o Barão Posted October 29, 2024 Posted October 29, 2024 13 hours ago, PhoenixLP44 said: Just out of curiosity. When was that change made? I have no idea. I just noticed yesterday a difference in the values because "warspite96" mentioned an issue with the ammo values in vanilla game.
justMike247 Posted October 29, 2024 Posted October 29, 2024 Evidently that first modern US CA isn't the only hull ya gotta grind out, but can't build... You can imagine the frustration when, wayyyyyyyyyyy back at campaign start, you guys know how it is, you need to light up the entire tech page like a xmas tree butchya can't... But you want to cos... Clown Cars are US... So... After what felt like forever, lurching around with a 4k ton CA that slows to just 6kts any time you need to turn cos the damned thing can't breathe... The next CA option can't come soon enough, right? Only... can't build that one neither... While I've been focused on Hulls and Engines and Boilers, the Main Gun tree's been ticking over all on its ownsome... And the first gun to hit Mk2 spec is... you guessed it... 9"... Guess which turret doesn't fit that 6k ton CA hull??
HopefullAdmiral0786 Posted October 29, 2024 Posted October 29, 2024 Dear Developers, I have noticed this issue commented upon in the above members comments and now it has appeared in one of my campaigns. The game is asking a question WITHOUT the ability to SAY NO. I do not wish to see all of my naval budget dissapear and DO NOT WISH to improve my relations with Britain (with whom I have been trying to go to war with for the past few years). However, by simply ignoring it and pressing next turn, the message stays, blocking the screen visability. If this is a supposed 'improvement' I would strongly disagree. Please remove of modify in the next patch release, as this is pushing the gameplay BEYOND acceptability!
MDHansen Posted October 29, 2024 Posted October 29, 2024 4 minutes ago, HopefullAdmiral0786 said: Dear Developers, I have noticed this issue commented upon in the above members comments and now it has appeared in one of my campaigns. The game is asking a question WITHOUT the ability to SAY NO. I do not wish to see all of my naval budget dissapear and DO NOT WISH to improve my relations with Britain (with whom I have been trying to go to war with for the past few years). However, by simply ignoring it and pressing next turn, the message stays, blocking the screen visability. If this is a supposed 'improvement' I would strongly disagree. Please remove of modify in the next patch release, as this is pushing the gameplay BEYOND acceptability! Britain is paying you 1
Северная Posted October 29, 2024 Posted October 29, 2024 17 minutes ago, MDHansen said: Britain is paying you I think he is commenting on the fact that it is weird that war is totally consensual, like he doesn’t want Britain to pay him. He wants to reject it and go to war.
Северная Posted October 29, 2024 Posted October 29, 2024 @Nick Thomadis with the changes made to tech research rates and priorities, is it still the case that using priorities results in a net negative effect on research progress? One of your previous comments suggests that in order to not be behind in tech now, we should be using priorities. I am confused how this mechanic works now. At 100% research on normal difficulty I am very behind in tech without using priorities. I choose all the GDP boosting options too.
MDHansen Posted October 29, 2024 Posted October 29, 2024 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Северная said: I think he is commenting on the fact that it is weird that war is totally consensual, like he doesn’t want Britain to pay him. He wants to reject it and go to war. this is the answer to the initial event, where the question is to push for war or not (cancel). If the ai, here be Britain, wants to buy themselves out of a war, this is the message you'll get. I agree though that there should be a button saying "push for war regardless" and you loose a ton of Prestige Edited October 29, 2024 by MDHansen 3
Panzergraf Posted October 29, 2024 Posted October 29, 2024 21 hours ago, PhoenixLP44 said: Just out of curiosity. When was that change made? Patch 1.6 A change I hope they revert. Now increased ammunition is pretty much mandatory, whereas before reduced/normal/increased were all valid options for different ships. 3
kjg000 Posted October 29, 2024 Posted October 29, 2024 1 hour ago, MDHansen said: this is the answer to the initial event, where the question is to push for war or not (cancel). If the ai, here be Britain, wants to buy themselves out of a war, this is the message you'll get. I agree though that there should be a button saying "push for war regardless" and you loose a ton of Prestige Yes, this is an example of poor ergonomics. The use of "OK" implies that you are agreeing with a proposal but, without a choice, it is just frustrating. Perhaps, in cases where no choice is presented, replace "OK" with "Ack" for acknowledge or better yet, as suggested again here, let the player spend prestige to further influence the decision. Note influence, not decide. The more the prestige player spends the higher the stakes, i.e. a proportionally better chance of success but if it fails the possibility of loosing more prestige than was bid, say up to 10% more. this would be consistent with the premise that a senior Admiral would risk their reputation every time they used their influence to affect political matters. Consequences for your own actions, what a seditious thought! Almost sounds like engaging game-play.
Nick Thomadis Posted October 29, 2024 Author Posted October 29, 2024 2 hours ago, HopefullAdmiral0786 said: Dear Developers, I have noticed this issue commented upon in the above members comments and now it has appeared in one of my campaigns. The game is asking a question WITHOUT the ability to SAY NO. I do not wish to see all of my naval budget dissapear and DO NOT WISH to improve my relations with Britain (with whom I have been trying to go to war with for the past few years). However, by simply ignoring it and pressing next turn, the message stays, blocking the screen visability. If this is a supposed 'improvement' I would strongly disagree. Please remove of modify in the next patch release, as this is pushing the gameplay BEYOND acceptability! When an AI nation asks you something it is their government that forms the answer, and you as the player decide. When you agree that your government sends an ultimatum, you do not have any control over what your government says, you just see the response of the AI (enemy player). It is understandable that players ask for more diplomatic freedom. This functionality gave more freedom of choice for the player, using the basic simple rules of the game. You are the head of the admiralty, but you do not have full control of the nation. Now about the main problem, you are right that the effect list is confusing, the effects shown are for the AI player, so the AI paid you money. We will improve the visualization to show the correct colors. 1
brothermunro Posted October 29, 2024 Posted October 29, 2024 The ai paying you off and avoiding war isn’t new, but the game now makes it much more obvious when this is happening (which is a good thing imo) 3
lrdplatypus Posted October 29, 2024 Posted October 29, 2024 1 hour ago, Nick Thomadis said: You are the head of the admiralty, but you do not have full control of the nation. I really feel that it is in the best interest of gameplay to either abandon this conceit or dramatically loosen it. As a player it is not fun to be at the complete mercy of your nation's AI. The government AI often makes ridiculous decisions about war that a human player never would. For example: I have often won a war so completely that the enemy has basically no fleet left... yet I cannot sue for peace because I the only control I have is to "ask" the AIs to please make peace, and they reject it for unclear reasons. This makes the war no longer a fun engaging experience, but a miserable grind. A proposal: Allow us to spend our naval prestige to force the government AI to take an action, such as a peace treaty. Another proposal: If I ask the government AI to sue for peace, make it clearer *why* the government AI refuses to, and if it is my government's AI or the enemy government's AI that is rejecting the peace offering. TL;DR: Being at the mercy of game AI feels bad as a player. Please abandon that idea entirely for the sake of gameplay, or offer us significantly more control over it. 4
justMike247 Posted October 29, 2024 Posted October 29, 2024 5 minutes ago, lrdplatypus said: A proposal: Allow us to spend our naval prestige to force the government AI to take an action, such as a peace treaty. You realise, what you're proposing is staging a Military Coup against your own government because rightly or wrongly, you disagree with whatever policies they've decided to roll with... You seriously wanna go there?? We're supposed to be Admirals... with barely any control over our own fleet. We are, therefor, mere tools, used to prosecute the Gub'ment's bidding to the fullest of our capabilities...
Panzergraf Posted October 29, 2024 Posted October 29, 2024 1 hour ago, justMike247 said: You realise, what you're proposing is staging a Military Coup against your own government because rightly or wrongly, you disagree with whatever policies they've decided to roll with... You seriously wanna go there?? We're supposed to be Admirals... with barely any control over our own fleet. We are, therefor, mere tools, used to prosecute the Gub'ment's bidding to the fullest of our capabilities... If Naval Prestige is high enough, the player is a national hero and someone with a lot of "pull" with the public. The government would be wise to not oppose or disregard the player's wishes, unless they want to be crushed in the next election. Also, it's a game 4
Warspite96 Posted October 29, 2024 Posted October 29, 2024 Started a France 1930 save, USA goes to war with me in less than a year due to the bizarre tension system, my fleet is unprepared for war so soon so the AI just spams port strikes in every location, transport capacity crippled by not even the end of 1931, dead save. Great!
Aldaris Posted October 29, 2024 Posted October 29, 2024 (edited) 1 hour ago, justMike247 said: You realise, what you're proposing is staging a Military Coup against your own government because rightly or wrongly, you disagree with whatever policies they've decided to roll with... You seriously wanna go there?? A coup is an armed insurrection against the government. What is being proposed here is influencing politics. Which we're already allowed to do. Only it's random as hell currently. What is wrong with having a way to use our prestige to influence events more reliably to our liking? I really don't understand that objection. Edited October 29, 2024 by Aldaris 2
kjg000 Posted October 29, 2024 Posted October 29, 2024 2 hours ago, justMike247 said: You realise, what you're proposing is staging a Military Coup against your own government because rightly or wrongly, you disagree with whatever policies they've decided to roll with... You seriously wanna go there?? We're supposed to be Admirals... with barely any control over our own fleet. We are, therefor, mere tools, used to prosecute the Gub'ment's bidding to the fullest of our capabilities... This is not in any way true. For a start the proposition that we are playing as the Senior Admiral of the navy is inconsistent with the existing game-play and always has been. Such an admiral is largely a political appointment and would spend the bulk of their time in administration and government meetings, not commanding individual ships at sea. But in any event, spending prestige this way would not represent a revolt against the government, but rather a senior figure using their personal reputation and political capital to influence government ministers to get the outcome they want. BTW the ability to spend prestige to overthrow the government is entirely consistent with historical precedent. I'm not suggesting this is added to the game but history is replete with examples of just this sort of behavior. 1
justMike247 Posted October 29, 2024 Posted October 29, 2024 2 minutes ago, Panzergraf said: If Naval Prestige is high enough, the player is a national hero and someone with a lot of "pull" with the public. The government would be wise to not oppose or disregard the player's wishes, unless they want to be crushed in the next election. Doesn't matter what your Prestige is... Your gub'ment can and will ask your opinion if they wish to... You're obligated to give it... Your gub'ment however, is under no obligation to TAKE your opinion if it runs contrary to their own. It's bad enough that I gotta spend an obscene amount of game-time carefully managing a budget that swings violently from one extreme to the other, with absolutely no justification, much less explanation for the swings going either way. The absolute last thing I want or need is getting my sorry butt embroiled in horse-chit like politics and international diplomacy.
kjg000 Posted October 29, 2024 Posted October 29, 2024 24 minutes ago, justMike247 said: ... It's bad enough that I gotta spend an obscene amount of game-time carefully managing a budget that swings violently from one extreme to the other, with absolutely no justification, much less explanation for the swings going either way. The absolute last thing I want or need is getting my sorry butt embroiled in horse-chit like politics and international diplomacy. Fair enough, so don't. For the case where you are given the option to change the outcome, just don't take that option! What I don't get is why you are against others having that option?
justMike247 Posted October 29, 2024 Posted October 29, 2024 3 minutes ago, kjg000 said: What I don't get is why you are against others having that option? Have you actually tried playing a campaign lately? The dev's have their hands more than full trying to find even a basic level of playability... You really want them to divert their limited time and resourses away from core rework to develop this stuff instead??
Thramoun Posted October 29, 2024 Posted October 29, 2024 1 hour ago, Warspite96 said: Started a France 1930 save, USA goes to war with me in less than a year due to the bizarre tension system, my fleet is unprepared for war so soon so the AI just spams port strikes in every location, transport capacity crippled by not even the end of 1931, dead save. Great! To avoid this, make sure none of your fleet activity is upsetting someone you really can't afford to upset. You get a list of tension effects every turn, just move any ships out of a region that's causing tension, or altenatively set limited activity or mothball those ships. Additionally, you may want to bite the bullet and go into debt to avoid war if you're not ready for it. Better to lose a bit of GDP due to Naval expenses than lose a war you're not prepared to fight.
Thramoun Posted October 30, 2024 Posted October 30, 2024 3 hours ago, lrdplatypus said: I really feel that it is in the best interest of gameplay to either abandon this conceit or dramatically loosen it. As a player it is not fun to be at the complete mercy of your nation's AI. The government AI often makes ridiculous decisions about war that a human player never would. For example: I have often won a war so completely that the enemy has basically no fleet left... yet I cannot sue for peace because I the only control I have is to "ask" the AIs to please make peace, and they reject it for unclear reasons. This makes the war no longer a fun engaging experience, but a miserable grind. A proposal: Allow us to spend our naval prestige to force the government AI to take an action, such as a peace treaty. Another proposal: If I ask the government AI to sue for peace, make it clearer *why* the government AI refuses to, and if it is my government's AI or the enemy government's AI that is rejecting the peace offering. TL;DR: Being at the mercy of game AI feels bad as a player. Please abandon that idea entirely for the sake of gameplay, or offer us significantly more control over it. I feel this system works decently well, bar a few exceptions. Might be some bugs working in the background, or just some other reason why sometimes peace is just never declared. For cases like this I would really like a 'cheat' menu where you can fix stuff like this. Personally I prefer the "you're just the admiral" approach (because god forbid a game does anything slightly different than 20 games I've played before) but sometimes the AI can really just hang up in the strangest way, and I can only restart so many borked campaigns before I lose enthusiasm.
kjg000 Posted October 30, 2024 Posted October 30, 2024 4 minutes ago, justMike247 said: Have you actually tried playing a campaign lately? The dev's have their hands more than full trying to find even a basic level of playability... You really want them to divert their limited time and resourses away from core rework to develop this stuff instead?? T'was ever thus! The Dev's have been making more progress lately than they have since putting the game on steam (IMO), and I don't think anyone is demanding instant action. Spending prestige has always been a tantalizing possibility and would have been an elegant way to give players more agency without unbalancing the game but still being consistent with the mythology that we are playing as a senior admiral or minister for the navy. It could also of been a plausible means of goading the government into declaring war on a neutral nation, suing for peace, giving the army a war goal etc., of course being accompanied with suitable diplomatic penalties and the ever growing risk of being sanctioned by your own government. Again the principle is that risky actions with the hope of gaining something but balanced against possible repercussions creates more engaging and rewarding game-play and can still be consistent with the premise of the game. And no, I have not played the game much for quite a while. I am currently playing a DIP campaign to see if it is worth returning to the game, spurred on by a recent brothermunro YouTube and recent updates. However I don't think it is quite there yet. Spending prestige and some other stuff I recently posted on the Mods thread would go a long way to getting it there though. 2
Warspite96 Posted October 30, 2024 Posted October 30, 2024 (edited) 23 minutes ago, Thramoun said: To avoid this, make sure none of your fleet activity is upsetting someone you really can't afford to upset. You get a list of tension effects every turn, just move any ships out of a region that's causing tension, or altenatively set limited activity or mothball those ships. Additionally, you may want to bite the bullet and go into debt to avoid war if you're not ready for it. Better to lose a bit of GDP due to Naval expenses than lose a war you're not prepared to fight. All of my ships were either in Brest or Marseille in Limited mode, they haven't been moved out of their home ports at all. I started my campaign as I usually do, just build a basic fleet until my economy grows large enough, then expand the navy after a couple of years perhaps. The AI decided to throw hands early, however........ Don't get me wrong, I still went toe to toe with some enemy BBs and won, but the more pressing issue is that the AI just sit ships/subs off every colony and spam port strikes or sub attack missions on transports, and because its so early in my campaign I haven't had a chance to build up to 200% capacity so my transports have been crippled. I can't take losing 10-15 transports per turn! Edited October 30, 2024 by Warspite96
SpardaSon21 Posted October 30, 2024 Posted October 30, 2024 On 10/28/2024 at 3:54 PM, justMike247 said: Glad I'm not the only one seeing this... I never could figure how spamming with H.E. could cause more damage to an armour-clad than A.P... The whole purpose of that armour is to keep the BIG boom OUTSIDE the soft, squishy bits of your ship... They can boom all they want then... the boom's sposed to be harmless or at worst, very largely ineffective. If you crack open the params file partial pens do more damage than overpens. The exact opposite of how it should be. 1
Recommended Posts