>>>Beta v1.7 is open<<<(RC)

[Nick Thomadis]

Read the news and instructions:
https://steamcommunity.com/games/1069660/announcements/detail/601890524829320303

Place your feedback on Steam:
https://steamcommunity.com/app/1069660/discussions/3/651430371783610934/

Or use this thread for any comment and feedback which will be much appreciated.

[MDHansen]

begun has it

Edited December 14, 2024 by MDHansen

[HMS Implosive]

Ok, first of, I am really happy that most of the gun models now have their own quatruple version available 😊
 

Second, now that you are working on the gun models, would you increase the barrel legths of 2" and 3" guns? For example Japanese 3" late model guns are 23 calibers long. You could triple that barrel legth and it still wouldn't be out of place for a gun of that size and era.

Third: would it be too much to ask that you changed the code such a way that on the file that defines the turret models' parameters, the barrel legth was given as an actual barrel legth in calibers rather than a vague modifer? Would make it a lot easier for us who like to tinker with mods, and maybe also help your own work when you want to add new models or chance their values. For example, currently the code goes:

"gun_2_x1_japan_bb, bc,ca,cl",,51,gun_2_x1,japan,"bb, bc,ca,cl",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,yamato_gun_25_x1,0.985,1.15245,0.75,1,yamato_gun_25_x1,1,1.17,0.77,1,,,,,,,,,,

While it would be easier if the code was:

"gun_2_x1_japan_bb, bc,ca,cl",,51,gun_2_x1,japan,"bb, bc,ca,cl",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,yamato_gun_25_x1,0.985,1.15245,0.75,60,yamato_gun_25_x1,1,1.17,0.77,60,,,,,,,,,,

Fourth: could you maybe tweak the range we can adjust the gun calibers a bit? Currently we can have 98.9mm gun and 102mm gun, but not 100mm gun, even though that caliber was extremely common in some navies. Not a big deal, something I have just been missing.

Fifth: could the reloading tech be revorked to something more realistic? I feel that whether or not the loading of the gun is automated or not is more of a feature of the gun model rather than separate tech and shouldn't even exist as an separate option. However, if you want to keep it there, maybe make it so that small guns get bigger boost to their reload speeds than big guns. It feels weird that, say 3" guns, get only 20% increase to their rof even from the most advanced reloadc tech. Realistically handloaded 3" gun would have rof around 20 rpm while automatic 3" gun would reach around 60-100, or somewhat less if accounting for reload time taken by filling up the gun feeding magazines. Alternatively, just rename the tech names form "Auto I" and "Auto II" to something more ambigous such as "Advanced Gun Rammers #" or something.

Thanks a lot for this update patch!

[Nick Thomadis]

Beta Update 2
- Improvement of USA destroyer gun models for mark 4/5 techs. Changed the 3D models.
- Weight changes for small caliber guns to reflect their actual shielded model (allowing them to be armored more).
- DD engine weight changes to follow latest base weight changes of ships.
- Pitch/Roll factors balanced to follow the latest weight changes.
- Various fixes and improvements for auto-design
You must restart Steam to get this update fast - The 3d model and weight changes may cause errors to your beta designs, please note.

[Markus1985]

Hi and thanks for your continued hard work!

Just wanted to add some reflections upon the recent builds. 

These mainly touch on the recent changes in 16.1.5, but they seem to apply 1.7 too.

Auto-resolve to my experience works a lot better now. Instead of the David vs Goliath results from recent changes, it now seem like it is more reasonable than before. If a few small ships engage a much bigger and variade task force they will be sunk, sometimes without doing any damage at all to the big tf. And if they do damage it is limited to light damage which for the most part is spread along the ships equal or close to equal to the same ship class (DD & and CL only seem to damage other DD & CL, rather than BB and CA) and often stay at light damage. In my experience I like this balance a lot and I think you should stay close to this Auto resolve version for now.

Minor nations

I also like that I’m finally able to retaliate against minor nations attacking me. It took a while before it triggered but I've been getting the option to generate revenge missions once the minor is attacking.

I'm also able to start naval invasions against minors that are allied to my enemies, so that seem to work too. Also as a side note I really like how my minor allies are now actually active and attack my enemies and actually provide some support. This makes me want to help them out even more though. Just like my armed forces can help out if a allied major nation attack or defends against a common enemy I'd like to have some of my armed forces help my minor allies in their conflicts too.

There are off course more to be done to complete the game, but I really like the way the game is going and wanted to start with this before some recent flaws.

 

Task forces entering port and repairs when I in fact didn't click on the port or wanted them to repair.

Others have also reported on this. In my case I wanted to lay my German TF in ambush for a Russian close to the Swedish port of Malmö. However on the next turn my task force had instead docked at Malmö and the Russians got a way. Adding further injuries my ships started repairing at a port that wasen't big enough for them and created a minus for my overal economy for a turn or two. The ships wasen't too damaged, but if they'd been they could have stayed there for multiple frustrating turns, which wasn't what I wanted to happen.

Just like the others who have reported it I think the movement placement points need to be a bit more exact. But if anything I think it shouldn't be that easy for a TF to be accidentally bumbed into a port, and that repairs shouldn't be automatically engaged as it is now. I'd rather be told that I've damaged ships at a port, go to that port to look at the damaged ships and then decide which ships need a repair and not. 

Screening small ships want to overtake and surround the enemy

This has happened alot in the recent build. When I spot the enemy my Screening and Scout ships quickly runs ahead of my Task force, leaving their screened targets behind.

They don't seem to attack though, but seem to want to overtake and attack the enemy from the opposite side. In a way I'm not sure if it should be called a bug or if the ships are actually clever enough to actually try and pincer the enemy between a hammer and anvil (between them and the bigger ship they screen). But the screeners are usually small, a litteral tiny pincer rather than a hammer, and are putting themselves in needless harm for little gain. They also leave their screening target dangerously exposed to the enemies smaller ships so that doesn't help either. 

Edited December 16, 2024 by Markus1985

[Markus1985]

As a side note I have another suggestion I'd like to add to a seperate post just to see if others like this idea too.

Minor nation commissions for ship designs

This is an idea I got recently, thinking about ways how you could generate more minor nation allies as well as renown points. I'd like to suggest a new kind of event, where a minor power commission the major powers to design new ships for their navy. I got the idea from a recent tank designer game where you work as a arms dealer/designer who'd get commisions for new tank designs that must meet certain criteria: Speed, armor, fire power, budget etc. Your mission is to build a ship that works for their limited needs, and if you succeed you may either build them in your ports (like it works now) or you give the nation a license fee to build them at their own ports (if they are advanced or big enough to build their own ships).

The results of a good commision design would be more renown for your quality designs and more minor nations asking you for the same or new designs, as well as the possibility to create alliances with minors. It could also diversify the nations fleet leading to nations having different major nation designs influences. This of course have some base in history to, for instance how the Mikasa of the IJN was a ship built at the Vickers in the UK. Either way I think this could be a good addition to the ship designing of the game.

Edited December 16, 2024 by Markus1985

[Peksern]

Is the problem fixed, that ships, that are automatically sent to ports for repairs (after being heavily damaged), return to their previous position when the repairs are finished?

In theory, that's nice. But they even return, when their fleet is gone somewhere else during the repairs. Happens then that a single, just repaired ship, stands completely alone in the nowhere... or worse against an enemy fleet. 

[Aldaris]

3 hours ago, Markus1985 said:

As a side note I have another suggestion I'd like to add to a seperate post just to see if others like this idea too.

Minor nation commissions for ship designs

This is an idea I got recently, thinking about ways how you could generate more minor nation allies as well as renown points. I'd like to suggest a new kind of event, where a minor power commission the major powers to design new ships for their navy. I got the idea from a recent tank designer game where you work as a arms dealer/designer who'd get commisions for new tank designs that must meet certain criteria: Speed, armor, fire power, budget etc. Your mission is to build a ship that works for their limited needs, and if you succeed you may either build them in your ports (like it works now) or you give the nation a license fee to build them at their own ports (if they are advanced or big enough to build their own ships).

The results of a good commision design would be more renown for your quality designs and more minor nations asking you for the same or new designs, as well as the possibility to create alliances with minors. It could also diversify the nations fleet leading to nations having different major nation designs influences. This of course have some base in history to, for instance how the Mikasa of the IJN was a ship built at the Vickers in the UK. Either way I think this could be a good addition to the ship designing of the game.

Now THAT is a fantastic idea! Love it.

The ship designer is the heart and soul of this game, and the prospect of being commissioned to design ships for others that meet defined criteria gives a great reason to do something other than what you usually do.

The challenge I think would be to dynamically define criteria that make sense for the technology level in question. Don't know if that is feasible. But if it is, I'd love to see this added to the game.

Edited December 16, 2024 by Aldaris

[VadimAleks]

Patch notes:

"Ship parts weights are reduced and costs have been adjusted accordingly. Armor and engine weights slightly adjusted. The result is more available tonnage for ship design, as much as was needed for allowing to recreate historical designs more easily, with adequate protection."

A very strange explanation for the change. There is no problem with the lack of tonnage in this game. On the contrary, the available tonnage is much greater than it was in reality (since only the weight of the installed parts and units is taken into account, without taking into account the auxiliary rooms and their equipment such as kitchen, laundry, food and water supplies, crew quarters, etc.). Therefore, all ships can be armored much more strongly than it was in reality. The AI simply does not know how to do this, it tries to install as many guns as possible (4-5-6 different calibers, neglecting armor). In reality, this practice was abandoned immediately after the construction of the Dreadnought.

We cannot design ships that actually exist because the necessary equipment becomes available too late, when their hulls are already obsolete and newer, more powerful ones are available.

"Triple guns and quad guns are now available sooner in the technology tree" - this was the right decision. But in addition to this, it is also necessary to make casemate guns available up to 8 inches inclusive and without caliber restrictions for hulls. For balance, this can be compensated by increasing the weight of the gun, but it should be possible to install such guns (since they were there in reality). It is impossible to build the cruiser St. Louis in 1893, because by that year we either don't have engines or 6-inch guns (and can't invent them, because the tech tree doesn't allow us to see them). It is impossible to build the cruiser Gromoboi 1898, because her 8-inch guns must be in the side casemates, and 8-inch guns are not available for them (8-inch guns can only be mounted by the main battery turret).

[Nick Thomadis]

Beta Update 3
- New USA “Dreadnought IV” (Shifting the naming of previous Dreadnought hulls accordingly) based on the USS Arizona Battleship, which can be recreated with sufficient accuracy. It has a base displacement between 27,500 and 35,500 tons and is available during 1914-1927.
- New USA “Dreadnought VI” (Shifting the naming of previous Dreadnought hulls accordingly) with a base displacement between 31,500 and 42,500 tons and is available during 1916-1927.
- Fixed bug of barrel elongation for some of the new guns. If you notice again a problem in any gun, please report.
- Various fixes and improvements for auto-design.
You must restart Steam to get this update fast - The 3d model and weight changes may cause errors to your beta designs, please note.

[__Arminius_]

57 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:

Beta Update 3
- New USA “Dreadnought IV” (Shifting the naming of previous Dreadnought hulls accordingly) based on the USS Arizona Battleship, which can be recreated with sufficient accuracy. It has a base displacement between 27,500 and 35,500 tons and is available during 1914-1927.
- New USA “Dreadnought VI” (Shifting the naming of previous Dreadnought hulls accordingly) with a base displacement between 31,500 and 42,500 tons and is available during 1916-1927.
- Fixed bug of barrel elongation for some of the new guns. If you notice again a problem in any gun, please report.
- Various fixes and improvements for auto-design.
You must restart Steam to get this update fast - The 3d model and weight changes may cause errors to your beta designs, please note.

That's all new hulls that will be in update or there is more coming ?

[xPorkulusx]

1 hour ago, __Arminius_ said:

That's all new hulls that will be in update or there is more coming ?

At the rate they're adding stuff to the beta I assume there's going to be more coming

[PhoenixLP44]

Some good changes and some bad changes so far. Love most of the new gun designs but one question.

Why, why did you have to remove the beautiful quad bofors from the american ships and replace them with this monstrosity? 

[Peksern]

1 hour ago, PhoenixLP44 said:

Why, why did you have to remove the beautiful quad bofors from the american ships and replace them with this monstrosity? 

I guess because bofors is a 40mm gun. Which is a pity in question of design, totally agree with you.

Edited December 16, 2024 by Peksern

[mrfox1918]

GL with new update! Hope you can fix the fore and aft weight offsets soon

Edited December 17, 2024 by mrfox1918

[Hibbidyhai]

8 hours ago, PhoenixLP44 said:

Some good changes and some bad changes so far. Love most of the new gun designs but one question.

Why, why did you have to remove the beautiful quad bofors from the american ships and replace them with this monstrosity? 

 

I do like the new ones, but it would be nice to choose between the two models (and they have differing stats too, like faster fire rate vs more range or something). 

[HMS Implosive]

The New  Arizona style parts are visually fine, but I noticed theyr collision boxes are quite bulgy. Especially the secondary tower limits firing arcs of turrets placed behind them needlessly.

What is this turret colliding with exactly?

[MDHansen]

Fairly sure the towers hitbox is just a rectangle and not following the structure of it, otherwise you would be clear of the lifeboats. 

Edited December 17, 2024 by MDHansen

[HMS Implosive]

16 minutes ago, MDHansen said:

Fairly sure the towers hitbox is just a rectangle and not following the structure of it, otherwise you would be clear of the lifeboats. 

If that is the case, I would prefer the boats to be removed for us to enjoy better firing arcs. Same thing frustratingly repeats throughout most of the tower designs in the game, I just hoped maybe this one time it could have been fixed.

 

[HMS Implosive]

Also, late model Chinese Battleship guns appear to have quadruple turret model that is of wrong turret series (KGeorge turret instead of Iowa turret).

[Nick Thomadis]

33 minutes ago, HMS Implosive said:

Also, late model Chinese Battleship guns appear to have quadruple turret model that is of wrong turret series (KGeorge turret instead of Iowa turret).

Which exactly and what Mark? Can you tell?

[HMS Implosive]

1 hour ago, Nick Thomadis said:

Which exactly and what Mark? Can you tell?

14"-20" inch mk5

[Nick Thomadis]

14-20 inches were intended to follow this line, as previous version, but we can try to change and follow the style of the smaller calibers.

[HMS Implosive]

5 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:

14-20 inches were intended to follow this line, as previous version, but we can try to change and follow the style of the smaller calibers.

No, thats not what I meant. See, the quatruple turrets are of different style than equivalent caliber single, twin and triple turrets. I attached 14" and 20" guns in the images for reference.

[Nick Thomadis]

8 minutes ago, HMS Implosive said:

No, thats not what I meant. See, the quatruple turrets are of different style than equivalent caliber single, twin and triple turrets. I attached 14" and 20" guns in the images for reference.

Ok thanks, we will see to fix/improve in both ways.