult modifiers.

 

[Peksern]

28 minutes ago, o Barão said:

Let's go back and read again what you wrote:

• Range of the weapons?
• Effective hit chance?

Okay, I think I might be rather bad in expressing my thoughts. Range and effective hit chance are more or less the same thing in my point. Yeah, I think, the maximum range is also too low (see comparison above), but that does not matter too much.

What I am trying to say, is that the "effective" range - the range where the hit chance starts to become higher than the minimum of 1% - is too low, compared to the historical reality. An 1916 40.6cm/45 Mark 1 should be able to hit the target at almost 20 kilometers, at least 15 kilometers (compared to my research about the battle of jutland) yet in the historical accuracy setup of NAR, it will most likely hit only closer than 10 kilometers. That's my point.  

Thanks for the advice how to change the parameters. Currently I consider trying the arcade version of NAR  

Edited 13 hours ago by Peksern

[o Barão]

28 minutes ago, Peksern said:

Okay, I think I might be rather bad in expressing my thoughts.

Probably the error is me. English is not my native language, and If knew how much important it would be in life, I would have paid more attention in the classes 25 years ago.

30 minutes ago, Peksern said:

What I am trying to say, is that the "effective" range - the range where the hit chance starts to become higher than the minimum of 1% - is too low, compared to the historical reality. An 1916 40.6cm/45 Mark 1 should be able to hit the target at almost 20 kilometers, at least 15 kilometers (compared to my research about the battle of jutland) yet in the historical accuracy setup of NAR, it will most likely hit only closer than 10 kilometers. That's my point.

I had to open the game and run a test battle just to see what is the issue.

6.3% at 18.5km

18% at 15km

86% at 10km.

 

How can this be low to you? For me, this is too much already, but I am using all tricks in the book to get the maximum performance, but still crazy high value.

[Peksern]

10 hours ago, o Barão said:

How can this be low to you? For me, this is too much already, but I am using all tricks in the book to get the maximum performance, but still crazy high value.

Okay. No, what you show, would be perfectly fine for me and fits my imagination. But it's completely different to my experiences ingame. Beginning to believe there is some mistake on my side, perhaps even with my mod installing. Or are you using arcade accuracy?

10 hours ago, o Barão said:

Probably the error is me. English is not my native language, and If knew how much important it would be in life, I would have paid more attention in the classes 25 years ago.

Neither it's mine, I'm quite sure my grammar is far from correct, even though my school days are not this far behind. 😬

Could you perhaps show the gun table in the ship designer once, that I can compare with mine?

Edited 2 hours ago by Peksern

[o Barão]

11 minutes ago, Peksern said:

Could you perhaps show the gun table in the ship designer once, that I can compare with mine?

[Peksern]

6 minutes ago, o Barão said:

okay, thanks. Well, the tables don't look so much better than mine (okay, you got higher than 1% at 12500 meters)... so I am wrong and apologize. I am fascinated you get to 8% hit chance at even 18 Kilometers. How can this be? Veteran crew? Or what would you see as reason between the 1% chance on the table and the reality?  Obviously I underestimate something. Travel speed perhaps?

Edited 1 hour ago by Peksern

[o Barão]

6 minutes ago, Peksern said:

okay, thanks. Well, the tables don't look so much better than mine (okay, you got higher than 1% at 12500 meters)... so I am wrong and apologize. I am fascinated you get to 8% hit chance at even 18 Kilometers. How can this be? Veteran crew? Or what would you see as reason between the 1% chance on the table and the reality?  Obviously I underestimate something. Travel speed perhaps?

The range found boost mechanic from UAD is the main kicker. (Just to be perfectly clear, I never liked that mechanic, but I can't remove it or nerf the effect)

Just sail in a straight line at cruise speed (you need to hover the mouse above the engine to know the value) and let your crew work. In a few salvos against the same target, the modifiers will all stack up, and you get insane values.

Double barrels, not triple or quads.

The test was made using perfect conditions. Calm sea, sun behind me, perfect light conditions, huge target, the best components, only 1 vs 1, huge beam, minimal draught, veteran crew, etc, etc

[Peksern]

3 minutes ago, o Barão said:

The range found boost mechanic from UAD is the main kicker. (Just to be perfectly clear, I never liked that mechanic, but I can't remove it or nerf the effect)

uhh, never heard of this, I think. How to see that? 😅

[o Barão]

7 minutes ago, Peksern said:

uhh, never heard of this, I think. How to see that? 😅

In your left panel, "range found" modifier: 998%

Crazy stupid value, that ruins the game IMO. And it was possible to get 2000% in previous versions.

[Peksern]

1 minute ago, o Barão said:

In your left panel, "range found" modifier: 998%

Crazy stupid value, that ruins the game IMO. And it was possible to get 2000% in previous versions.

Okay. Crazy. O.o ... well, I see my mistake. I usually move more and go to the closer distances, where the chances are getting higher anyway. Well, in that case I think you are doing a good job to compensate the "range found". Seems like the result are realistic battle ranges. 😊 Just was confused since I could not see this in the gun tables. 😅