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

[Nick Thomadis]

Uploaded optimized build x5 including:
- Fixed issue which could cause ship designs and their related ships to become deleted. It was a rather rare incident that could be caused when you have saved a design and on the same turn you tried to make a refit and exited without saving. Other issues some players report: ships disappearing from task forces, or not appearing on map are not bugs. Ships may leave task forces to get repairs (and will return if the Task Force is active) or they may not be visible due to low visibility and poor tower spotting.
- Fixed a minor issue that could not allow a design to become valid if the tonnage was absolutely equal with the technology limit of tonnage  for a ship type.
- Auto-Design further optimization: Auto-design will build, on average, even more effective ships with less frequent the spamming of too many secondary guns.
You need to restart Steam to get this update fast

[Dave P.]

54 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:

- Auto-Design further optimization: Auto-design will build, on average, even more effective ships with less frequent the spamming of too many secondary guns.

Personally I am a big believer in spamming too many secondary guns.

It does seem to have some FPS implications though.

[Urst]

58 minutes ago, Dave P. said:

Personally I am a big believer in spamming too many secondary guns.

It does seem to have some FPS implications though.

FLAK IS LOVE! FLAK IS LIFE! DESTROYERS GET OUT!

[Cryadis]

On 11/26/2024 at 6:16 AM, Dave P. said:

Another odd thing that's cropped up in the last couple releases - the tonnage calculation for naval invasions seems to fluctuate - task forces in the invasion area don't always get counted in the included tonnage every turn.

You can see here I've got an invasion going, and the invasion area sees 499k tons.

But the two task forces here are 499k and 431k tons.

The smaller group did engage in a convoy battle earlier that turn, so I'm thinking that somehow ships which engage in combat don't get counted? Or maybe just if some of their ships get sent home for repairs?

I've also noticed that I sometimes have to move the task forces to another spot in the invasion zone before they get registered again.

So it seems a little bugged.

Actually that occured also to me but eventually i figured out that at least in some case the missing Tonnage Taskforce is outside the Invasion zone, but the visualisation in the map is incorrect. For me there is the workaround to try moving them to a different spot inside naval invasion area and then display will update and also show that a taskforce was outside.

[Dave P.]

Another issue, although it's kind of old - I think it started in 1.5. But I can't put secondaries within a certain fore/aft distance of different barbettes, even though it looks like I ought to be able to.

Is this intentional?

[Aldaris]

18 hours ago, Dave P. said:

Personally I am a big believer in spamming too many secondary guns.

 

69 barrels?

Nice.

 

Also, go and fix that forward offset. We ain't building a submarine optimized for emergency dive here!

[Dave P.]

10 minutes ago, Aldaris said:

69 barrels?

Nice.

 

Also, go and fix that forward offset. We ain't building a submarine optimized for emergency dive here!

As long as pitch and roll are ok, it doesn't seem to matter much IME. At least not that I've noticed? I'd be happy to be corrected on that point, though.

[Aldaris]

If you mouse over the offset value in the ship details panel on the right (in the yard) you'll see details. 28 front offset should be a base accuracy penalty of 8-9%, plus a bunch of other penalties. That's pretty significant.

[HMS Implosive]

https://imgur.com/a/0CBcyFn

Here are some images of the flag issue I mentioned earlier @Nick Thomadis

I also included image of my another long time visual pet peeve: the King George V style turrets sit weirdly on the barbettes. I suppose you have either misscaled the turret stalk or misplaced the reference plane that tells the turret at what level it should sit on the barbette.

I can post a lot more visual issues if it helps you, but I can also keep them to myself if you find you have better things to do. Just my 2 cents.

[mrfox1918]

3 hours ago, Aldaris said:

69 barrels?

Nice.

 

Also, go and fix that forward offset. We ain't building a submarine optimized for emergency dive here!

If anything the devs need to fix the strange fore and aft offsets....

In what world do two 4 inch casemates weigh more then a 14 in triple turret?  

This has no armor on anything aside from the mandatory 7 inch minimum belt.

Ships in vanilla UAD always have a stupid high fore weight offset and the only way to fix it 99% of the time is by making the ships look stupid buy sticking the funnels alllll the way in the back.... Its dumb...

Edited November 30, 2024 by mrfox1918

[Aldaris]

Believe me, I'm aware. I've posted about this before, extensively. But as it stands, the offset is there, it's caused by very strange things (like you said, tiny secondaries cause huge shifts), there are few ways to effectively counteract, and it affects the performance of the ship.

I still almost always get my ships into the below 1% range, but it often requires dumb compromises. And if it's too annoying to get anything good with low offset out of a hull (the experimental heavy cruiser hull with it's destroyer like breaks in the deck is a prime example) I usually don't even bother trying anymore.

 

[HMS Implosive]

14 minutes ago, Aldaris said:

Believe me, I'm aware. I've posted about this before, extensively. But as it stands, the offset is there, it's caused by very strange things (like you said, tiny secondaries cause huge shifts), there are few ways to effectively counteract, and it affects the performance of the ship.

I still almost always get my ships into the below 1% range, but it often requires dumb compromises. And if it's too annoying to get anything good with low offset out of a hull (the experimental heavy cruiser hull with it's destroyer like breaks in the deck is a prime example) I usually don't even bother trying anymore.

 

If I am not mistaken, some great people here have managet to get rid off that offset trouble in their mods. Unless the devs know better to not touch those parameters, it is apparently not that difficolt thing to fix.

[Dave P.]

4 hours ago, Aldaris said:

If you mouse over the offset value in the ship details panel on the right (in the yard) you'll see details. 28 front offset should be a base accuracy penalty of 8-9%, plus a bunch of other penalties. That's pretty significant.

Damn, no kidding. Okay, thanks!

[mrfox1918]

3 hours ago, HMS Implosive said:

If I am not mistaken, some great people here have managet to get rid off that offset trouble in their mods. Unless the devs know better to not touch those parameters, it is apparently not that difficolt thing to fix.

YEP! the wonder modders fixed the fore and aft offsets ages ago

[Dave P.]

Also, it seems like the recent changes to minor nations ship building/buying/scrapping has done something annoying - my allies are no longer offering to buy my mothballed ships even if they are offering to buy new construction versions of the same model.

I'm fine with scrapping them - it was never a huge income source. But it's weird from a RP perspective.

[Cryadis]

in regards to invasions it seems the there is indeed a Bug but ways in case a task force in radius also had an engagement. At least visually both directions always work to the disadvantage to the player:

1) as on my previous post in this topic: your task forces are shown in radius, but are not counted (manually setting them to a course seems to update the world map and shows the mission one slightly outside of radius)

2) Something i just witnessed before: Enemy invading you with Tonnage but not Task force visible on world map (see screenshot below)

I made ingame bugreports on both accounts.

 

Besieds playing 1890 Spain on hard is challenging, but real fun (you fight your own economy more then anything else, vs, AH is more fighting with the super limited initial shipbuilding capacaty)

Edited December 1, 2024 by Cryadis

[PhoenixLP44]

Just one question to the devs.

How do you think armour works?

 

I know this might not be true with modern APFSDS projectiles and other railgun stuff, but this is 1950s tech

Just think about it for a moment. HOW IS THAT LITTLE GUN ABLE TO COMPLETELY DISABLE MY SHIP!

We need a total rework of ballistics in the next major update. HE cracks your armour as if it was a tincan no matter how much you put on your ship, penetration is way too high in later years and don't get me started on aiming/accuracy. 

Enough of my rant you get the point.

[Dave P.]

2 hours ago, PhoenixLP44 said:

Just one question to the devs.

How do you think armour works?

 

I know this might not be true with modern APFSDS projectiles and other railgun stuff, but this is 1950s tech

Just think about it for a moment. HOW IS THAT LITTLE GUN ABLE TO COMPLETELY DISABLE MY SHIP!

We need a total rework of ballistics in the next major update. HE cracks your armour as if it was a tincan no matter how much you put on your ship, penetration is way too high in later years and don't get me started on aiming/accuracy. 

Enough of my rant you get the point.

Those hits aren't doing a lot of damage. 5-10 points per hit? That's piddly. But they can set your ship on fire and that will cause DOT.

What does the overall damage summary show? (When you hover over the damage total it will give you a damage breakdown by caliber types, etc.)

[Peksern]

4 hours ago, PhoenixLP44 said:

I know this might not be true with modern APFSDS projectiles and other railgun stuff, but this is 1950s tech

That's literally no damage. Scratches on the armor. Don't see the problem there. 😅

[PhoenixLP44]

1 hour ago, Dave P. said:

Those hits aren't doing a lot of damage. 5-10 points per hit? That's piddly. But they can set your ship on fire and that will cause DOT.

What does the overall damage summary show? (When you hover over the damage total it will give you a damage breakdown by caliber types, etc.)

The point is that the 8.6cm shells shouldn't be able to damage the armour belt in the first place. Let alone set everything in the vicinity ablaze. You don't throw a lighter at a wall to light a candle in the room BEHIND it (at least I hope you don't).

I get that they can destroy or disable my smaller 4 and 8cm guns but how is it able to damage the main belt? Also 8 damage on average per shot isn't a lot but if you consider that the enemy hit me with around 500 shells of that calibre ~90% of them were partials. Yeah that adds up real fast. aka death by a thousand cuts

I don't think fire should be able to kill your ship if it is only on the deck. If it reaches below the main armour deck sure it can cause havoc on a ship but deckplating, eh?

HE and in fires were and still are way too powerful. Lots partial of pens are way more useful and easier to get than penetrating shots.

[PhoenixLP44]

50 minutes ago, Peksern said:

That's literally no damage. Scratches on the armor. Don't see the problem there. 😅

The problem is that my ship was made combat ineffective by those hits. Yes superstructure and so on can take a beating with 500+ shells but they weren't hitting that. 

[Dave P.]

2 hours ago, PhoenixLP44 said:

The point is that the 8.6cm shells shouldn't be able to damage the armour belt in the first place. Let alone set everything in the vicinity ablaze. You don't throw a lighter at a wall to light a candle in the room BEHIND it (at least I hope you don't).

I get that they can destroy or disable my smaller 4 and 8cm guns but how is it able to damage the main belt? Also 8 damage on average per shot isn't a lot but if you consider that the enemy hit me with around 500 shells of that calibre ~90% of them were partials. Yeah that adds up real fast. aka death by a thousand cuts

I don't think fire should be able to kill your ship if it is only on the deck. If it reaches below the main armour deck sure it can cause havoc on a ship but deckplating, eh?

HE and in fires were and still are way too powerful. Lots partial of pens are way more useful and easier to get than penetrating shots.

Ah. I see. Or rather, I don't see, since you're not actually showing the damage report for your own ship there, (:-p) but I still think I see your point.

I'm actually interested in this hoverover:

As you can see here, this BB has taken a couple hundred small caliber hits but the vast majority of the actual damage is coming from those 10" and 13" hits. If you're going by the logs, those few hits are absolutely lost in the noise.

First of all, historically, any ship hit by several hundred shells, even small ones, is going to be having a BAD day and probably rendered combat-ineffective. (See: last battle of Japanese battleship Hiei.) The in-game mechanic of disabling ships with too many crew losses is basically what happens IRL.

I'd also point to the battle of Tsushima, and the fate of the Russian battle line, as examples of HE shells rendering ships combat ineffective even if they didn't sink them properly.

Secondly, small hits to actually ablate heavy armor. Example (testing done on a tank):

You can see that even hits which don't penetrate the armor plating cause damage, thinning the armor and allowing other followup hits to penetrate more easily. One thing which isn't modeled in-game is armor plates are usually bolted on to be easily replaced; enough non-penetrating hits can actually knock them off completely. Anyway, from a design standpoint, it's usually assumed that an armor plate can block its rated shell once, after that all bets are off.

Anyway, tl;dr - Big guns are for hitting battleships at range. Small guns are for melting destroyers and cruisers if they come too close to you. Keep the range open and you won't get hundreds of small caliber hits.

Edited December 2, 2024 by Dave P.

[PhoenixLP44]

20 hours ago, Dave P. said:

Ah. I see. Or rather, I don't see, since you're not actually showing the damage report for your own ship there, (:-p) but I still think I see your point.

I'm actually interested in this hoverover:

As you can see here, this BB has taken a couple hundred small caliber hits but the vast majority of the actual damage is coming from those 10" and 13" hits. If you're going by the logs, those few hits are absolutely lost in the noise.

First of all, historically, any ship hit by several hundred shells, even small ones, is going to be having a BAD day and probably rendered combat-ineffective. (See: last battle of Japanese battleship Hiei.) The in-game mechanic of disabling ships with too many crew losses is basically what happens IRL.

I'd also point to the battle of Tsushima, and the fate of the Russian battle line, as examples of HE shells rendering ships combat ineffective even if they didn't sink them properly.

Secondly, small hits to actually ablate heavy armor. Example (testing done on a tank):

You can see that even hits which don't penetrate the armor plating cause damage, thinning the armor and allowing other followup hits to penetrate more easily. One thing which isn't modeled in-game is armor plates are usually bolted on to be easily replaced; enough non-penetrating hits can actually knock them off completely. Anyway, from a design standpoint, it's usually assumed that an armor plate can block its rated shell once, after that all bets are off.

Anyway, tl;dr - Big guns are for hitting battleships at range. Small guns are for melting destroyers and cruisers if they come too close to you. Keep the range open and you won't get hundreds of small caliber hits.

So after testing this again i realized that the armour wasn't the actual problem but my ship randomly slowing down and refusing to speed up again unless I violated the steering and speed controls. This constant decelerating and accelerating caused my aim to go down while my ship turned itself into a sitting duck.

 

[HMS Implosive]

Is it just me or are destroyers still extremely survivable against torpedoes?

 

[Dave P.]

4 hours ago, PhoenixLP44 said:

So after testing this again i realized that the armour wasn't the actual problem but my ship randomly slowing down and refusing to speed up again unless I violated the steering and speed controls. This constant decelerating and accelerating caused my aim to go down while my ship turned itself into a sitting duck.

 

That's normal - ships slow down when they take flooding or engine damage, and they will also slow to keep pace with the slowest ships in their units/division. If you hover over the ships division it will popup a list of ships in the division and their maximum speeds. If you have a single ship in a division, you can set the speed control higher (into the red portion of the slider) but it won't do you any good, the ship will just putter along as fast as it can.

They also slow down when turning - larger ships and tighter turns have to slow down more. So if you issue a bunch of course change commands to a ship and don't give it time to turn, stop turning, and speed back up to cruising speed, you can sort of "freeze" them in place.

Edited December 3, 2024 by Dave P.