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

[Werwaz]

some additions I would like to see:

• increase USA shipyard sizes to be more in line with britain and germany (currently the same size as spain)
• tillman battleship hull (1920-1929, 50-75k tons)
• bigger standard battleship ~45-50k tons
• Lexington BC (1916-1927, 30-50k tons)
  • probably can reuse current Arizona and Texas towers and hulls for these
• german modernized dreadnought (hypothetical Bayern class modernization)
• unique hulls and towers for china and spain
• add newer towers to the older alpha and beta era hulls
  • a lot of russian, austrian, and italian modern era ships have this problem in particular
• a few more pre dreadnoughts for britain, austria, and germany
• modern "torpedo boats" (destroyer escorts, frigates, etc.)

 

 

 

[Suribachi]

During my latest play through, I realized that I can sometimes get frustrated with the Transport capacity slider under the Finances tab.  Once a player hits 200% transports, keeping the slider above +0.00% becomes a waste of funds and going into even -0.01% will diminish the capacity overtime even during peace time. 

I would like a button that resets the slider to this level.  For example, when a campaign first starts the slider is already in this position.

Edited December 18, 2024 by Suribachi

[Nick Thomadis]

Beta Update 4
- New British “Compact N3 class” which can recreate the HMS Nelson. It has a base displacement between 32,000 and 39,500 tons and is available from 1919.
- Various new ship parts.
- USA 2-inch/3-inch quad guns of Mark 5 reverted to their previous model.
- New Chinese 7 to 20-inch guns for Mark 3/4/5 techs.
- Further auto-design optimizations.
You must restart Steam to get this update fast - The 3d model and weight changes may cause errors to your beta designs, please note.

[Peksern]

36 minutes ago, Nick Thomadis said:

- Various new ship parts.

Can you tell more about what ship parts are added?  Can't play the beta currently myself.  

Edited December 18, 2024 by Peksern

[xPorkulusx]

1 hour ago, Peksern said:

Can you tell more about what ship parts are added?  Can't play the beta currently myself.  

As someone who does have the beta, let me second this, as I'd like to look at the parts and see how they work!

[Северная]

3 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:

Beta Update 4
- New British “Compact N3 class” which can recreate the HMS Nelson. It has a base displacement between 32,000 and 39,500 tons and is available from 1919.
- Various new ship parts.
- USA 2-inch/3-inch quad guns of Mark 5 reverted to their previous model.
- New Chinese 7 to 20-inch guns for Mark 3/4/5 techs.
- Further auto-design optimizations.
You must restart Steam to get this update fast - The 3d model and weight changes may cause errors to your beta designs, please note.

What are the “various new ship parts”?  

[halofanjames]

Few things mostly wishful thinking for germany

first loving the german towers but noticing the allowed placements are a bit janky so it'd be nice to see them propagated to other hulls particularly the modern cruiser 1 hull so it has an option besides the one it's had since i think this game was yet on steam and possibly the heavy cruisers to replace the hydraulically pressed towers also related it'd be nice to see a flush deck hull for light cruisers above 10k for Germany so there's a bit more freedom for designs.

second any plans on the horizon for new german guns particularly for DD's as I've noticed a lot of the big updates recently have mostly been filling the gaps of nations that still use what i'd call the default models.

and third if possible can the mk 2/3 4/5 inch gun be used for single barrel turrets for both visual and practical reasons as I find they clip and cause errors in refits of older hulls due to the larger clipping box

[HMS Implosive]

The new Nelson hull looks really nice 😎

Would it be possible to get also four shaft version of it, as a battlecruiser hull or something? (I admid, would love to use that for my own moddings 😅)

[HMS Implosive]

Also, would you make it so that for the Nelson style "Advanced BarbetteTower #" the secondary guns could fire over the blast guard thingy protruding from the barbette structure, see image below:

[Peksern]

@Nick ThomadisIt is still pretty much impossible to send ships to the caribbean port of San Juan. Always get "move to", no matter how often I try to hit the port.

[Harwood_39]

Started playing the beta today, couple of notes:

• The G3 Battlecruiser hull:
  • The secondary tower doesn't have the same options as the N3, could you please allow the G3 to have the same secondary towers that the N3/Compact N3 has?
  • Are there plans to do a secondary tower based on the plans for the original designs for the St Vincent class?
  • None of the funnels available for this hull fit in the funnel slot for the Advanced Control Tower IV
• With the campaign, is there a possibility to add a "manage ports" tab? so we can bulk edit the priority for the port when it comes to repairs?  It can be really frustrating in a campaign to see a ship damaged in the North Sea teleport to a random port in South Africa for repairs.

[Markus1985]

5 hours ago, Harwood_39 said:

With the campaign, is there a possibility to add a "manage ports" tab? so we can bulk edit the priority for the port when it comes to repairs?  It can be really frustrating in a campaign to see a ship damaged in the North Sea teleport to a random port in South Africa for repairs.

I too would like this option (this morning a damaged BB in the black sea decided to use the allied port Bar instead of the newly conquered Odessa), or that all ports with low port capacity have the lowest priority from the start of a campaign by default. 

It would also be nice if the ships didn't automatically repair themselves when entering a port, especially when there isn't enough port capacity to do it efficiently. 

[Peksern]

Is it supposed to be that way? The fleet is still about 500 to 1000 kilometers away, yet there is a meeting. Not exactly a new thing in 1.7, but... I'm still wondering. 

[Nick Thomadis]

Beta Update 5
- New Barbette parts and fixes on barbette logic which could result in inconsistent allowance of calibers.
- Changes in German gun models for cruisers for Mark 4/5 4-inch and 5-inch calibers.
- Gun ammo increased, especially for small and medium calibers (This change affected weight, so it had to be delayed for a next major patch).
- Ship weights optimizations.
- Further auto-design and part placement logic optimizations.
You must restart Steam to get this update fast - The saves had to be reset due to the many changes that would affect all designs.

[Zuikaku]

No new hulls are expected in beta?

[UnleashtheKraken]

3 hours ago, Zuikaku said:

No new hulls are expected in beta?

There are so far, two new american dreads, and 'compact n3 to build nelson'.  A bunch of new turret models.  More hulls to come.

Edit, just opened the latest update (I need a job).  New shipbuilding parts.  Haven't seen them yet.  I'm looking forward to seeing more of the default 'light cruiser towers' that show up in every nation get replaced with more realistic and hell, some hypothetical designs.  Keep it reals, please, less quad 20inch turrets, more 'this was actually something that could have been done, but wasn't, and would fill a niche'.

I like when there are different towers and this one is better at ranged fire, that one is better at damage control and spotting, etc, for the same ship class.  So you can have ships actually intended for different roles.  Even better would be to have the stats separated from the towers, so you pick tower models, and there's space for, let's say, fire control, spotting, damage control, etc.  But there's tradeoffs, you take more fire control but that leaves less space for other modules.  Bigger ships have more space so battleships with their thousands of crew in their final form really can take on multiple roles, where a destroyer is always going to be focused one way or another.

Edited December 20, 2024 by UnleashtheKraken

[Pappystein]

too bad I didn't notice "all saves were reset" before I updated... I was about to take over the last vestiges of Russia.   Not a complaint, just an observation that I am not always observant enough

Seriously though.   I think for the first time in a LONG time I have not felt the need to use a trainer in the game with V1.7   Although I will say I am a bit concerned with armed transport shots seemingly bending to hit me as I turn (not an optical illusion they are actually tracking my movement mid flight... Didn't realize that late 1910 technology had mid-course guided and corrected shellfire...   Thought that didn't come about until the Zeus 8" in 1947

Also anyone else notice that armed transports fire in "Swarms"   Fire fire fire...  None of them fire for a long time... Fire fire fire....   Almost realistic for a small mount running out of ready ammo... but they all do it at the same time and again the tracking shellfire...   

I don't want to fill out a bug report on this yet without corroboration and more experience myself with this phenomena... I have only seen it once in one mission.

 

[UnleashtheKraken]

22 minutes ago, Pappystein said:

too bad I didn't notice "all saves were reset" before I updated... I was about to take over the last vestiges of Russia.   Not a complaint, just an observation that I am not always observant enough

Seriously though.   I think for the first time in a LONG time I have not felt the need to use a trainer in the game with V1.7   Although I will say I am a bit concerned with armed transport shots seemingly bending to hit me as I turn (not an optical illusion they are actually tracking my movement mid flight... Didn't realize that late 1910 technology had mid-course guided and corrected shellfire...   Thought that didn't come about until the Zeus 8" in 1947

Also anyone else notice that armed transports fire in "Swarms"   Fire fire fire...  None of them fire for a long time... Fire fire fire....   Almost realistic for a small mount running out of ready ammo... but they all do it at the same time and again the tracking shellfire...   

I don't want to fill out a bug report on this yet without corroboration and more experience myself with this phenomena... I have only seen it once in one mission.

 

Regarding shells 'bending in flight' - as far as I can tell, hits are calculated at the moment of firing.  The graphic of each shell moving through the air has no impact on hits or misses..  that's why hard maneuvers to take a ship out of the predicted firing pattern don't work so well.  this is not 'bullet impact calculation'.

That's why shells seem to track targets.

[MDHansen]

33 minutes ago, Pappystein said:

Although I will say I am a bit concerned with armed transport shots seemingly bending to hit me as I turn (not an optical illusion they are actually tracking my movement mid flight... 

as said in the post above, shells calculate trajectory when they fire, hence the "track-ir". It looks bad, and really bad vs fast moving targets. And it is ofcourse the same for the player and ai.

[Pappystein]

Thanks for the replys... I have never noticed this before... but I have also never seen a nation have armed transports in only ONE mission where their mk1 guns out-range my mk3 guns (same caliber) by ooh so much (I lost 3 light cruisers to the transports...)   Every convoy AFTER that one the transports were not armed.   Probably was a bug and I wish I had reported it now.    sees 150 4 inch shells in the air....  ALL HIT....   Light Cruiser sunk.    Light Cruiser can't even shoot at enemy (with best powder and shell combo) because they are out of range.

 

[Nick Thomadis]

Beta Update 6
- Balances in the ship damage model, mainly affecting the durability of ship parts, armor endurance and how flooding is affected due to structural damage. The overall experience should be an even more realistic and expected feeling of how ships damage each other according to their displacement and protection schemes.
- New Chinese/Spanish “Ironclad I” which can recreate the HMS Inflexible ironclad. It has a base displacement between 9,770 and 12,900 tons, available from 1890 to1899.
- New Chinese/Spanish “Ironclad II” with a base displacement between 10,900 and 13,900 tons, available from 1891 to1899.
- New Chinese “Experimental Ironclad I” with a base displacement between 9,600 and 11,200 tons, available from 1890 to1895.
- New Chinese “Experimental Ironclad II” with a base displacement between 9,750 and 12,250 tons, available from 1890 to1895.
- New Chinese “Experimental Ironclad III” with a base displacement between 9,850 and 12,550 tons, available from 1890 to1895.
- New Chinese armored cruiser “Ironclad Cruiser” with a base displacement between 3,000 and 11,500 tons, available from 1890 to 1905.
- New Chinese light cruiser “Small Ironclad” with a base displacement between 3,000 and 6,500 tons, available from 1890 to 1902.
You must restart Steam to get this update fast.

[Cryadis]

Soo i am really enjoying UAD currently, imo best investment into a game for a while, Kudos there Team

AI builds reasonable ships and moves them around quite well.

Still I'd like to deposit some points for improvment, maybe suggestions if i think my idea is workable.

Based on playing Spain, 1890 start, Hard difficulty (own ship designs same as for AI), current Beta available on steam today:

* Crew recruitment cap: Yes i know i mentioned it on previous posts, already, still that is an underlying issue when playing Spain, as it affects crew reinforment and, even worse, the ability to actually put ships in service. Currently this softcap seems to be around 1100 and it cannot be influenced in any meanly way, besides putting slider to 100% if you can afford it, but then still you get like 76 crew if you already have a pool of around 800 --> Suggestion: raise that softcap or (if i am not mistaken) it is based on your home population also make foreign population influence it (to a lesser degree).

* Ability to defend your TRs: no matter what and how many fleets and power projection you have at a sea area (1890 start mind you) it is impossible to defend your TRs. As long the AI has a ship in a region you have a port in it you will loose 2 to 5 TR a turn there. this can only be countered by putting your Transport sllider to max (still canot keep up especially as Spain there, also mind you you are almost required to run a very high crew slider as well, plus technologies are also essential). Also i am not sure if armored Transport techs even play a role there, which, if not,  would make te tech mostly fluff --> suggestion: Have your power project also play a role on the chance to loose Trs in a region.

* Minor Nation land attacks: In my current Spain campaign my plan was to try and go for china first and then focus on USA before they grow too big, but with some more economical backround. Turns out even try to reduce tension with USA they kept provoking my country and also had Brasil and Portugal as minor nation allies. So far so good, before the war broke out i had venezuela and northern columbia. Now the issue which is amplified by both issues above:

Brasil kept land invading my provinces from norther brasil up to costa rica (included, as i in the meantime took panama from USA). Likewise Portugal conquered western Spain via land invasion. The problem here is the speed it happens especially at the start. Due previous mentioned issues your army logistics is at 20% at best (would increase with more ships, but you lack the crew there, also you likely loose a lot more TR then you can defend / replace). While you get a conquest mission if that happens (provided they do have a port in the country they infade from !!) they succeed their invasion in about 3 or 4 turns, a conquest with sufficent fleet presece would also take 4 turns at least.

Additionly there seems an order of event issue: Brasil conquered  southern colmbia from venezuela teh same turn my naval invasion was finished. in previous version i had a campaign where I had most of nortehr America, but Canada kept invading me from Canadia Prairies, and since that province has no port its impossibel to counter it in any way.

I am aware thata rmy logisics also slaces with your GPD to some degree at that majore empires on hard have a bonus there, but these you can chocke with blocking their ports and sea bloading them. Also the game should not be balanced around hard (i play it to give me a challenge and offset the difference in shipbuilding and focus reseach key techs vs the AI)

--> suggestion: besides improving on first 2 points, maybe have naval invasions with suffience fleet present at least slow down the invasion progress (imagine if you get naval invaded from the north you likly will not be able to deploy your full army to your conquest in the south). Still not sure how to improve getting land invaded from a minor nation without ports, besides having them dissolve like a major empire when loosing all ports.

* underwater torpedo tube hits: this is a minor one, but quite annoying. No matter what caliber you get fired on there always is a chance tehy will hit your underwater (!!!) torpedo tube cause torpse explosion. WHile the damage is minor usually you also loose a few torpedos which you wanted to send the general direction of you enemy. I am not sure hor realistic it is, but have a suspision that underwanter torpedo tubes have the same "getting hit"-probability like deck torpedos, which makes no sense. An expample of that issue is having a heavily armored BB that gets attacked by small guns (2 or 3 inch) of some TBs on a range of 2km and higher. genereally you get no damage but eventually you will out of torpedos whithout firing any. This brought me to using designs of CA and BBs without any torpedos usually--> suggestion: review underwater tube "getting hit"-probability.

* build refit designs: I know this topic is as old as the refit feature itself, still i want to list it. Considering some techs require a ship refit to apply (especiially Torpedo range with same diameter i am looking at you), beeing able to directly build refit designs is a rellay big need to have. --> suggestion: its obvious i guess

* GUI improvement a): as your campaign progresses it would be really really nice to have a quick way to see on the world map in which harbor are which ships. --> suggestion: if not already in use by something i'd suggest pressing "Alt" toggles a popup / icos on (your) visible ports indicaing how many BB, CA; CL, TB, DD; BC are in all visible ports.

* GUI improvement b): Fleet overview screen: First that screen really could use an indication of currentl in use / max available ship building capacaty. Considering at least myself i keep suspending / resuming ships a lot depending on ym needs (or if a fleet returned to port for repairs). secondly better filter options to only show ships of type, in region(s), design year and so on. --> suggestion: the fleet capacity is clear, reagrding filtering i am prossibly damaged from work, but would seek inspiration here: https://docs.devexpress.com/WindowsForms/114635/controls-and-libraries/data-grid/filter-and-search

 

 

Edited December 21, 2024 by Cryadis

[Nick Thomadis]

Hotfix uploaded
Fixed issues reported for the new Ironclad hulls
Restart Steam to get it

[mrfox1918]

10 hours ago, Cryadis said:

 

* build refit designs: I know this topic is as old as the refit feature itself, still i want to list it. Considering some techs require a ship refit to apply (especiially Torpedo range with same diameter i am looking at you), beeing able to directly build refit designs is a rellay big need to have. --> suggestion: its obvious i guess

 

 

 

you can already do this, make your refit, save it, then make a copy of it and build the copy. ez.

[Kraut]

Originally i just wanted to comment on the recent development regarding the ship designs, which indeed finally seem to have improved.

But an old Issue regarding Design still remains:The Player, so the only won that buys your product and can be happy or unhappy with it, is still restricted in terms of armour design, but the Computer can put ridicoulus armour thickness on its ship. First Campaign:

Russian / Soviet BB with an Mainbelt of 48cms on a 1910 design. Only 78% Armour Strength though.. are they using wood-iron-compound armour or wat? And that on a aroudn 22k t BB ... as a trade off they had only 28cm gunz...

Current Campaign:

Soviet / Russian BB with 26cm Main Deck Armour (Strength 142%)on a 1920 Design. Main Belt almost reasonable 43cms but no trade off, since that ship is fielding ... 12 !!! 41cm !!! guns ! Rest of the armour is also really thick, only thin part is the Super-Structure. all on a 43k t ship... with 21 knots its rather slow for 1920.

Why am i Complaing bout the armour thicknesses? Well apart from the 1910 garbage armour not even the strongest armoured ships in our timeline, should be Iowa and Yamato, had so much deck armour. And those Ships were sailing around 20 years later than where i am atm. Why is that important? Cause Deck Armour increase was an reaction to the Range and accuraccy increase of the gunz and the therefore increasing penetration power of those + desire to armour against atleast some Bombs, not the biggest ones ofc.  So the Devs restrict us players on armour thickness, for example BC main Belt cannot be increased to the historical values of german strongly armoured ones untill only the very latest BC hulls, instead of restricting the Computer much more in order to ensure better Auto-Design results, it needed a multiple-years long fiddling around the parameters of the auto design algorhythm.

I also wanted to express my joy bout the fact, that i can finally see the ships range / endurance in the details in the ship design section. although i still strongly wish for the range beeing shown in the hover / overlay info-box since its a very vital ship feature.

 

So, why i wrote originally at the start? CAuse what made me write just now is the bullshit just happened most recentently in my campaign.

Im in a War against Ex-Soviet / Russia in 1924. After i had already destroyed half of the Russian fleet in the Baltic, they still managed to get an Naval Invasion starting on Ostpreußen. Well, i dont mind, since they dont have nearly enough tonnage then they would need to ensure success... 

Most part of my Fleet was busy with Invading the Netherlands. Wich is another point by itself. Why no Land-Invasion into our little Neighbour? Anyway. The Invasion of the Netherlands would be finished one turn before the Russian Invasion attempt in Ostpreußen would have ended, since with their small fleet they had only a ... 13% or something chance to win. So far so gut, but from hier on the bullshit starts.

Usually we loose more Soldiers per turn on Invasion then the defender, when we dont have enough tonnage to reach those 100% win Chance. Atleast my Observation so far. Not so the Computer against me. Despite their military power even weaker than mine (seen in politics tab hovering over gouvernment) and despite having no real chance to win the fight, i lost much much more troops then the attacking computer did. And now comes the greatest Bullshit, i couldnt believed it, since i have withnessed that only on my invasions without ships before:

the Computer Invasion on me ends two turns prematurely ....but they also won !!!!!!!!!!! WTF ??????? And on Top of all that, not outside, but in Harbour and ready for battle was a fleet of mine that was almost as big as the attacking / invading computer russian one ...

So, wtf is going on????

Apart from that huge bs i appreciate the fact, that now only 100% of the shown required tonnage is needed to ensure a 100% success rate and not double or tripple as before... But it is still strange now, that even a slightly smaller Fleet than required results in a huge decrease of success rate.

edit: typos, grammar

Edited December 21, 2024 by Kraut