>>>v1.6.0.7+ Feedback<<<(Latest version: v1.6.1.5 Optx4)

[justMike247]

7 minutes ago, SpardaSon21 said:

If you crack open the params file partial pens do more damage than overpens.  The exact opposite of how it should be.

Sadly... most of the stuff that ruins the game fall into this exact same bracket... doing the exact opposite of what it should do...

[justMike247]

Game Date November 1962, Rev 1.6.1.1

 

I’ve given up… I’m a patient guy, but when the game’s degenerated to the point where it’s just a click-fest, even my patience runs out. There’s just China and Germany left among the Majors… I’ve zero interest in going to war with China because it’d just be yet another round of dead boring seal-clubbing, wiping out their swarms of pre-dreads while trying to find funds to keep building my merchant fleet. Germany hasn’t build a single solitary hull for the last 40 game years, primarily because they’re reduced to just he Solomon Islands. China has remained steadfastly technologically in the stone age despite having a healthy GDP. So… no challenge, nor any prospect of a challenge… I could clear the board within a year if not for the idiotic “skip a turn” diplomacy. So I’m simply running the clock down, utterly powerless to prevent the Minor nations retaking provinces I’ve had to conquer.

 

Discovered a couple more nerfs along the way, or perhaps it’s just long term ramifications of already known nerfs reaching their ultimate illogical conclusion. Firstly… I learned there’s precious little point trying to expand the fleet much beyond 1945, nor any point trying to modernise it beyond 1950. It’s nigh on impossible to do either beyond 1955 because of the crew-training nerf… It now takes the same amount of time to recruit crew for a 3 ship class of BB’s as it does to build the damned boats, despite crew training being max’d at the expense of everything else, but if you need supporting hulls for those new capitol ships, ferget it… The hulls will be obsolete or overweight long before you ever see crews for them.  

 

It's impossible to build old hull designs because the module weights increase beyond the capabilities of modern power-plant and armour to compensate for, though, strangely, if any “Allies” want me to build hull designs that apparently I can’t build, it’s not a problem… Frikkin weird, but… Mehhh… Even writing this list is… soul destroying, because it’s all so totally unnecessary.

 

At risk of sounding totally jaded, despite a freakin scary amount of bugs, the game had far more challenge, more playability, as rev 1.4 than it’s had since… With the current rev, there’s precious little point playing beyond pre-dreadnought… anything after that is a slumber-fest… Simply an exercise in seal clubbing… Sad really… it never needed to be this way…

[Zuikaku]

Please, revert BB main gun ammo back to normal values. Don't know why was this messed up at all! 

And also, crew replacements at highest levels of fundings I'm having difficulties to crew DDs. Why slashing replacements that much on high funding?

Edited October 30, 2024 by Zuikaku

[Aldaris]

16 hours 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??

Yes, because it does touch on that very core stuff. If I can set a diplomatic stance towards a country, influence war and peace more reliably? Wouldn't that adress a ton of the complaints you regularly (and rightfully) write?

[LaughingSam]

Army losses effect on population are much too high for the permanent wars and minor nation land invasions.  Currently playing a a game started in 1910, it is almost 1930 and everyone's population has collapsed completely.  Russia and China are the only AI nations with more than 20 million home pop now.  Spain has 100.  Not a hundred hundreds, not a thousand, one hundred people in the whole country. Germany at under 7 million.  Growth can't keep up at all, even I am just treading water and I have avoided any major entanglements on land.

[kjg000]

Also remember, you have to earn the prestige first. Its not as if this would an infinite giveaway. Ideally players would have to weigh-up when is it worth the risk of spending prestige.

[kjg000]

18 hours ago, justMike247 said:

Sadly... most of the stuff that ruins the game fall into this exact same bracket... doing the exact opposite of what it should do...

Yes, and this has been known for years. Another example is Beam and Draught. Increasing beam should increase maneuverability but reduce top speed and engine efficiency, increasing  draught, forming a narrow long hull, should do the opposite. however in the game they have always been reversed. I'm not sure why the Dev's haven't fixed this over the years.

[HopefullAdmiral0786]

Dear Community and Dev's,

I've put over 1200 hours into UAD to date, and have progressed to playing the game through to legendary hardness.

That being said, the 'single' issue that bugs me (and I know I've seen it commented upon so many times on by the community) is the poor and often oudated ship designs produced by the AI major nations opponents, particularly as one progresses from the 1890s to the 1910s, 1920s 1930s etc.

So it got me thinking.

Putting aside the huge increases in AI tech generally, I was curious as to the what the opening screen of the campaign really meant (see attached).

I understand that this provides the AI ships which can be generated at the start of the campaign drawn from a basket of designs, to speed up the game generally. 

But does it also apply to the AI generation of ships as it progresses through the game from year to year?

If so, could it not be populated with more challanging designs, pre-installed by the game developers for the AI nations, as the player progresses from decade to decade?

Because whilst the different difficulty levels really only impact the money, it does not impact the quality of ships that one faces. 

Indeed, once one has worked out how to manage the money challenges, as JustMike 247 has commented, the mid and late game is simply, to coin a famous US naval description - a series of naval "Turkey Shoots"!

As an example, I'm playing as Japan at the moment, I only have a modest fleet of 80 or so ships (divided into 5 task forces) and I'm wiping the floor with Great Britain which has over 700 ships, despite being on legendary setting!

It is just a thought, as I am not a programmer and perhaps do not appreciate the difficulties involved in writing such code, but perhaps some a library of pre-written designs that the AI players can draw upon as they gain the technology, might be worth considering to improve the challenge for the human player as they progress through to 1965.

I'd be interested in any thoughts. 

[kjg000]

4 minutes ago, HopefullAdmiral0786 said:

Dear Community and Dev's,

I've put over 1200 hours into UAD to date, and have progressed to playing the game through to legendary hardness.

That being said, the 'single' issue that bugs me (and I know I've seen it commented upon so many times on by the community) is the poor and often oudated ship designs produced by the AI major nations opponents, particularly as one progresses from the 1890s to the 1910s, 1920s 1930s etc.

So it got me thinking.

Putting aside the huge increases in AI tech generally, I was curious as to the what the opening screen of the campaign really meant (see attached).

I understand that this provides the AI ships which can be generated at the start of the campaign drawn from a basket of designs, to speed up the game generally. 

But does it also apply to the AI generation of ships as it progresses through the game from year to year?

If so, could it not be populated with more challanging designs, pre-installed by the game developers for the AI nations, as the player progresses from decade to decade?

Because whilst the different difficulty levels really only impact the money, it does not impact the quality of ships that one faces. 

Indeed, once one has worked out how to manage the money challenges, as JustMike 247 has commented, the mid and late game is simply, to coin a famous US naval description - a series of naval "Turkey Shoots"!

As an example, I'm playing as Japan at the moment, I only have a modest fleet of 80 or so ships (divided into 5 task forces) and I'm wiping the floor with Great Britain which has over 700 ships, despite being on legendary setting!

It is just a thought, as I am not a programmer and perhaps do not appreciate the difficulties involved in writing such code, but perhaps some a library of pre-written designs that the AI players can draw upon as they gain the technology, might be worth considering to improve the challenge for the human player as they progress through to 1965.

I'd be interested in any thoughts. 

I found the game to be more challenging when I edit the shipTypes resource to limit the number of TB and DD being build and increase the number of BB and BCs. Of course to do this you need to learn to use a utility such as UABEAvolonia or equivalent to unpack the relevant resource from the resource.assets file, edit it without errors, then repack it.

I find it much nicer when there are ships actually able to fight back and damage my own ships rather than TBs and DD which die too easily. Often without even attempting an attack run.

[Nick Thomadis]

Uploaded optimized x2 version including:
- Further balances on the army kills/losses mechanics, to give more consistent results. You have to note that mission success is dependent on the losses so if you as an attacker have many more losses than the defender, this will negatively affect the win chance.
- Added tooltip to show the chance of your war reparation proposal to be accepted or not.
- Made text changes to the special events of alliance offers or war declarations your nation makes, clarifying that the effects are for the AI opponent.
- Minor UI improvements for the Task Force movement window, showing the total tonnage of ships that will move and the damage of each ship to appear in the tooltip.
- An improvement on Vsync setting, improving the total fps allowed.
- Various fixes on cases where a save could not be loaded.
- Minor changes in the minimum tonnage allowed for US Large Armored Cruiser and Russian Large Armored Cruiser II allowing them to be built immediately when they are researched.
- Fixed issue making naval invasions to continue to trigger battles, even when there is no longer a fleet in the mission radius.
- Fixed rare issue of major offensives to not conclude when the defender has no army left.
- Fixed issue which could cause ungoverned territories to have no army.
- Fixed Croatia flag to appear correctly.
- Other minor fixes. 
Please restart Steam to get this update fast

[brothermunro]

2 hours ago, HopefullAdmiral0786 said:

Dear Community and Dev's,

I've put over 1200 hours into UAD to date, and have progressed to playing the game through to legendary hardness.

That being said, the 'single' issue that bugs me (and I know I've seen it commented upon so many times on by the community) is the poor and often oudated ship designs produced by the AI major nations opponents, particularly as one progresses from the 1890s to the 1910s, 1920s 1930s etc.

So it got me thinking.

Putting aside the huge increases in AI tech generally, I was curious as to the what the opening screen of the campaign really meant (see attached).

I understand that this provides the AI ships which can be generated at the start of the campaign drawn from a basket of designs, to speed up the game generally. 

But does it also apply to the AI generation of ships as it progresses through the game from year to year?

If so, could it not be populated with more challanging designs, pre-installed by the game developers for the AI nations, as the player progresses from decade to decade?

Because whilst the different difficulty levels really only impact the money, it does not impact the quality of ships that one faces. 

Indeed, once one has worked out how to manage the money challenges, as JustMike 247 has commented, the mid and late game is simply, to coin a famous US naval description - a series of naval "Turkey Shoots"!

As an example, I'm playing as Japan at the moment, I only have a modest fleet of 80 or so ships (divided into 5 task forces) and I'm wiping the floor with Great Britain which has over 700 ships, despite being on legendary setting!

It is just a thought, as I am not a programmer and perhaps do not appreciate the difficulties involved in writing such code, but perhaps some a library of pre-written designs that the AI players can draw upon as they gain the technology, might be worth considering to improve the challenge for the human player as they progress through to 1965.

I'd be interested in any thoughts. 

I’ve been digging around in these modes for my modding work so I might be able to answer, Nick is free to correct me as always!

1.6.0.8 added what I call a ‘blob’ of designs. It’s one file but inside there’s about 20,000 design files covering 1890-1950 for all nations and ship types. These designs also seem able to bypass the usual checks the game does on shared designs like if a country has all the components researched, it just seems to care about the year and if the thing can physically be built. This then feeds into the new game modes:

Slow is traditional UAD, every design is generated when needed.

Mixed uses the ‘blob’ of shared designs when you start a campaign, but only then. After that the game generates designs on the fly as normal.

Fast uses blob designs exclusively. I haven’t tried this but if you try a fast mode campaign you may find the ai using more advanced designs than they would otherwise be able to make.

The caveat here is that the blob designs are still the same sort of designs the AI usually makes, they’re just already created. It’s absolutely possible to make those designs better (for instance by using an armour generator file with TAF) but only by improving the AI builder itself and then regenerating a new batch of 20,000 ships.

[Северная]

Autoresolve still needs work.  It seems to overwhelmingly favor quantity rather than quality.  Like if you have 4 BB and 6 CA and 6 DD of 1910 tech but come across a fleet twice your size of 1890 tech, you will often take lots of losses.  Also, there is a weird mechanic in the autoresolve where the ships “spread out” their damage over your fleet.  So if you have your fleet attack a single TB and you want to autoresolve, sometimes like half a dozen or more of your ships will take light damage from a single TB.  It’s really strange.

[HaMaT]

Minor countries' aggression needs to be improved. In my current campaign, Greece has captured my West India because there were less than 1000 army and Greece had more than 100k. It took 2 turns to capture my province. And the worst thing is that I cannot do anything about it. My fleets are loitering nearby but nothing happens. I cannot initiate an invasion and even if it happens by the decision of the game, it takes 6 turns to recapture it. Only to lose it again in another 2 turns.

Edited October 31, 2024 by HaMaT

[Bjoern]

thank you to the developers for all the work you put into the game.

the game runs much faster now (so fast, that i cant read the text in the loading screen after battles), turn times much faster and changing to shipyard and back as well - thank you very much for that.

I´ve got about 1000 hours into the game, playing germany and japan most times.

 

but with the actual build i have some issues:

as hopeful admiral already said, does the ai build crappy ships, even worse than for example in v1.4. That makes the campaign game relatively fast to a boring clickfest. In my acutal campaign as japan on normal difficulity its 1912 and i am the only nation with dreadnoughts (4) and destroyers. All other nations are technologically way behind, their crew pools depletet (exept China), but with shitloads of ships (Great Britain and USA with about 250-300 Ships each), but these ships are of crappy technology so the only challenge is how to defend my transports from single TBs or CLs straying into my waters.

earlyer builds of your game gave me more of a challenge in the mid game

and I dont build "superships" with max tonnage and biggest guns but rather modest designs (technologically maxed out, but shipsize is rather historically correct, with CLs at 4500ts and 12x10.5cm guns for example

furthermore you reduced the crew replacement rates a bit too much. As Japan I have a relatively small fleet of about 65-70 ships, about half of them destroyers in 1912, but my crew pool is completely depleted after building 2 25000ts dreadnoughts - although i kept crew funding at 100% since 1900. My army is at about 3 Million men, but the navy cant recruit more than 91 sailors per month at max funding??? thats not right and hampers the ai even more, because of the shitloads of crappy ships they build.

 

Not a direct issue, but an irritating thing is what I would call the army running wild: In my actual campaign I finally went to war against british (second most powerful nation in the match) for their posessions (they owned everything from India to Indochina). While my navy was conquering borneo the army attacked from cochinchina westward. They captuered one region each turn and immediately after each conquest started the next offensive, so within a 8 month the british were thrown out of india and the army conquests made unrest in my nation rise to 100 wich resulted in a revolution (didn´t matter to me because of about 600 naval reputation i stayed in office). All my alliances to minor nations were lost because of the massive expansion, wich was way more than i had planned or wanted at that point. because of the slow way of making peace (only every 2 month possible to offer peace treaty - and then the other nation often rejecting at first) it is hard to stop the army from running wild and conquering more than yout want. (some may call that realistic - but in this extend it seems to be a bit too much)

 

for the future builds i would like you to offer us a bit more diversity in the shipbuilder, especially considering the control towers for the sips. Actually (at least) for japan and germany its simply the bigger the better. No way of designing ships to a special ability (log range fire, volume of fire, torpedo accuracy, damage control for example). And if you are desingning some more control towers, would you please try to produce some more models that look like the historically used ones instead of the many generic but ugly looking towers actually in the game. I would think its easier creating a 3d model from historical plans than completely from scratch but looking awful

 

[Северная]

4 hours ago, Bjoern said:

thank you to the developers for all the work you put into the game.

the game runs much faster now (so fast, that i cant read the text in the loading screen after battles), turn times much faster and changing to shipyard and back as well - thank you very much for that.

I´ve got about 1000 hours into the game, playing germany and japan most times.

 

but with the actual build i have some issues:

as hopeful admiral already said, does the ai build crappy ships, even worse than for example in v1.4. That makes the campaign game relatively fast to a boring clickfest. In my acutal campaign as japan on normal difficulity its 1912 and i am the only nation with dreadnoughts (4) and destroyers. All other nations are technologically way behind, their crew pools depletet (exept China), but with shitloads of ships (Great Britain and USA with about 250-300 Ships each), but these ships are of crappy technology so the only challenge is how to defend my transports from single TBs or CLs straying into my waters.

earlyer builds of your game gave me more of a challenge in the mid game

and I dont build "superships" with max tonnage and biggest guns but rather modest designs (technologically maxed out, but shipsize is rather historically correct, with CLs at 4500ts and 12x10.5cm guns for example

furthermore you reduced the crew replacement rates a bit too much. As Japan I have a relatively small fleet of about 65-70 ships, about half of them destroyers in 1912, but my crew pool is completely depleted after building 2 25000ts dreadnoughts - although i kept crew funding at 100% since 1900. My army is at about 3 Million men, but the navy cant recruit more than 91 sailors per month at max funding??? thats not right and hampers the ai even more, because of the shitloads of crappy ships they build.

 

Not a direct issue, but an irritating thing is what I would call the army running wild: In my actual campaign I finally went to war against british (second most powerful nation in the match) for their posessions (they owned everything from India to Indochina). While my navy was conquering borneo the army attacked from cochinchina westward. They captuered one region each turn and immediately after each conquest started the next offensive, so within a 8 month the british were thrown out of india and the army conquests made unrest in my nation rise to 100 wich resulted in a revolution (didn´t matter to me because of about 600 naval reputation i stayed in office). All my alliances to minor nations were lost because of the massive expansion, wich was way more than i had planned or wanted at that point. because of the slow way of making peace (only every 2 month possible to offer peace treaty - and then the other nation often rejecting at first) it is hard to stop the army from running wild and conquering more than yout want. (some may call that realistic - but in this extend it seems to be a bit too much)

 

for the future builds i would like you to offer us a bit more diversity in the shipbuilder, especially considering the control towers for the sips. Actually (at least) for japan and germany its simply the bigger the better. No way of designing ships to a special ability (log range fire, volume of fire, torpedo accuracy, damage control for example). And if you are desingning some more control towers, would you please try to produce some more models that look like the historically used ones instead of the many generic but ugly looking towers actually in the game. I would think its easier creating a 3d model from historical plans than completely from scratch but looking awful

 

Excellent post.  I really hope they do something about the crew replenishment rates.  I think this and the constant war are why the AI eventually stops building BB and hangs onto very old ships forever.  They have no time to recover.

[justMike247]

Game Dte Dec 1903, Rev 1.6.1.1 Optx 2

 

Bear with me if I’m less “politically correct” than usual; I’ve never had much time for that bollox, and given my current state of frustration, I’m just gonna shoot from the hip. I’ve been embroiled in a war that never seems to end against the US for about 6 years now. It never ends despite frequent agreed to requests to finish it… yet it still drags on. Conclusion;- Political influence is still as impotent as ever.

 

The following list of obscenities have not merely been ongoing/reported for some time, they’ve become progressively worse with subsequent “improvements.”

 

Crew Training… It’s getting to the point where this is a waste of time; it’s always been a waste of resources, but now, the only effective way to crew new-built hulls is by scrapping older hulls to redeploy their crews.

 

Merchant Fleet. The rates of replacement and their attrition simply beggar belief in the game. In a time before radio communications, much less any hi-tech surveillance assets, how is it possible to attrite a global merchant fleet from 200% down to just 9” while fighting is constrained to just three main theatres (Caribbean, Atlantic, North European)? How are they being found, given the fleet I’m opposing is down to barely 1/3^rd its former strength? There’s a damned sight more involved in hunting merchant vessels than simply being in the same ocean. Given their vulnerabilities, why can’t we allocate assets to Convoy duties to protect them, in the same way as the opposing A.I. has been capable of doing recently?

 

Fleet replenishment. If the in-game time it takes to refuel and rearm a fleet were anything close to reality, we’d still be in the age of sails and human powered oars. Six freakin months to refuel a fleet in a major port?? Seriously? Hell, I could do the job myself, alone, carrying coal one lump at a time in less than a quarter of that time. Give me a freakin break… Six months… eesh!!

 

Final point re Updates;- Nick, when you’re going to make fundamental changes to how fleets operate that enforce radical changes to how our fleets need to be managed, fer crying out loud, DON’T bury the notification of those changes under “various other improvements.” TELL us up front… “Guys… the tooth-fairy will no longer be conducting at-sea replenishment.”… Just TELL us… We can roll with it PROVIDED we KNOW about it up front. As it is, simply being blind-sided by changes like this just antagonises players.

[Северная]

2 hours ago, justMike247 said:

Game Dte Dec 1903, Rev 1.6.1.1 Optx 2

 

 

 

Bear with me if I’m less “politically correct” than usual; I’ve never had much time for that bollox, and given my current state of frustration, I’m just gonna shoot from the hip. I’ve been embroiled in a war that never seems to end against the US for about 6 years now. It never ends despite frequent agreed to requests to finish it… yet it still drags on. Conclusion;- Political influence is still as impotent as ever.

 

 

 

The following list of obscenities have not merely been ongoing/reported for some time, they’ve become progressively worse with subsequent “improvements.”

 

 

 

Crew Training… It’s getting to the point where this is a waste of time; it’s always been a waste of resources, but now, the only effective way to crew new-built hulls is by scrapping older hulls to redeploy their crews.

 

 

 

Merchant Fleet. The rates of replacement and their attrition simply beggar belief in the game. In a time before radio communications, much less any hi-tech surveillance assets, how is it possible to attrite a global merchant fleet from 200% down to just 9” while fighting is constrained to just three main theatres (Caribbean, Atlantic, North European)? How are they being found, given the fleet I’m opposing is down to barely 1/3^rd its former strength? There’s a damned sight more involved in hunting merchant vessels than simply being in the same ocean. Given their vulnerabilities, why can’t we allocate assets to Convoy duties to protect them, in the same way as the opposing A.I. has been capable of doing recently?

 

 

 

Fleet replenishment. If the in-game time it takes to refuel and rearm a fleet were anything close to reality, we’d still be in the age of sails and human powered oars. Six freakin months to refuel a fleet in a major port?? Seriously? Hell, I could do the job myself, alone, carrying coal one lump at a time in less than a quarter of that time. Give me a freakin break… Six months… eesh!!

 

 

 

Final point re Updates;- Nick, when you’re going to make fundamental changes to how fleets operate that enforce radical changes to how our fleets need to be managed, fer crying out loud, DON’T bury the notification of those changes under “various other improvements.” TELL us up front… “Guys… the tooth-fairy will no longer be conducting at-sea replenishment.”… Just TELL us… We can roll with it PROVIDED we KNOW about it up front. As it is, simply being blind-sided by changes like this just antagonises players.

 

Hey Mike, considering you are trying to communicate clearly in a feedback thread about game development with a game development team that doesn't speak English as a native language, you would probably have an easier time being understood if you didn't ramble on in colorful slang.  I appreciate and agree with a lot of your feedback but I can't help but feel like you aren't helping yourself be understood.

Edited November 1, 2024 by Северная

[justMike247]

46 minutes ago, Северная said:

I appreciate and agree with a lot of your feedback but I can't help like you aren't helping yourself be understood.

I can offer translation services... for an appropriate fee..

[JaM]

At this point, as game stands, there are two large issues that need attention.  AI complete lack of understanding how technology is beneficial - or said simpler - AI keep building obsolete cheap designs over time never progressing as time goes.. Despite Tech meter showing them being "average" while myself is "very behind" my ships are way ahead technologically, because AI just likes cheap designs...  And while i understand quantity has quality of its own, its not a good game design, as it just makes gameplay boring facing over and over hundreds of cheap junk that cant fight back, while it erodes your money situation every turn due to numbers...

 

Second area is the crew management.. It is just way too costly as it is.. Its quite ridiculous not being able to recruit few thousands of men, when army has 700k of soldiers in almost every province (exaggerating but you get my point).. Instead of restricting numbers, restrict experience..  make slider influence how much training new crews get, instead of their numbers.. even remove numbers completely.. its not really value that should matter in era of Dreadnoughts, considering millions of people fighting in WW1..

[justMike247]

12 minutes ago, JaM said:

And while i understand quantity has quality of its own, its not a good game design, as it just makes gameplay boring facing over and over hundreds of cheap junk that cant fight back

While I totally agree with this... I have to point out... there is worse...

Facing the above, in conflicts... but facing them one ship at a time...

[Zuikaku]

There is no way to ever end wars. You can not even propose peace if an ally of yours is at war. And they are at war all the time

[Северная]

4 hours ago, Zuikaku said:

There is no way to ever end wars. You can not even propose peace if an ally of yours is at war. And they are at war all the time

Yeah I am playing a game that is almost at 1920 from an 1890 start.  Except for me, every AI nation has about the same or lower total GDP at this point than in 1890.  They're constantly at war, constantly going broke, massing obsolete terrible ships.  I think having more prolonged periods of peace would solve a lot of these issues because it would give them a time to rest and recover.  There should be a minimum of 5 year truce between nations that were at war and can only be dragged into war by alliance obligations or something.  In my game, the entire world has been at war nonstop, with the AI usually at war with 3-4 other nations at the same time.  Only Austria-Hungary has been eliminated.  My own government constantly wants me to go to war with 3-4 nations every turn too.  It's just insane.

 

DEVS PLEASE DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS

[brothermunro]

A ‘cool off’ truce period would be most welcome, 5 years sounds about right

[Suribachi]

5 years sounds good to me as well.  In addition to allowing the nation to lick its wounds and rebuild GDP, it would also allow for newer technologies to be researched allowing the AI to cycle through its fleet and help with building newer, more technologically advanced ships.  This is assuming the nation has no immediate threats.

[Zuikaku]

Minor nations seem a bit too agressive now. They are on the complete rampage. Also, army AI is a bit overly agressive, spreading too much in all directions, so I can not keep defending all these areas with my overstreched and undermanned navy. As the result... Transport losses in seas I did not want ports in anyway...