Plane Free

[alexrodgersaf]

What do people think about an option that takes aviation out of the game.

[nimrod]

An option would be appreciated.

Airpower is just weird and I'm not really comfortable with land based AC. One of the greatest values for AC is long range recon and from the mid 1930s fairly continual updates via shadowing fleets. However, in the game no aircraft are pre-deployed; their is no strategic recon from subs or AC to provide any sightings at the start of the battle engagement. Deployed fleets, even in peace time, often had AC flying from dawn to dusk to provide weather updates, keep a look out for suspicious ships / fleets, look for opposing intel efforts like aircraft or subs, etc. so to not have any pre-deployed AC in wartime seems very much like a code consideration rather than an intentional game play mechanic.

Lacking the strategic value of recon, I find the battle value of un-controlled land based AC very suspect. In my most recent game as Italy (v1.22), I had a regular bombardment mission (8 or 9 times) in southern France. The bombardment target and several French airbases were within strike range of three Italian airbases. No matter what option I chose for the land based AC, I could never get the land based aircraft to engage anything, the ships, airfields or the bombardment target. I tried, DB, TB, PB, F and MB in the different airfields to no avail, additionally the Fighters would not provide CAP for the ships. I did get a lot of recon from the airfields so the land based planes were flying - the airfields were not in reserve.

[zoomar]

It would be a good idea, but probably unpopular with most players of RTW2, since the game was developed in large part to appeal to the airpower people.


To be honest, the "slow aircraft development" option in the initial setup pretty much removes aircraft and aircraft carriers as a decisive element of the game, at least until the late 1940's. I played one game as the USA and never built a single aircraft carrier...but by 1950 I had a fleet of 50,000 to 70,000 ton battleships and battlecruisers (as well as cruisers and DDs) armed to the teeth with all the radars, AAA and torpedo protection possible. I did develop land based air and invested a bit in land bases and kept my airships around. In my last war, I handily defeated a Japanese AI that had invested heavily in aircraft carriers. My greatest moment came when my battlecruisers, with their DD escorts, caught the enemy carrier task force and pounded it to pieces...thanks in part due to the enemy AI stupidly sailing into Korea trying to escape and being trapped with land on one side and my 19' guns on the other. It was also airship scouts that found the enemy for me.

On the other hand, the best solution might simply be an update to Steam and Iron extending to 1950 that incorporated all the improvements of RTW except the introduction of aircraft. The game would come with an "historical option" that limited players only to the actual ships each nation possessed in the game year chosen, and a "hypothetical option" that allowed the player to design and construct realistic ships for his navy based on the technology and weaponry available in the selected game year, while the AI would populate potential enemy navies.

[nimrod]

Zoomar,

Understood and I agree with what you wrote. Although I'm not sure how well reduced research and or slow aircraft development always works - nws-online.proboards.com/thread/5395/reduced-research-rate-work. Hawkeye noted that with 10% research and slow aircraft development that in 1938 he had 8 CVLs and that "And aircraft _completely_ dominate the Mediterranean."

With mid tier countries I like my CV and CVLs outside of the lack of airborne recon at the start of a battle. Having wrote that I would appreciate the option to turn AC off when playing AH and or Russia with historical resources - it isn't a strong desire, but I think I would use it while playing them. I also could see myself doing a lot of late game testing of SSM, depending on how they are introduced. And I can easily see enemy air-power being a hindrance when I'm trying to learn a new mechanic and develop suitable tactics.

To expand on my previous post - I find aviation to be over-powering mid to late game but also clunky to use at times. For example, I believe, tossing a CV or CVL into a battle moves the starting fleet positions further apart depending on AC range. If this is true, a CVL with a small contingent of AC and lack of land based support creates an conundrum of searching for the enemy vs. holding back the AC for a strike. This is the sort of clunkiness I am writing about, the reduced value of legacy ships due to longer starting distances coupled with the lack of early game recon - makes for a lot of ships passing each other in the night. I had a surprise attack as Japan which ended before I could launch an air strike or get my surface ships into gun range due to starting distance, light conditions and 500 battle run time.

To restate - for navies with small budgets it disincentives me from building CV and CVLs as they decrease the value of my other ships which often can't get into gunnery range when started far from the enemy fleet, and I also have issues fielding sufficient carrier air-power to carry the day at the longer engagement ranges. Additionally with some of the issues in getting land based AC into battle, I see AH and Russia as being a bit too much at the mercy of other countries air-power which can't reliably be countered by there own land or at sea based AC. Yes this is part of the fun / challenge of playing those countries but there are times when their geographic position, tech and funding levels are enough of a challenge. Additionally playing various country mods, I'm thinking Sweden and possibly the Dutch, could be thrown into the mix here as well.

[flying fish]

My experience with the "slow aircraft development" was that it operated strangely within the game producing unexpected and illogical results. I can't recall how it "didn't" work in detail, only that I didn't like it. I'm a U.S. Navy vet, and have had a lifelong love of surface ships, especially battleships and battlecruisers. Aircraft Carriers ended the battleship era, and I'm not all that fond of them for it. RTW2 is ok, but the screams of diving planes and reports of unseen enemy ships being hit is like listening to a radio show. For my tastes, it is very unfulfilling. I like RTW, but I'd like to see it updated with some of the improvements seen in RTW2. Since RTW2 came out, it seems that RTW has been completely forgotten for improvements or continued development. Not everyone is carrier crazy.

Or, how about a world where only airships were developed? That would provide a sort of in between universe where some of the fantasy ideas for airships could be expanded on, plus they would not come to dominate sea warfare as aircraft have done. I'd just really like to see NWS develop a game where, once again, dreadnoughts ruled the waves well into the 20th century instead of dodging bombs and torpedoes. Same with subs. I hate it when a heavy ship that I have designed and built is sunk by a submarine right after it is completed.

[Warspite]

Oct 5, 2020 6:16:46 GMT -6 alexrodgersaf said:

What do people think about an option that takes aviation out of the game.

Buy RTW I ?

[sittingduck]

Oct 25, 2020 18:12:24 GMT -6 Warspite said:

Oct 5, 2020 6:16:46 GMT -6 alexrodgersaf said:

What do people think about an option that takes aviation out of the game.

Buy RTW I ?

Ah, were it so simple...
I did a quick count of Updates and changes in RTW2: of the approximately 397 changes/improvements to date, approximately 214 did not include aircraft and associated carriers, bases, AA, SAM, etc. I could be wrong on the exact numbers but the point is that there have been many playability changes made in RTW2 that (to my knowledge) have not been applied to RTW1. Going back to RTW1 is indeed an option, but leaving so many improvements would be bittersweet indeed.

[bbdb]

I'd be up for a mod that just locks all aircraft bases on reserve status. Especially if it's save-game compatible. Then I could just activate or deactivate the mod based on whether I'm in the mood for my naval engagements to be dominated by... well, ships (to include CVs), or whether I'm in the mood for the realism of airports dictating the battlespace.

Leaving airship bases untouched in such a mod would retain a representation of scouting planes' recon contribution. Although, since airships are at least semantically ships..... it would certainly be fun to arm them up and have them compete to win a recon advantage for their side. But that's neither here nor there, haha.

[seawolf]

Oct 29, 2020 18:25:21 GMT -6 bbdb said:

I'd be up for a mod that just locks all aircraft bases on reserve status. Especially if it's save-game compatible. Then I could just activate or deactivate the mod based on whether I'm in the mood for my naval engagements to be dominated by... well, ships (to include CVs), or whether I'm in the mood for the realism of airports dictating the battlespace.

Leaving airship bases untouched in such a mod would retain a representation of scouting planes' recon contribution. Although, since airships are at least semantically ships..... it would certainly be fun to arm them up and have them compete to win a recon advantage for their side. But that's neither here nor there, haha.

I've got an idea- anybody got an active save in an era with lots of airbases?  I need to test it and don't want to play through a whole game first.

If I disable the flight decks of the AI airbase template it might stop them from launching aircraft in battle

[gurudennis]

I would love to have this option without resorting to playing RTW1.