|
|
Post by noshurviverse on May 14, 2019 12:22:00 GMT -6
With the RtW2 demo having (sort of) dropped and us only being a couple days from full release, lets have a dedicated thread for all the bugs we notice so they're all in one convenient area.
|
|
|
|
Post by maturin on May 14, 2019 12:30:56 GMT -6
OK, here's one. I requested a new floatplane scout design. Happy when the submissions were ready! One came up as Supermarine Swordfish, so I renamed it to Spearfish. But I didn't hit "save" I think, and tabbed out to a new window in Chrome to check on something for the wife....and RTW gave me an error message about not selecting a prototype to develop. However the window to select prototypes was already gone, and I had no way to go back and select one for development....
|
|
|
|
Post by thesovietonion on May 14, 2019 12:38:22 GMT -6
Not a bug per se, but a few things stand out to me as weird. It could totally just be that I'm getting used to the new stuff (Which I love!!!) and I slept very little last night, but why am I concerned about CAP from an airship base?
|
|
|
|
Post by jwsmith26 on May 14, 2019 12:50:01 GMT -6
Not a bug per se, but a few things stand out to me as weird. It could totally just be that I'm getting used to the new stuff (Which I love!!!) and I slept very little last night, but why am I concerned about CAP from an airship base? Could you provide some details about what you are seeing? Airship bases should not fly CAP, but CAP could be over an airship base if a nearby airbase is flying CAP. |
|
|
|
Post by thesovietonion on May 14, 2019 12:52:21 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by janxol on May 14, 2019 12:54:54 GMT -6
A company designed a plane as private venture, a window popped up with the new plane and current plane. I selected the current plane, as it was better, and hit OK. The existing plane then reverted into being in development.
|
|
|
|
Post by marauder on May 14, 2019 12:55:09 GMT -6
I just went to refit an old 600t destroyer with some additional goodies, and when I reduced the ammunition load from 150 rounds per gun to 145, the rebuild time jumped from 3 to 12(!) months. The same thing happens when increasing ammo load. Putting the ammo load back at 150 rounds reduces the rebuild time back to 3 months.
|
|
|
|
Post by rob06waves2018 on May 14, 2019 12:56:44 GMT -6
I just went to refit an old 600t destroyer with some additional goodies, and when I reduced the ammunition load from 150 rounds per gun to 145, the rebuild time jumped from 3 to 12(!) months. The same thing happens when increasing ammo load. Putting the ammo load back at 150 rounds reduces the rebuild time back to 3 months. Might make sense for adding ammo... not sure about taking it away! |
|
|
|
Post by jwsmith26 on May 14, 2019 12:58:25 GMT -6
OK. I see what you concern is about. That is the standard dialog that is used for all search and CAP commands. The CAP setting will have no impact on an airship base. There are other situations where it might be used just for setting search parameters. For instance, it might also be used for naval forces that are not capable of flying CAP, such as a Main Force equipped only with floatplane scouts.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fredrik W on May 14, 2019 13:00:31 GMT -6
I just went to refit an old 600t destroyer with some additional goodies, and when I reduced the ammunition load from 150 rounds per gun to 145, the rebuild time jumped from 3 to 12(!) months. The same thing happens when increasing ammo load. Putting the ammo load back at 150 rounds reduces the rebuild time back to 3 months. This is intentional. Changing the size of the magazines is a rather cumbersome process, as they are just about as low down in the ship as you can get. Also, it is intended to prevent the practice of storing a "rebuild margin" in the form of ammo that is later easy to remove. |
|
|
|
Post by marauder on May 14, 2019 13:01:03 GMT -6
I just went to refit an old 600t destroyer with some additional goodies, and when I reduced the ammunition load from 150 rounds per gun to 145, the rebuild time jumped from 3 to 12(!) months. The same thing happens when increasing ammo load. Putting the ammo load back at 150 rounds reduces the rebuild time back to 3 months. Might make sense for adding ammo... not sure about taking it away! Twelve months seems a bit excessive if all they do it add space to store 10 more rounds in total, considering my dockyards can rip out the entire machinery and replace it with a brand-new, oil-fired version in only 10 months time.  |
|
|
|
Post by rob06waves2018 on May 14, 2019 13:02:35 GMT -6
Might make sense for adding ammo... not sure about taking it away! Twelve months seems a bit excessive if all they do it add space to store 10 more rounds in total, considering my dockyards can rip out the entire machinery and replace it with a brand-new, oil-fired version in only 10 months time. I think they should be able to do it in 4-5 months so maybe a bit extreme!
|
|
|
|
Post by Fredrik W on May 14, 2019 13:03:24 GMT -6
Might make sense for adding ammo... not sure about taking it away! Twelve months seems a bit excessive if all they do it add space to store 10 more rounds in total, considering my dockyards can rip out the entire machinery and replace it with a brand-new, oil-fired version in only 10 months time. Maybe for a destroyer. But imagine changing the size of the heavily armored magazines of a dreadnought battleship... |
|
|
|
Post by noshurviverse on May 14, 2019 13:06:46 GMT -6
This is intentional. Changing the size of the magazines is a rather cumbersome process, as they are just about as low down in the ship as you can get. Also, it is intended to prevent the practice of storing a "rebuild margin" in the form of ammo that is later easy to remove. While I'm certain this is way too minor of a thing to really bother with adding, it could be interesting to allow a player to avoid that penalty by storing ammunition outside of magazines, at the increased risk of flash fires. |
|
|
|
Post by marauder on May 14, 2019 13:08:24 GMT -6
Twelve months seems a bit excessive if all they do it add space to store 10 more rounds in total, considering my dockyards can rip out the entire machinery and replace it with a brand-new, oil-fired version in only 10 months time. Maybe for a destroyer. But imagine changing the size of the heavily armored magazines of a dreadnought battleship... That definitely makes sense, yeah. It just threw me off a bit when I saw for how long my little 600 tonners would be in the yards for removing 5 rounds, so I assumed it might be a bug.
I guess RTW1 has spoiled me in regards to refitting ammo loads on ships.
|
|
