|
Post by williammiller on Oct 6, 2021 9:11:35 GMT -6
The Developer Diary for the had these holes as well, with longer periods of silence. Even if tragedy didn't strike, which I certainly hope, there could be simply mundane legwork to do during development, balancing, boring code to write, bugfixing, ect. My take on the news was basically, that they were posted as they happened and internal versions were reselased. Right now the internal work on the Expansion is mainly bug fixes and adjustments/tweaking of stuff that has already been added. In general I post stuff that I think players would find interesting, i.e. new features or major changes, so I don't post mundane stuff like mere bug fixes or adjustments/tweaks to the added stuff (especially when such tweaks are likely not final). A bit of a teaser, however, to tide folks over: I am currently working on a mini-project that I call "The Expansion Catalog", which is a 'catalog-like' document showing what the RTW2 Expansion will contain/include. This will be the most complete document we have published so far concerning Expansion details, so it should answer most questions about the Expansion as well as give a much better indication of exactly what it will be like. I have no exact ETA for it, but of course when it is ready for release it will be posted here!
|
|
|
Post by williammiller on Sept 30, 2021 13:22:36 GMT -6
I have recovered the save game in question, and will examine it to see what is going on, thanks.
|
|
|
Post by williammiller on Sept 30, 2021 8:51:13 GMT -6
Changes to this entire area has and is happening with the Expansion work, so stay tuned for those notes as we get things closer to final.
|
|
|
Post by williammiller on Sept 30, 2021 8:48:18 GMT -6
"we will have some news that relates to SAS coming out soon, so please stay tuned for that" Have been quietly watching this since I saw this. I'm hoping for a revival of SAS (there's no harm in hoping, right)? Cant officially say anything else at this time, but I think you will be pleasantly surprised
|
|
|
Post by williammiller on Sept 30, 2021 8:46:16 GMT -6
The formation and inclusion logic for divisions and battlegroups are changing with work on the Expansion, so some/much of what you are reporting will likely be moot later on TBH.
Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by williammiller on Sept 29, 2021 20:39:04 GMT -6
Wow, that is huge - too big to post here on the forums. Could post it to a cloud or file-sharing service, and then post the link here?
|
|
|
Post by williammiller on Sept 29, 2021 9:47:38 GMT -6
Hello azazel - That is a very odd bug - if you can post the save game for it that would help, thanks.
|
|
|
Post by williammiller on Sept 27, 2021 17:01:51 GMT -6
I haven't read anything from the thread but this just popped into my head. I hope it will make sense to ditch dive bombers and torpedo bombers for strike focused carriers at some point of this new timeline. This would probably finally allow carriers to be actual offensive ships as opposed to just keeping your surface forces from sinking instantly. If you can strike confidently with your fighter bombers, there could be moments where it actually makes sense to do it. That is actually a 'change-up' that can/will happen in the Expansion, generally around 1945-1950 or so IIRC.
|
|
|
Post by williammiller on Sept 27, 2021 16:59:43 GMT -6
I'll check it, thanks. I have noted that some apps (including RTW2) may have issues if a PC goes into sleep mode while it is active, which is why I generally disable that on my own machines.
|
|
|
Post by williammiller on Sept 25, 2021 9:57:40 GMT -6
Hello terrortyrant , welcome to the forums! Unfortunately we cannot help much if it involves custom nations, as we have no idea what was done with them nor how they might affect the core game. I have not seen this issue with the normal game, but I suspect you have an infinite loop somewhere that is causing the game to 'eat up' all the memory that it can allocate for the game (which is normally more than would ever be required for the game). All I can say is to go through your custom nations and double-check for errors or missing values. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by williammiller on Sept 22, 2021 9:20:18 GMT -6
More player control over such things is one goal of the Expansion, thanks brygun .
|
|
|
Post by williammiller on Sept 21, 2021 9:52:53 GMT -6
We can def confirm the issue - what sort of game start (size, etc) did you have if you recall? Also, I assume you are not using any mods?
Thanks again for the report!
|
|
|
Post by williammiller on Sept 21, 2021 9:22:56 GMT -6
Thanks for the report - will post this for internal evaluation.
|
|
|
Post by williammiller on Sept 21, 2021 9:19:47 GMT -6
Extreme range Does anybody build extreme range ships? They do not seem good value for money A 1900 medium range 9000 CA will cost 35000 but it will need to increase displacement up to 12500tm if we want it to have extreme range and its price tag will be over 45000 (30% higher). The smaller the ship the bigger the price increase: a medium range 3400tm CL will need to go up to 6400tm to have extreme range and its price tag will go up from 12500 to 22750 (80% more expensive!) And what do we get out of it? as per RTW2 manual, large range ships will perform better than others as raiders and raider hunters. I guess extreme range ships will perform marginally better than large range ships? But is this enough to justify the extra expenditure? I would suggest, to add a new feature to extreme range ships to make them more interesting: they will be able to move 2 areas per turn. That's it, it will be a more strategic rapid action force. It does not make sense that extreme range ships will take the same time to reach a far away destination as medium range battleships, which need to go into port for coaling much often. I think the game would be more acurate and open new posibilities for us. Long range cruisers did reach far away stations far faster than other warships, not because of their cruising speed but because they did not need to waste time going into ports so often to refuel Interesting suggestion - thanks.
|
|
|
Post by williammiller on Sept 18, 2021 16:27:47 GMT -6
Have considered something like this, but my worry is that some/many players might not be happy with a natural disaster almost entirely beyond their control altering the fate of their game.
|
|