|
Post by mikebrough on Jan 12, 2016 12:07:36 GMT -6
Voting is open for Grogheads Readers Choice awards, and RtW is nominated in two categories. If you haven't already, go give it a vote! grogheads.com/?p=9707Thanks, C. Votes cast.
|
|
|
Post by mikebrough on Dec 17, 2015 5:35:18 GMT -6
Are you sure, JF? I'm sure I've seen reloads - taking 30 minutes or so. But that might just be me interpreting a little.
|
|
|
Post by mikebrough on Oct 24, 2015 2:29:56 GMT -6
decourcy2, what are the problems of deep well resonant cavities? And what are 'deep well resonant cavities' in the first place? I tried googling the term but didn't come up with anything.
I'm guessing it's the top-to-bottom structure from cupola down to the foundations and I could guess that the problems are related to a hole being punched through the ship's structure but I'm curious as to whether there's any literature on the subject.
|
|
|
Niggle
Oct 17, 2015 1:56:22 GMT -6
Post by mikebrough on Oct 17, 2015 1:56:22 GMT -6
A third niggle is concluding a peace where you've won territorial concessions, only to find you either can't afford any of them or the enemy doesn't have anything to concede.
In the former case, I'd like a couple of ships, instead. In the latter, I'd like the head of state's most beautiful daughter to add to my harem!
|
|
|
Niggle
Oct 17, 2015 1:44:00 GMT -6
Post by mikebrough on Oct 17, 2015 1:44:00 GMT -6
A second niggle is that the enemy can decline a bombardment mission when he's the defender. So, for the loss of 25 or 30 points, he can avoid a 2000 or 3000 point bombardment loss.
Should the enemy really be allowed to decline?
|
|
|
Niggle
Oct 17, 2015 1:40:53 GMT -6
Post by mikebrough on Oct 17, 2015 1:40:53 GMT -6
I've just been involved in a significant battle where I sank two Russian pre-dreads without loss, only to see that I'd lost the overall action on points due to an 'off-map' action in which one of my battle-cruisers was sunk. The BC squadron was always under AI control and a hundred miles away from the action under my control.
While I'm annoyed at the loss of the battle due to 'circumstances beyond my control', I'd love to see a log of the overall action to let me see what actually went on.
Is there such a log created somewhere?
|
|
|
Post by mikebrough on Oct 10, 2015 10:13:15 GMT -6
Would be cool if there were someplace in the build menu where we could attach short design notes to remind us of the various roles we might have for a particular design. For example if I want to design a specific cruiser as a raider as opposed to a fleet scout type, if there were a short note under the ship class name that said (Raider) or something that might make it easier to remember what sort of ships I am in the process of building and for what purposes. Good idea.
|
|
|
Post by mikebrough on Oct 6, 2015 0:48:35 GMT -6
The reason for this appears to be sharp increase in machinery size needed to move the extra weight around. It feels somewhat odd that it requires 2x the horsepower (and with it, the weight) to move a ship 1.5x heavier, but then I didn't do any research for this. Maybe that's how it works. Although this reminds me, there's some weirdness happening with visualization of the low end ship sizes -- e.g. the shape for a 5000 tons CL is drawn larger than the shape of 5000 tons CA. It's even more pronounced with 7.500 tons CL vs 7500 tons CA -- the former's hull is huge, while 7500 tons CA is drawn no larger than 5000 tons one. That might make sense, tmp. A light cruiser doesn't carry as much (really heavy) armour as a CA thus you get a bigger hull for the same displacement. It would be an interesting experiment to stretch the game's definition of a 7900 ton CL with no armour and an 8000 CA with 3 or 4-inch armour to see what the silhouettes look like.
|
|
|
Post by mikebrough on Oct 3, 2015 1:18:58 GMT -6
I'm also interested in WHEN the modifiers kick in and how long they last for. I think the pop-up shows that the modifiers kick in at the end of the 12 months of training but does they disappear immediately if you don't keep the training going?
|
|
|
Post by mikebrough on Sept 17, 2015 11:13:45 GMT -6
I'm finding that my ships, from CLs to BCs, are being hit at medium-to-long range even when travelling above 30 knots. Tends to happen from the early 20s 'onwards. Is that realistic or historic?
|
|
|
Post by mikebrough on Sept 13, 2015 1:27:04 GMT -6
HMS Rodney hit the Bismarck with a 24.5" torpedo fired from a submerged mount during WW2 - that is the only hit against a BB by a torpedo fired by another BB that I am aware of, so it was obviously a pretty rare event.
HMS Rodney fired a total of 12 torpedoes at the Bismark, only one hit. So not only was it rare it was rather ineffective as well. To be fair, an 8% hit rate is better than they tended to manage with the guns.
|
|
|
Post by mikebrough on Sept 2, 2015 0:41:10 GMT -6
I am sorry, continuing on after 1950 would possibly lead to a number of errors or strange values in the game. RTW was originally intended to end after 1925, but the option to continue was added as a result of player requests, but even that is stretching things. If gameplay/balance was disregarded, would the game itself work? Even if everyone was rocking in 52,000 displacement 18 inch ships. Or would there be actual errors? I started getting assertion errors round about 1935. I could click past them but there were probably around 15 per turn - I think there was one for each research category.
|
|
|
Post by mikebrough on Aug 20, 2015 0:11:39 GMT -6
Something like HMS Abdiel (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Abdiel_(M39)) would be nice.
|
|
|
Post by mikebrough on Aug 15, 2015 8:41:41 GMT -6
I've been assigned a bombardment mission with two cruisers whose gun range is too short to reach over the minefield. I think it was against Colon - I'm Germany. That has been adjusted in 1.1, but since there is some randomization involved it can still happen. Sometimes there might also be low visibility that prevents a bombardment target being seen. In those cases, just hunt around and you will likely find merchants and patrol boats to sink instead that will let you win the scenario. That's exactly what I did. A fine game.
|
|
|
Post by mikebrough on Aug 15, 2015 5:41:02 GMT -6
The intention of the force selection routines is to mostly create battles between similar types of ships with more or less equal forces, subject to ship availability of course. But there is also some randomization with the intention to sometimes create unequal battles. The force selection for scenarios works exactly the same for the player and the AI. Any imbalances or ships left at home should hit both sides to the same extent. FW if the game generates roughly balanced scenarios, what's the point of building high ship numbers or of putting them into zones? If I put a BB, BC and 4 CAs into an area and the enemy only has 4 CAs, my BB and BC will be useless and will seldom get into a fight. Is that a correct summary?
|
|