|
Post by buttons on Nov 20, 2017 12:45:19 GMT -6
Is there any chance we can get a "Launch a coup" button added to RtW-2? In my current game as Japan, I've fought two wars with Germany. During the first, I got a popup message asking about a peace offer from Germany giving us some of their colonies. I said forget it, we can crush them, and the politicians immediately negotiate a compromise peace with no border changes. During the second war, the same "please stop sinking our ships and we'll give you some colonies" message popped up. Not trusting the sake-addled delicate geniuses of the foreign ministry, I recommend accepting the offer. So what do they do? Negotiate another compromise peace with no border changes. Aaaaagghh. Would the army go along with a coup? They're idiots. The Germans of course have their colony at Tsingtau, which we can practically hit with a rock thrown from Korea. So when the army ask for more resources for an offensive, do they invade Tsingtau? No, they invade the Caroline Islands. They must have used the extra money to charter Cunard to ferry them there, because I certainly wouldn't have been on board with the idea. Rant ends. We now return you to your regularly scheduled quest for maritime domination. While I wouldn't want anything as overt as a coup button I do like the idea of being able to make political and army decisions with some penalties for overstepping your bounds. Essentially you could come forward with proposing that the army invade a specific colony, launch an offensive, cease offensive actions, that the government attempt to fund rebels, or suggest that the government begin sounding out the opposition for peace talks. Depending on how the war is going certain suggestions may have worse impacts on your prestige, if you propose peace talks too early in the war you are defeatist or cowardly, if you propose peace talks while winning massively you are suggesting letting them off easy, if you propose an army offensive just after a military disaster you are suggesting sending more men into the slaughter, and if you suggest the army halt all offensive actions for the time being (increasing your budget) you are promoting a lack of offensive spirit within the army.
|
|
|
Post by ddg on Nov 20, 2017 15:26:03 GMT -6
A tiny quality of life thing for me: Assuming RTW2 uses the same engine as RTW, I'd appreciate the map zoom being slightly less sensitive to the mouse wheel. At the moment it takes me only two tics to go from max zoomed out to a single zone filling the window, which is about as zoomed in as I ever need to be.
|
|
|
Post by HolyDragoon on Nov 20, 2017 15:49:57 GMT -6
I have some two cents to add. I tried to stream RTW for a bit as an experiment... while recording allows me to edit things in post-production, I couldn't get RTW working for me. Any change of tweaking settings and design to make it more streaming-friendly?
|
|
|
Post by generalvikus on Nov 25, 2017 22:47:34 GMT -6
I'm not sure if this has been bought up or considered by the devs yet, but I think that the importance of aircraft as the decisive naval weapon of this time period warrants a considerable focus on the customisation of aircraft, since customisation is at the heart of the game.
At the very least, I think it would be appropriate to customise the balance of fighters, dive bombers, scouts and torpedo bombers in their carrier air wings as the primary means of customising the carriers themselves.
Furthermore, a simple kind of aircraft customisation - perhaps similar to the Hearts of Iron 4 system, by which a certain number of points can be used to upgrade a base design while incurring certain trade-offs, is the best way to go.
Of course, designing aircraft in the same manner that ships are designed would be ideal, but of course this would entail a great deal more effort.
|
|
|
Post by garrisonchisholm on Nov 26, 2017 8:37:24 GMT -6
Aircraft have been brought up, including the depths to which one might best go in developing them considering this is a naval game (stock/historical, simple, or complex?), but of course we have as yet no inclination as to which way things will go. It even as yet may be unclear to the developers.
Given Aircraft Carriers are going to be treated, and that weight/performance/size are critical to the time period, as well as timely acquisition of effective designs, I suspect we will have a *modicum* of input, but little more than that. We have to take the long 'wait and see' on this one I think.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Nov 26, 2017 15:13:32 GMT -6
Aircraft have been brought up, including the depths to which one might best go in developing them considering this is a naval game (stock/historical, simple, or complex?), but of course we have as yet no inclination as to which way things will go. It even as yet may be unclear to the developers. Given Aircraft Carriers are going to be treated, and that weight/performance/size are critical to the time period, as well as timely acquisition of effective designs, I suspect we will have a *modicum* of input, but little more than that. We have to take the long 'wait and see' on this one I think. I don't think it has to be that complex. You first stipulate the kind of aircraft you want; a fighter, dive bomber or torpedo/level bomber. You now provide requirements: The four most important are combat radius, armament, level speed and maximum altitude. You could include number of crews, but a dive bomber generally had two and a torpedo/level had two or three. You could include seaplanes and flying boats and possibly float planes with the same specifications. I don't think you have to include folding wings, but if you do then you can put aircraft on the deck and in the hangar. The size of the carrier will dictate the number of aircraft that you can carry. As far as the composition of the squadrons, you just choose the number of aircraft in each squadron for each type, and that is it. You don't have to complicate this. The complex portion will be the research area. But I am certain that the team has already worked out that strategy.
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Nov 26, 2017 16:32:20 GMT -6
Turn Rate, and survivability are also very important attributes, you then get a mass and deck footprint.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Nov 26, 2017 17:48:45 GMT -6
Turn Rate, and survivability are also very important attributes, you then get a mass and deck footprint. This is an IgoUgo game, the details for aircraft are not necessarily that important in the whole scheme of things. I would not put much emphasis or try to provide specifications for turning radius. There are too many factors that affect turn radius that you, as a designer cannot control. It is just far too complex to deal with in a game that isn't a flight simulator. As to survivability, you just assign a numeric value to any aircraft based on specifications. For maneuverability, You could provide a numeric value like zero is a bomber and five is a biplane fighter and then work from there. It would be adequate for this game. The most important factors in this game of carrier warfare is A. Scouting effectiveness B. Net Combat Power. In carrier warfare, the side that finds the enemy first, launches the quickest, will win three out of four times. We proved that theory in the first four naval battles of the war in Pacific. Even at Santa Cruz, where the Japanese launched first, it was the failure by the Fleet commander to understand the position and launch that caused the problem. Both sides struck simultaneously.
|
|
|
Post by stratos on Dec 4, 2017 5:17:41 GMT -6
I hope to have certain degree of customization for aircraft, heavier designs or lighter ones with the advantages/disavantatges in range and fighting habilities, folding wings, seaplane designs, etc... Having options to train crew more or have more of them... It's a lot of options that will be great to have.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on Dec 6, 2017 13:07:55 GMT -6
I have some suggestion for RtW-2:
1. editor for ships design used by AI reason: allow players easily add their design to increase challange of the game as historical classes has disadvantage against: a) players hindsigh b) effectivity of player to build ships best suit the rules of the game
2. ship organization moving ships in group could be better there could be specialized ships for the task (as AA cruisers etc.)
3. solve the issue that the game prefers quality from quantity as in battles the side which has quantity advantage usually doesnt deploy all forces thus smaller but better capital ships get high advantage over smaller, more economically but middle quality ships
|
|
|
Post by cv10 on Dec 9, 2017 20:56:06 GMT -6
Since Carriers are going to be in the game, I think that it might be cool to have a few "carrier-centric" missions. Perhaps reaching a certain position to launch a raid on an enemy installation ala Operation Outflank (Combined name for Op. Robson, Lentil, Meridian I, and Meridian II), with the attendant risk that enemy forces might be in a position to strike back.
|
|
|
Post by buttons on Dec 11, 2017 23:51:18 GMT -6
Since Carriers are going to be in the game, I think that it might be cool to have a few "carrier-centric" missions. Perhaps reaching a certain position to launch a raid on an enemy installation ala Operation Outflank (Combined name for Op. Robson, Lentil, Meridian I, and Meridian II), with the attendant risk that enemy forces might be in a position to strike back. I think in general missions should be more purposeful, perhaps they could even add monitors as a class for shore bombardment missions. For example *If you are blockaded your odds of a fleet battle (in order to break the blockade) increase, if you are blockading the enemy refusing a fleet battle breaks the blockade for a few turns *If you get the army offensive event and choose to launch the offensive you can get more shore bombardment missions leading up to it, with your success increasing the odds of the offensive turning out well In addition to this they could add some new mission types particularly related to the more skirmishing areas of warfare *Have some destroyers and minesweepers sweep a minefield, the enemy will obviously try to intercept your forces with their own *Assisted naval landing, a lot like convoy defence except the transports have a specific objective they have to reach instead of defending them for a set time as they slowly mosey forwards *Shell an enemy port city, potentially setting back enemy ship construction or even outright destroying smaller enemy ships under construction or being repaired
|
|
sigma
New Member
Posts: 1
|
Post by sigma on Dec 16, 2017 5:26:23 GMT -6
Some suggestions, a few have probably been mentioned already but 80+ pages is a lot to scan over:
*An aircraft designer. I know this is a ship game but since this game will cover the WW2 era I don't think abstractions like with submarines will work well with aircraft. Maybe things like the ASW and scouting aircraft can be abstracted since they were never meant for major combat roles. Things like bombers, attack aircraft and fighters I just couldn't see being simplified as easily though. The designer could have things like plane type, size of the plane, body design, wing length, wing type, plane levels (monoplane, bi-plane, triplane, quadruplane), engine type and number of engines, propeller type, gun type and number of guns, bomb/torpedo loadout, gunners and turret gun type and number of guns, and checkboxes for things like radar, folding wings, flying boat, bomb bays, and pressurized cockpits.
*Be able to build and upgrade airbases at your possessions on the map. The larger the airbase the more planes it can hold, and field. A large bomber isn't going to be able to take off from a small landing strip after all.
*The ability to be able to edit how many AI countries are in a game so it's not limited to 6.
*The major sea powers being able to shift depending on domestic events and wars. Like how after WW1 Germany's fleet was stripped and their economy collapsed, Austria-Hungary ceased existing, Britain's fleet waned in the interwar years and the rise of the US and Japanese navies.
*Amphibious assault missions. You're given a limited amount of tactical turns to have your ships cover for landing craft as they approach an enemy possession. Having to first take out any potential enemy ships, mine sweeping, and firing upon and bombing the coastal artillery all to try and minimize losses as the landing craft approach the shore. A successful landing starts off an event chain after the battle to take the possession, which can be successful or fail.
|
|
|
Post by Fredrik W on Dec 16, 2017 6:36:24 GMT -6
Some suggestions, a few have probably been mentioned already but 80+ pages is a lot to scan over: *An aircraft designer. I know this is a ship game but since this game will cover the WW2 era I don't think abstractions like with submarines will work well with aircraft. Maybe things like the ASW and scouting aircraft can be abstracted since they were never meant for major combat roles. Things like bombers, attack aircraft and fighters I just couldn't see being simplified as easily though. The designer could have things like plane type, size of the plane, body design, wing length, wing type, plane levels (monoplane, bi-plane, triplane, quadruplane), engine type and number of engines, propeller type, gun type and number of guns, bomb/torpedo loadout, gunners and turret gun type and number of guns, and checkboxes for things like radar, folding wings, flying boat, bomb bays, and pressurized cockpits. *Be able to build and upgrade airbases at your possessions on the map. The larger the airbase the more planes it can hold, and field. A large bomber isn't going to be able to take off from a small landing strip after all. *The ability to be able to edit how many AI countries are in a game so it's not limited to 6. *The major sea powers being able to shift depending on domestic events and wars. Like how after WW1 Germany's fleet was stripped and their economy collapsed, Austria-Hungary ceased existing, Britain's fleet waned in the interwar years and the rise of the US and Japanese navies. *Amphibious assault missions. You're given a limited amount of tactical turns to have your ships cover for landing craft as they approach an enemy possession. Having to first take out any potential enemy ships, mine sweeping, and firing upon and bombing the coastal artillery all to try and minimize losses as the landing craft approach the shore. A successful landing starts off an event chain after the battle to take the possession, which can be successful or fail. Thanks for the suggestions!
We are still not decided on the level of detail in aircraft design. Having too many factors in might be overdoing it for a naval game.
Airbase building and upgrading will be in.
As for the nations in the game, changing those during the course of a game will be complicated and most likely not a feature. The nations in RTW2 (if starting in 1920) will be USA, Britain, Italy, Japan, France, Germany and the Soviet Union. As in RTW, those can be modded, but 6 AI nations will be the limit.
|
|
|
Post by garrisonchisholm on Dec 16, 2017 10:39:43 GMT -6
@fredrik W Will there be no transition from RTW 1 to 2 then, i.e., in RTW 2 you will not be able to start with the early pre-dreadnoughts?
If this is a design decision for whatever reasons are apparent to the team, perhaps consider a function where you could export your 1920 RTW 1 fleet into a new start in 1920 for RTW2? I could see much request for this, if it were possible. The way the player faces change is part of the great fun, and the change from Pre-to-Dred is just as exciting as Dred-to-Air. I would love to tackle both in one game.
|
|