|
Post by kasuga on Jul 14, 2015 13:40:37 GMT -6
I think i was the first that "complain" about raider battles... well, when i say it the idea was give the option to decide if fight them or not... i think that when appear the screen of the raider battle you can select
Play battle Skip battle with disengage option to avoid combat or engage, is like disengage but is a small chance to damage the raider... or even sink it.
With raiders i have a little question... is possible "buy" support for them??? i refer invest money to secure supplies for them in far regions... i see a lot of times how Rusian raiders VS AH simple run out of fuel or the USA raiders except Olimpia CL... damn raider.
|
|
|
Post by darkrenown on Jul 14, 2015 15:07:08 GMT -6
Re Oil and AH - AH was something like the world's third largest producer of oil in 1900 so always has oil (although IIRC for technical reasons, that doesn't appear on the nation selection screen). Click on the nation flag in the almanac to find out if you have (or any other country has) oil. The story of Galician Oil is here - jerome-segal.de/Publis/TheGDec12E.9-13.pdfThat's, uh, wow, that's a fairly big technical thing!
|
|
|
Post by brucesim2003 on Jul 14, 2015 15:33:17 GMT -6
Darkrenown...are you the same as the Darkrenown on the paradox fora?
|
|
|
Post by eisenengel on Jul 14, 2015 21:29:33 GMT -6
Speaking of oil, I'm not sure if the rebuild mechanic is fully balanced. I took a ship from 1912 and tried to create a decent modernization after I struck oil in 1923. So single mount secondaries switched to dual mounts, new fire control, new machinery for oil firing (with the additional space going to a bit of extra speed), and while I was at it, upgrading the guns to the newest model of the caliber.
Comes out to 7 million funbux. More than a newly built dreadnought almost twice the size, with 4 knots more speed and bigger guns and better armor. Why exactly would I want to rebuild under these circumstances? Rebuilds should be the more economic option, especially since you still get stuck with the build time. The only reason why you wouldn't just design a bigger ship is if for some reason you failed to upgrade your docks, which given how cheap that is should never happen.
|
|
|
Post by Fredrik W on Jul 14, 2015 22:57:36 GMT -6
Extensive rebuilds of major warships with complete replacing of machinery and guns were very expensive and often not cost effective compared to building a new ship. The main reason they were done IRL was due to the Washington Treaty. RTW is made to reflect this. That said I am not sure they are quite as expensive as in your example. You have to consider that the build time for a rebuild is shorter than a new build, so the monthly cost can seem very high.
|
|
|
Post by ccip on Jul 14, 2015 23:49:16 GMT -6
Actually I'm not sure rebuilds should always be cheaper! It depends on the ship - from an engineering standpoint, it could actually be easier and more economical to build a new ship from scratch than having to work around existing structure.
I notice that it really depends on the ship on how viable rebuilds are. So far, the main thing I've found is that ships with more displacement and a lot of secondary mounts are best candidates for rebuild, because they're usually more impacted by replacement of engines, and because you can often take off some of the secondary mounts while upgrading the quality of your weapons and directors.
In my last game for example, I had two nearly identical classes of ACs, but one was slightly bigger and had 8" secondaries in single mounts, while the other was a little smaller and had dual turrets for the secondary battery. Initially, the latter ship was a lot more economical and performed better in combat, but when it came to rebuilds, it couldn't be rebuilt into anything useful, while the former ship became an excellent fast raider by losing some of its secondaries. The same happened with my pre-dreads - I had three classes of 18kt old battleships ships that were all in reserve by 1910, but I found that actually the oldest and originally the weakest class of Bs could be upgraded into a 21kt ship and keep up with a battle line, while the others which were originally more powerful couldn't be made into anything useful at all and had to be scrapped.
The other advantage of a rebuild is that even with the expense, it only takes a few months. Often, when I find myself in a war, the first thing I do instead of mobilizing is go through my mothballs to see which of my old warships can be rebuilt into something useful, and then order them rebuilt immediately while scrapping the rest to fund those refits. In that way, rather than having a lot of obsolete, rusty, untrained ships to use as cannon fodder, I'm guaranteed to have some useful capital ship reinforcements by the end of the year.
|
|
|
Post by fremen on Jul 14, 2015 23:55:25 GMT -6
When your country go to war, you cannot do anything before the first battle appears. Would be great a pause to reasign warships to conflictive zones, asign minor ships to ASW/Patrol duties, etc.
|
|
|
Post by Fredrik W on Jul 15, 2015 0:23:30 GMT -6
When your country go to war, you cannot do anything before the first battle appears. Would be great a pause to reasign warships to conflictive zones, asign minor ships to ASW/Patrol duties, etc. The intention is that the player has the option to raise readiness in advance of a war, when tensions are rising. It is a choice of saving money by keeping ships in reserve or being better prepared. Of course some wars can start suddenly, but historically, some wars did start with the participants poorly prepared.
ASW patrols will not be required until the second month of a war.
|
|
|
Post by eisenengel on Jul 15, 2015 1:10:16 GMT -6
When your country go to war, you cannot do anything before the first battle appears. Would be great a pause to reasign warships to conflictive zones, asign minor ships to ASW/Patrol duties, etc. The intention is that the player has the option to raise readiness in advance of a war, when tensions are rising. It is a choice of saving money by keeping ships in reserve or being better prepared. Of course some wars can start suddenly, but historically, some wars did start with the participants poorly prepared.
ASW patrols will not be required until the second month of a war.
While I do agree with that, I think it might be interesting to see it as an event of sorts - the act of mobilizing the reserves early would be seen as a major act of aggression and would serve to increase tensions. It's a little strange that the French Prime Minister is told that the Germans have mobilized the fleet and called up the reserves to bring the ships to full war readiness, and he just goes and shrugs his shoulders "Doesn't change anything". Also, do other nations in a game actually conduct diplomacy amongst each other? Do they form treaties? Get into wars that don't involve the player?
|
|
lixma
New Member
Posts: 43
|
Post by lixma on Jul 15, 2015 3:14:05 GMT -6
Option for **** x 768 friendly interface please!
(Same with regular SAI & Campaign)
|
|
|
Post by darkrenown on Jul 15, 2015 4:07:03 GMT -6
Darkrenown...are you the same as the Darkrenown on the paradox fora? Yes. Hello.
|
|
|
Post by brucesim2003 on Jul 15, 2015 5:46:18 GMT -6
Darkrenown...are you the same as the Darkrenown on the paradox fora? Yes. Hello. Ahhhh, hello. So that means you can suggest to the HOI4 devs that they take a look at this game and add it to hoi4 for the naval battles. Cheers Bruce
|
|
dgl
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by dgl on Jul 15, 2015 6:28:16 GMT -6
One change I would like to see is the possibility to establish my government's position on naval arms limitation. So for example, if an arms limitation conference is about to commence the government asks me which duration, tonnage and calibre restrictions I would prefer. As the professional head of the navy, would be nice to have a say, even if it is of minor influence in the grand scheme of things.
|
|
|
Post by cleveland on Jul 15, 2015 8:37:37 GMT -6
Suggestion: When you're at war have the option to go to a weekly or every two weeks turn. Time really flies!
|
|
|
Post by cleveland on Jul 15, 2015 8:53:52 GMT -6
Another suggestion: Have the chance a blockade will fail every month. So if you have 110% superiority there's 40 percent chance of faliure, 120% superiority there's a 20 percent chance etc (use what ever numbers you desire). Sometimes blockades weren't always airtight. Or as an alternative: have the blockade cost money to the blockader every turn as a cost to maintain it.
|
|