Post by zoomar on Nov 18, 2019 12:01:20 GMT -6
When RTW2 was first announced, I delayed getting it because, as somebody primarily interested in surface combat in the WW1 era, I didn’t want to play a game in which naval and shore based aircraft would come to dominate. My fear was increased by some of the reviewers who emphasized how much AirPower mattered, and by how much more granular air strikes were than surface warfare (I had rather hoped it would be treated more like submarines). But finally I gave in an purchased RTW2...and was delighted to see the “slow aviation development” option as a preference. I’ve just finished a game as Japan and was very interested in how this option created a fascinating alternate history. It wasn’t until the early 1930’s that the first heavier-than-aircraft were introduced in any navy, and it seemed that the improvements in aircraft were also much more laggardly than in “our history”: by the end of the game in 1955 aircraft seemed to have the flight characteristics of airplanes from the early 1930’s. Also, no nations developed CVs until the mid 1940’s, and nobody except the US built many by the end of the game. Over the 1900-1955 period, Japan fought multiple wars with Russia, France, and once with Great Britain. In all instances my enemies devoted only minimal forces to my theatre of operations in the NW and SE Pacific meaning that I could successfully invade many of their Asian territories, and then get others as part of peace settlements. Not once, other than as more effective long range scouts, did ship based or shore based aviation play any significant role in any battle. Now that is the way technology in the early 20th century should have gone. Interestingly, most nations also deemphasized BBs by the end but built lots of CAs. I also kept some very old (1899-1910) ships in my active fleet and, re-engined and with improved FC and torpedo protection they proved surprisingly useful.
