80% Research Rate - Thoughts?

[hiiiiii74]

I'd always thought that both RtW 1 and my first few experiments with RtW2 ran a bit fast in the tech sense, running myself into situations where in 1930 I was constructing super-heavy Battleships that would make the Yamato blush and faint, or normal fast-battleships that would make the Iowa seem rudimentary, with the same tech level going all the way down the line to DDs. Of course, naval treaties are rarely forced on the player, so inconveniences to naval development such as the Washington Naval Treaty aren't really in play. Personally, I found this all rather stressful, where I would refuse to build ships for years at a time because I was constantly getting new tech that would make any current design obsolete, and the AI was developing just as quickly, with any BB I commission in 1910 being hopelessly outclassed by even BCs commissioned in 1915. I understand that this may be historically accurate given how rapid naval tech changed in this period, but I still feel like it was too fast for an enjoyable game.

As a response, I experimented in my current Germany playthrough with an 80% Research Rate setting, to see how it changed the gameplay experience (for better or worse). I write this as of June 1940, which I figure is a fine place to pause and see how the tech progression has gone. I'll post the Design Cards for my most recent BB, BC, CV, CA, CL, and DD. I know many of these designs are actually a decade old or older by the time I took these snapshots, I've been spending all of my money on CVs, aircraft upkeep (even after clearing my land bases) and a new Heavy Cruiser program (which the CA below is the result of). I still think they are good for comparison.

BB Westfalen - Deutschland Class, Commissioned 1935:


These 16 Inch guns are Quality +1, as well as the 16 Inch guns on the BC.

BC Derfflinger - Derfflinger Class, Commissioned 1935:


CV Hindenburg - Hindenburg Class, Commissioned 1939:


CA Prinz Adalbert - Hansa Class, Commissioned 1937:


CL Medusa - Gazelle Class, Commissioned 1932:


DD S31 - S19 Class, Commissioned 1930:



I know that I'm no artist and my ship designs probably aren't perfect, but I feel that development in this game is still a touch above historical levels, but I felt like it was far more manageable and more fun to play.

I hope this isn't too many images or something! This makes me interested, has anyone else experimented with a lower research rate? If so, what has your experience been? Personally, I think I will continue to play games at 80% rate, maybe even playing with 70% and seeing where that takes me.

[mycophobia]

With the prevalence of aircraft and what I heard about the end game of airbases in the Mediterranean, I'd try 70% in an AH or Italy game. I only did 70% in rtw 1 before, while they made place more measured and arguably fun, I do also like the frantic development in the 10-20s at 100% as well. In anycase my only problem is that 70% arguably made the pre-dread era a bit long for my liking, but I feel it really depends on much you like that era.

[bobcarrierguy]

Let me preface my statements that I kind of like the idea of slowing down the pace of technological advance and might try it at some point. Now that being said.....

I believe RTW1, and in this case especially, RTW2 are very historical. The advances, in guns, armor, weapons, how systems were used, fleet operation, were massive between 1910-1925. I mean think about the submarine. It went from a nothing after thought to a major weapon of war. Just look at how the airplane advanced. The rate of technological advancement in this time period was such that I see the IRL world navies doing the same thing I do, not willing to build more than a couple of each class of ship. This is because the technological advancement was such that you really couldn't build more than a couple of a class.

Now I want you to compare these two ships:
Ship #1: BC 45,000t, 33kn, 4x16", 14x6", 8x3", 8TT.
Belt: 7" CT: 12" D: 2.25"

Ship #2 BB 57,000t, 33kn, 9x16", 20x5",
Belt 12.0" CT":: 11" D 6"

The first ship is the BC Lexington (construction started 1921). The second is the Battleship Iowa (1943). Twenty years apart and really there isn't a massive difference between the two. Not like a ship built in 1900 and one built in 1920. If they could have built a ship the size of the BC Lexington and launched it by say 1925...then why couldn't you build super battleships in the mid-30's.

The reason you don't see that IRL is because the Washington Naval Treaty squashed everything.
#1 The only way you could build a battleship was if it was replacing one.
#2 Any battleship you had could only be replaced after 20 years.
#3 Limited gun size to 16" and 35,000 tons. (Britain and US would in the late 30's use a clause that allowed them up to 45,000 tons).


The Washington Naval treaty put thing in a deep freeze. Without that treaty, and given everything else being equal, ships the size of the Iowa would have been built in the late 30s, if not mid-20s, and as ship the size of Yamato would have been built long before it was. The fleets you see in real life that existed in the 1930's and fought in WWII are a direct result of the Washington Naval Treaty and it's extension the London Naval Treaty.

[hiiiiii74]

May 29, 2019 19:09:23 GMT -6 bobcarrierguy said:

Let me preface my statements that I kind of like the idea of slowing down the pace of technological advance and might try it at some point. Now that being said.....

I believe RTW1, and in this case especially, RTW2 are very historical. The advances, in guns, armor, weapons, how systems were used, fleet operation, were massive between 1910-1925. I mean think about the submarine. It went from a nothing after thought to a major weapon of war. Just look at how the airplane advanced. The rate of technological advancement in this time period was such that I see the IRL world navies doing the same thing I do, not willing to build more than a couple of each class of ship. This is because the technological advancement was such that you really couldn't build more than a couple of a class.

Now I want you to compare these two ships:
Ship #1: BC 45,000t, 33kn, 4x16", 14x6", 8x3", 8TT.
Belt: 7" CT: 12" D: 2.25"

Ship #2 BB 57,000t, 33kn, 9x16", 20x5",
Belt 12.0" CT":: 11" D 6"

The first ship is the BC Lexington (construction started 1921). The second is the Battleship Iowa (1943). Twenty years apart and really there isn't a massive difference between the two. Not like a ship built in 1900 and one built in 1920. If they could have built a ship the size of the BC Lexington and launched it by say 1925...then why couldn't you build super battleships in the mid-30's.

The reason you don't see that IRL is because the Washington Naval Treaty squashed everything.
#1 The only way you could build a battleship was if it was replacing one.
#2 Any battleship you had could only be replaced after 20 years.
#3 Limited gun size to 16" and 35,000 tons. (Britain and US would in the late 30's use a clause that allowed them up to 45,000 tons).


The Washington Naval treaty put thing in a deep freeze. Without that treaty, and given everything else being equal, ships the size of the Iowa would have been built in the late 30s, if not mid-20s, and as ship the size of Yamato would have been built long before it was. The fleets you see in real life that existed in the 1930's and fought in WWII are a direct result of the Washington Naval Treaty and it's extension the London Naval Treaty.

Very true, which is why I referenced the Treaties in my opening paragraph, these treaties are rarely forced on the player, you've basically gotta agree to have them happen and even then it's not guaranteed. 80% Research Rate seems to compensate for that and result in historically similar ships throughout the entire time scale of the game, in my experience.

[generalvikus]

It's worth noting that you can make gameplay decisions to respond to the 100% research rate. In my games, for example, I tend to lay down one class of capital ship every year during the frantic years of development, so I usually have at least three classes of capital ship under construction at any given time, similar to the practice of real navies. This is more expensive than building all of those ships to the same design because of design costs, but I find that the relatively modest extra expense is worth it as it allows me to keep pace with technology much better. 

[garrisonchisholm]

When I was just playing RTW1 I always played on 70% advancement because I wanted the pre-dreadnought age to last a bit longer. It was enjoyable, and generally by 1940 ships still ended up looking like 1940 ships.

Since I've been testing RTW2 I have only played 100% so-as to be sure to as much as possible experience the release product I needed to be testing.

[hiiiiii74]

May 29, 2019 22:21:37 GMT -6 generalvikus said:

It's worth noting that you can make gameplay decisions to respond to the 100% research rate. In my games, for example, I tend to lay down one class of capital ship every year during the frantic years of development, so I usually have at least three classes of capital ship under construction at any given time, similar to the practice of real navies. This is more expensive than building all of those ships to the same design because of design costs, but I find that the relatively modest extra expense is worth it as it allows me to keep pace with technology much better. 

I'll try this in my next game, I think a rolling production of ships as well as making better use of refits/rebuilds will make for a better game with a stronger navy.

[dizzy]

I think I'm going to try 90% on my next playthru. I went into the mid fifties with both France and Japan and kinda topped out a lot of techs around the forties. Same with my current Germany playthru. And that was all on 12% research.

The one that really matters the most I think is carrier tech and Angled Flight decks just make aerial warfare that much scarier. It's 1946 and I'm flirting around with trying to develop it. So 90%... might get me to 1950+ and I'd be happy with slowing it down a tad. Who knows, maybe the magic number is 80%?

What we do absolutely need is a DLC for tech advancement thru to the 1970's. I want better more expensive and survivable subs and all sorts of jet fighters, oh and we'll need jet fighter sounds! I want missiles and all sortsa guided rockets! Bring the tech!

[JagdFlanker]

as i'v mentioned before going 10% tech is fun - pair it with variable tech causing some tech to advance quickly with others advancing very slowly and you can end up with some weird ship designs for an extended period of time

for example i'v had (RtW1) games where i didn't get 3 centerline turrets until the late 1910s so my BBs were all cross-deck firing for an extended period

also it's nice to be able to build a specific design for a few years instead of creating a new design every couple years

[cleveland]

How do you change the research rate?

[JagdFlanker]

May 30, 2019 18:31:36 GMT -6 cleveland said:

How do you change the research rate?

you can only do it when you start a new game

[cormallen]

... Or just edit the save file. I've been playing with ultra low research for the first few game years. 10-50% until 1910 or so then reading it up a little after then. I dip into the January save file and tweak it when I wish to. In RTW1 of tried editing the tech years too to try and stretch things out but the yards keep getting bigger so you end up with some very bloated pre-dreads unless you manually nerf yard size too, which is a bit of a faff tbh. In "one" I was half way to resigning early ships fort everyone to add more variety to the battle lines. Got a bit bored with the "everyone builds Dreadnought" era, followed by the "everyone builds Gangut" era. I'd made versions of mix calibre, lozenge B for the French and given the US some 13"+8" "Indiana" style lumps for their start fleet and would manually assign techs to encourage more national diversity. I like the early Dreadnought era where "how do we build these things?" is a question that received many answers.

[stevethecat]

20% with varied tech works for me, anything beyond 50% sees the game hurtle towards cold war tech in the 30's.

[Deleted]

Sept 27, 2020 8:46:32 GMT -6 stevethecat said:

20% with varied tech works for me, anything beyond 50% sees the game hurtle towards cold war tech in the 30's.

Agree. Even with my favourite 70% rate, I already have super 30kts Yamato in 1938...

[tindemon]

Sept 27, 2020 8:46:32 GMT -6 stevethecat said:

20% with varied tech works for me, anything beyond 50% sees the game hurtle towards cold war tech in the 30's.

I tried this last game. In 1918 I got a message saying Great Britain's latest medium bomber type was faster than mine. I had only just unlocked the "Heavier than air" techtree, and I didn't even have a floatplane in service yet... Are we sure this slower research rate is working as designed for the AI?