V.1.16 Сomplaints and suggestions

[G'Kosh]

Hi all!

First of all, thank you very much for your interest in our game! I am very clearly aware that sincere interest is the only thing that makes you write here.

A lot of negativity about the latest update, so I decided to start a new thread to avoid having a dialogue in different ones.

Version 1.16 included a very large number of small fixes, which we have accumulated over the summer and at some point we just lost the full list. That's why we made it without detailed changelog :)

We will try not to do that again. We will upload the fixes in smaller batches and with changelog.

We needed to nerf two big problems - armor belts from hull parts and artillery spam.

Understandably, if the developers nerf and players have to rebuild their ships, that's a negative. But it had to be done, otherwise the balance would go down the drain. Why do we need balance in a single-player game? Yes, pretty much the same reason why and in multiplayer - to have fun.

Armor belts from hull parts we have nerfed by through-piercing. And artillery spam by the fact that now the guns (and engines) overlap the line of fire to each other.

The fact that the engines overlap the LOF was a controversial decision. It was not necessary, but otherwise it was not very natural.

LOF in combat does not really work - and thank God. It was a risky decision and we got some more playtests before we turned it on :)

The gamepad support is still raw, we'll fix it.

In any case, there is time to talk. Write your comments, I really appreciate your constructive criticism.

And I would start such topics more often, but I have 8 working hours in a day and I can be in three modes - making new content, fixing bugs and communicating on the forum. I have to choose :)

[von_bock]

Slomes Inc님이 먼저 게시:

sheer spam from enemy

that is exactly what I am complaining about - there is no reliable way to deal with the spam.

[AtomHeartDragon]

von_bock님이 먼저 게시:

Slomes Inc님이 먼저 게시:

sheer spam from enemy

that is exactly what I am complaining about - there is no reliable way to deal with the spam.

There is no *single* relisble way, you mean.

At that's actually good, because otherwise it degenerates into
"yawn I've got flares/CIWS" hard counters that renders zeniths useless.

Now you need to make decisions whether to spend flares and maybe even do it again, when to try to dodge, when to maybe waste a sprint, when to fire CIWS (in case of 37mm you are ammo limited, in case of 57mm you need to commit early, in case of 100mm or molot with HE ammo you need good aim, timing and good nerves, since salvo size is small, and, in case of 130mm, rounds are both slow and have no dispersion, so firing in missile's general direction won't help) and when your APS will actually turn a hit into narrow miss.

And also when to play aggressively and kill the missile boat or at least polish it free of missiles.

[von_bock]

AtomHeartDragon님이 먼저 게시:

von_bock님이 먼저 게시:

that is exactly what I am complaining about - there is no reliable way to deal with the spam.

There is no *single* relisble way, you mean.

No, I meant exactly what I said, there is no reliable way. I don't want a silver bullet, I just want missiles to stop being my only concern in arcade mode.

All the things you say boil down to "git gud", and I know all of them, and I apply all of them as I can. My problem is, one mistake (shoot a bit crooked, start shooting too early or too late, flare when you shouldn't, not flare when you should have etc etc) means the ship is lost. So then the arcade game becomes "dodge ALL the missiles (not 95%, not 98%, all of them) and then, if you have fuel left, you are allowed to worry about killing some enemies".

This is rather frustrating, especially seeing as the enemy has unlimited missiles and unlimited ships, while I don't, so for me missiles aren't nearly as useful as for the enemy.

[Bers]

AtomHeartDragon님이 먼저 게시:

von_bock님이 먼저 게시:

that is exactly what I am complaining about - there is no reliable way to deal with the spam.

There is no *single* relisble way, you mean.

At that's actually good, because otherwise it degenerates into
"yawn I've got flares/CIWS" hard counters that renders zeniths useless.

Now you need to make decisions whether to spend flares and maybe even do it again, when to try to dodge, when to maybe waste a sprint, when to fire CIWS (in case of 37mm you are ammo limited, in case of 57mm you need to commit early, in case of 100mm or molot with HE ammo you need good aim, timing and good nerves, since salvo size is small, and, in case of 130mm, rounds are both slow and have no dispersion, so firing in missile's general direction won't help) and when your APS will actually turn a hit into narrow miss.

And also when to play aggressively and kill the missile boat or at least polish it free of missiles.

Spam missiles is a bad solution in my opinion. Not only is it annoying, but also missiles have become useless for players, because they are shot down in 90% of cases. Personally, I liked my mod, in which I accelerated the rockets and amplified their explosion, while removing markers from them so that they were less noticeable (such a move, by the way, gives the developer the opportunity to add a functional for the F.C.R.). In 1.151, bots did not spam missiles and this decision made them dangerous for the player and at the same time useful.

[Pallas' Cataphract]

I would really like for Zeniths to become rarer to see in usage, but also far more powerful and harder to deal with. Would be nice to see it require a sensor suite of some sort, or perhaps gaining enhanced tracking assistance/velocity via radar and/or F.C.R. tracking. Something to push them more towards a specialist "missile boat" role than "every attack ship carries them as a matter of course."

The spam really is annoying. I'd prefer more of the combat to be gunfighting.

[Dwang Zhongson]

von_bock님이 먼저 게시:

No, I meant exactly what I said, there is no reliable way. I don't want a silver bullet, I just want missiles to stop being my only concern in arcade mode.

AHD is right there, you want a hard counter and forget about it. That's not how the good game works, deal with it.

All the things you say boil down to "git gud", and I know all of them, and I apply all of them as I can. My problem is, one mistake (shoot a bit crooked, start shooting too early or too late, flare when you shouldn't, not flare when you should have etc etc) means the ship is lost.

That's not true. You behave like all the missile counters are mutually exclusive, cannot be used at once and like a single missile hit zeroes you. However, even if you screw up everywhere, a single armor layer still can tank several.

Chairkicker님이 먼저 게시:

I would really like for Zeniths to become rarer to see in usage, but also far more powerful and harder to deal with.

Are you sure there won't be "zeniths 2hard to deal with" backlash then?

Would be nice to see it require a sensor suite of some sort, or perhaps gaining enhanced tracking assistance/velocity via radar and/or F.C.R. tracking.

Why would a heatseeker require a radar?

Something to push them more towards a specialist "missile boat" role than "every attack ship carries them as a matter of course."

What a gamedesign task should such a specialization solve?

The spam really is annoying. I'd prefer more of the combat to be gunfighting.

It's still gunfighting, missiles themselves aren't more efficient as they used to be.

[ANGRY ABOUT ELVES]

Radiant Dawn님이 먼저 게시:

That's not true. You behave like all the missile counters are mutually exclusive, cannot be used at once and like a single missile hit zeroes you. However, even if you screw up everywhere, a single armor layer still can tank several.

I guess unarmoured interceptors are just a dead ship concept, then. Lost all their campaign fuel efficiency, lost the combat thrust necessary to dodge zeniths, lost the ability to distract zeniths with flares, you can't even build a ship fast enough to be recognized as an interceptor by the game. You didn't even consider that a fighting ship might not have armour. Kinda sad.

[Dwang Zhongson]

ANGRY ABOUT ELVES님이 먼저 게시:

I guess unarmoured interceptors are just a dead ship concept, then. Lost all their campaign fuel efficiency, lost the combat thrust necessary to dodge zeniths, lost the ability to distract zeniths with flares, you can't even build a ship fast enough to be recognized as an interceptor by the game. You didn't even consider that a fighting ship might not have armour. Kinda sad.

Indeed they are. And the damage phasing is the last nail into the coffin lid.

[Chicken Nugget Scoon]

Also please add a toggle for infinite fuel in the Shipworks.

[von_bock]

Radiant Dawn님이 먼저 게시:

a single armor layer still can tank several.

Or it can just burst open, depending on what RNGesus decides. I can do everything right, from ship design to choice of ammo and still die, unavoidably.

It's still gunfighting, missiles themselves aren't more efficient as they used to be.

Indeed, it seems that everything else got nerfed...

[von_bock]

Radiant Dawn님이 먼저 게시:

[quote=ANGRY ABOUT
Indeed they are. And the damage phasing is the last nail into the coffin lid.

And this seems like OK game design to you? When most stock ships are unarmored (or partially armored in ways which are worse than nothing)?

[Dwang Zhongson]

von_bock님이 먼저 게시:

And this seems like OK game design to you? When most stock ships are unarmored (or partially armored in ways which are worse than nothing)?

I have already expressed myself versus damage phasing in the past. The worst solution of 1.16 with a large margin.

[iSheep]

Game balance seems to have been altered in current version. I started a new play through.

R-9 Sprint seems to defend against enemy ASMs very well, one missile per incoming Kh-15 is sufficient. In previous versions, counter missile fire was not so effective, one had to standby a precise burst of 37mm CIWS to survive.

R-9 missiles are also super effective against aircraft, I'd say too effective, one missile away at the start of the combat scene, poof, aircraft do not stand a chance.

So I would suggest making it less effective otherwise one anti air frigate is sufficient to cover whole battlegroup from SG and missile task force attacks.

On 37mm guns, I would prefer lower rate of fire, or better yet, selective rate of fire. Missile defence, the idea of letting missile get very close then blast it at maximum RoF makes sense from modern naval warfare perspective. But for sustained air combat, the constant bullet hose of original version was much more entertaining.

Aircraft now seem to get swatted out of the sky a lot from 37mm and R-9 fire, so I need to send in my own ASMs to make enemy waste their missiles. I prefer again the original game balance where presence of CIWS and interceptors was not guaranteed chance of losing all my aircraft.

Lastly the explosion effects for 37mm seem to be too large, they really make a big flash and smoke cloud even at low velocity long range hits.

AI challenge wise I would say original game seems to have the gritty 50/50 victory chance feel especially when engaging advanced enemy ships. Now, I just send in Sevastopol to artillery spam from across the map, she can easily annihilate an entire enemy SG by herself so I am using it as a Frontline battleship with some modifications.

[von_bock]

How about if FCRs and IRST would actually do something for gunnery?
Such as, for example, set guns to converge at an appropriate distance?
Or how about if they could set timing on HE fuses? As in, press R with just HE loaded, and if you have fire control radar you get a timed airburst mode, and if you don't have it you still get your timed bursts but must set timing by hand, such as by rotating the mouse wheel to select among a few presets or something awful like that.
Or if you have IRST and LGMs they could be auto-guided to a target (with drawbacks such as, the system always aims center mass, there is control and actuator lag so that harsh maneuvers break lock, you have to keep line of sight (so no debris, flares or smoke in the way) etc.
It would also be nice if EW radars would actually warn early in case of raids by airplanes or swarms of missiles. Or, absence of early warning would mean that ships start with guns 100mm caliber and above unloaded.
Antennas should help for fleet actions btw, so when they are present a ship shoots at what the leader is shooting (possibly getting a benefit from any radar in the formation, could be something small like "start with guns pointing in roughly the right direction"), and if not must find and prosecute a target independently.

"But why help the player so much?", you ask? Well, it's to give players reasons to load up their ships with sensors (and in particular, to KEEP and USE the extravagant suite that the Sevastopol currently comes equipped with) and see about ways to keep said sensors working, because as of right now I haven't found any practical use for anything beyond the basic ELINT sensor, and you need only one, and that could be stuck on any old tanker that never sees combat. And no, SARH is not strictly needed, just spam more nukes on any bearings ELINT gives you and the enemies will all burn eventually, it's how I won my first campaign... well, that and a kamikaze attack on the enemy's last missile boat.

And speaking of SARH, if I get a lock warning, does that mean the Zenith is (semi-)actively guided? And then, shouldn't a fire control radar improve its performance?

[Pallas' Cataphract]

von_bock님이 먼저 게시:

And speaking of SARH, if I get a lock warning, does that mean the Zenith is (semi-)actively guided? And then, shouldn't a fire control radar improve its performance?

The Zenith is an infrared homing missile, so it doesn't rely on radar tracking. Dual-mode guided missiles that use both IR and radar guidance are (as far as I know) theoretical, but so are methane-powered jet airships. It's not that big a stretch if you ask me, but it could also just be a second type of tactical missile (which we could use one of).

Though with how spammy the AI is currently I don't think I'd want to see such a missile in their hands! Haha.