|
Post by Fredrik W on Aug 20, 2015 10:16:48 GMT -6
Yes, I just found a little glitch which makes the AI overly prone to build new classes of B, CA and CL. Can you take a look at the force ratios of the AI as well? I'm seeing a rather appalling lack of small ships in all major fleets. In my latest France game, in 1927, Germany, Britain and the US all have more Capital ships in service and building than they have destroyers. Japan has about an equal number of capitals and destroyers. Light cruiser numbers are also nearly always below the number of active BBs. Several nations did neglect lighter forces and concentrated on capital ships in the years prior to WW1. France for example built no CL and for some years neglected modern DD, the US skimped on all kinds of cruisers, Russia built no modern CL after the RJW, Austria-Hungary had a markedly battleship heavy navy etc. So I am not sure this needs adjustment.
|
|
|
Post by eisenengel on Aug 22, 2015 0:33:30 GMT -6
Britain (Britain!) has more dreadnoughts than destroyers. You are right that some nations would probably focus on capitals for prestige reasons, but seeing the Royal Navy reduced to a handful of destroyers after a single engagement is just silly. At Jutland they had almost 80 (the Germans had 60), in my game they started the war with 25 and lost quite a few. The main issue is that it allows the player to just swamp them with destroyer attacks without having to fear anything of the sort.
|
|
|
Post by thecarthaginian on Aug 22, 2015 3:47:54 GMT -6
Noticed that I have the relevant tech to build 'Superimposed 'B' turret' but the option to do so on B, BB, and BC class vessels has not appeared. This is in 1.1, game date MAY1908.
|
|
|
Post by brucesim2003 on Aug 22, 2015 7:05:19 GMT -6
You also need 3 (or more) centerline turrets. Also, sometimes it doesn't show unless you change ship type.
|
|
|
Post by thecarthaginian on Aug 22, 2015 16:23:39 GMT -6
You also need 3 (or more) centerline turrets. Also, sometimes it doesn't show unless you change ship type. Ahhhhh... that might have been the problem. We hit a 15,000t treaty limit with 11" guns in 1907 (which is awesome, because that is EXACTLY where CSN tech is sitting). I wanted to build a Dunkerque-esque pre-BC, two-twin 11" turrets forward, and two twin + two single 9" (British 9".2) turrets aft, 25 knots.
|
|
jma286
Junior Member
Posts: 97
|
Post by jma286 on Aug 22, 2015 18:18:07 GMT -6
Very small issue: the technology "Lengthened torpedoes" is misspelled as "Lenghtened torpedoes.
|
|
|
Post by brucesim2003 on Aug 22, 2015 18:54:20 GMT -6
You also need 3 (or more) centerline turrets. Also, sometimes it doesn't show unless you change ship type. Ahhhhh... that might have been the problem. We hit a 15,000t treaty limit with 11" guns in 1907 (which is awesome, because that is EXACTLY where CSN tech is sitting). I wanted to build a Dunkerque-esque pre-BC, two-twin 11" turrets forward, and two twin + two single 9" (British 9".2) turrets aft, 25 knots. The main armament layout is possible. I've built Richelieu clones before (2x quad turrets forward), so it is possible. The secondaries you wont be able to do, as they are just split between the sides. It could be you need the 3 turrets tech even if you only intend 2 turrets forward, idk.
|
|
|
1.1 Bugs
Aug 23, 2015 0:50:23 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by thecarthaginian on Aug 23, 2015 0:50:23 GMT -6
Ahhhhh... that might have been the problem. We hit a 15,000t treaty limit with 11" guns in 1907 (which is awesome, because that is EXACTLY where CSN tech is sitting). I wanted to build a Dunkerque-esque pre-BC, two-twin 11" turrets forward, and two twin + twok single 9" (British 9".2) turrets aft, 25 knots. The main armament layout is possible. I've built Richelieu clones before (2x quad turrets forward), so it is possible. The secondaries you wont be able to do, as they are just split between the sides. It could be you need the 3 turrets tech even if you only intend 2 turrets forward, idk. Oh, it works out ok with the 3 turrets and superfiring B... but not without it.
|
|
fred
New Member
Posts: 7
|
Post by fred on Aug 23, 2015 2:20:30 GMT -6
When a battle was generated while at war with Japan, warnings appeared that two Japanese classes had guns with a quality of 9. One of them was BC Mimisaka, I've checked the design and it has "MQ=9" for the primary guns.
I won the battle, sinking two BB, so I'm not sure of the effect.
I had to split the save folder to avoid the 1mb attachment limit. It was game one, playing the US.
|
|
|
Post by Fredrik W on Aug 23, 2015 3:38:55 GMT -6
Thanks, will look at this.
|
|
|
Post by gornik on Aug 24, 2015 13:44:54 GMT -6
Just recognised, that AI may build double submerged mounts, while I can't. Don't think it's intended. Attachment Deleted
|
|
|
Post by thecarthaginian on Aug 25, 2015 4:12:20 GMT -6
I did just notice this - MISSISSIPPI is misspelled 'Misisisppi' in the CSA shiplist.
|
|
|
Post by Fredrik W on Aug 25, 2015 9:44:32 GMT -6
The education system went south in the independent Confederacy
|
|
|
Post by tmp on Aug 25, 2015 10:22:25 GMT -6
In my current game AI Austria-Hungary developed guns up to 13", and then managed to get access to 17" guns. This apparently confuses the beejezus out of the automated ship generator, which now considers it perfectly valid to stick 14-16" guns on Austrian ships, and they get the 'default' 9 quality as result.
A few more generic observations about the automated ship designer; not bugs per se, but they might warrant a look:
* for nations without direct access to oil it keeps designing coal-powered ships even though from 1920 onwards everyone gets oil access * it doesn't seem to ever use torpedo protection higher than level 1, even if the nation in question has it developed (much) higher * for the BBs it never uses director for the secondary guns, even when it's available. It does tick the option for BCs, oddly enough. * it seems to rarely include the best available fire control in its designs. Central rangefinder and/or regular director is commonly picked, even though the nation has developed improved director * all nations appear to switch exclusively to AON scheme as soon as it's available, even ones which historically adopted it very late (and if I understand it right, even in the nations which did embrace it 'pure' AON designs were quite rare) * after 1910 or so all BBs/BCs are designed with only secondary, uniform battery always in casemates, never turrets. Don't know if it's AI's attempt at min-maxing, but it gets a bit.. boring? again if I get it right, some amounts of 3-4" guns did happen on at least some of the later battleships (sometimes as dual-purpose surface/aa defense)
On completely unrelated note, sorting sunk ships by sunk date is borked -- as far as I can tell it currently sorts it alphabetically, which results in by the day the ship was sunk, then name of the month, then year, rather than proper year-month-date order.
|
|
|
1.1 Bugs
Aug 25, 2015 10:44:15 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by thecarthaginian on Aug 25, 2015 10:44:15 GMT -6
Also with the autodesigner, I'm seeing a tendency to 'push' BC designs on the player when CA is selected. Anyone else notice this?
|
|