|
Post by bcoopactual on Jun 6, 2019 9:49:26 GMT -6
Yes, it's the last appendix in the manual. It's about 7-8 short pages worth of changes so a little long to summarize in a single post.
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on Jun 6, 2019 9:40:33 GMT -6
LOL, I had to modify my available funds in the game save file just to develop the design. Germany with the Versaille treaty in place is in a hole. Anyway, no, I couldn't build it in 1920 with the Washington treaty in effect. I made a new game with Versaille but without Washington using the same ship file copied over and I had no problem building them (again, that required cheating to have enough funds to do it that early in the game for Germany but yes I started construction on two of them.)
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on Jun 6, 2019 9:07:40 GMT -6
In 1.03, playing as Germany I tried to build a CA with 11" guns around 1908 but it still wanted to classify it as a B. Does the 11" allowance only apply in a later period? The patch note for the Deutschlands didn't state if it applied at a specific year or not. It's quite possible that it changes based on the game year. 11 inch guns would have been considered capital ship armament in the 1908 time frame.
Having done a little testing, I designed this in a 1920 start game (v. 1.03) with the Versaille and Washington treaties in effect and it considered it legal for a CA. It's pretty close to the historic panzerschiffe with the exception of diesel engines for ships which Germany doesn't have researched yet in-game (Jan 1920).
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on Jun 5, 2019 8:08:21 GMT -6
The current national dock size limit is a line near the beginning of each nations section of the gamesave#.bcs file. You could manually adjust that. I don't know how that would affect a game if the nation was already building a ship larger than the new lower limit. But that nation can just start raising their limit again through the normal means of investment and private shipbuilding events so you would have to repeat the manual editing. To my knowledge there is no way to permanently cap tonnage at a lower limit (without using the treaty mechanism which only works for peacetime and affects everyone).
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on Jun 5, 2019 7:52:40 GMT -6
Try setting the Tensions= lines in RTWGame#.bcs to 50. If that doesn't work, set it to 12 or higher and end turn. I always did the latter on the Tension= line for the applicable nation I wanted to start the war with if I was testing something. So in seawolf 's case I would do that for all of the AI nations in the game. What does the tension= line in the player's nation area do, if anything? By the way seawolf , how can you be seawolf and not have any submarines? As a former submariner I think that would be disqualifying or something. I'm only joking of course.
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on Jun 5, 2019 7:27:45 GMT -6
If your last structural points are lost due to an active fire on board the ship is forced to be abandoned. You will see a message in the ship's log (ship abandoned due to uncontrollable fires) to that effect. The result is the same as if the ship sank. There is no mechanism in-game for reboarding the ship as happened with USS Yorktown at Midway. USS Lexington (CV-2) and USS Hornet (CV-8) as well as Akagi, Kaga and Soryu are all good examples as well. Ships that had to be abandoned but did not have enough damage/flooding below the waterline to sink the ship outright. You don't have to actually launch torpedoes in-game to scuttle those ships affected, I presume it is assumed to happen off-screen after the scenario ends.
I'm not sure if the ship has to be abandoned if all structural points are lost due to gunfire but no fires are active on board. Not sure how likely that is to happen either.
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on Jun 1, 2019 18:38:44 GMT -6
[Edit - I was typing this while aeson posted so go with his post for SAP penetration since it comes from the developers.] No specific numbers are given for shell damage. It's just general thumbrules. Shell damage is proportional to caliber. For the same tech level and type of shell a larger caliber shell will always do more damage than a smaller caliber shell if they both penetrate and explode. Gun quality has no effect on shell damage other than determining whether the shell fully penetrates or not. Gun quality affects range and penetration (and indirectly accuracy in some cases). There is a general improvement in damage as tech level goes up but the specifics are unknown. I don't know if it's the same percentage each time or not (but I doubt it). Obviously AP shells do the least damage but have the greatest penetration and HE shells are the opposite. But I don't know specific numbers. You can probably use historical examples and compare bursting charges to get an idea. The development team has done their homework so they are familiar with those kinds of details although being a game you can't expect they got it exactly equivalent to historical examples or even which shells they used to compare. Information on SAP is pretty scarce online. The one article I saw that talked about penetration was about the SAP shells for Bismarck. It said they had about 3/4 the penetration capability of the full AP shell. So somewhere between 70-80% is a good guess. Assuming the HE L/4,5 base fuze shell listed for the 38cm SK C/34 ( Bismarck-class) on the navweaps sight is the SAP variant then the bursting charge for that is approximately 72 lb compared to roughly 41 lbs for the AP shell. So expect damage to be a little less than double for the SAP shell compared to the AP. For reference, the bursting charge for the nose fuse HE shells was about twice again the SAP shell at 141.5 lbs. So without checking, I couldn't tell you what the ratio was for American, British or Japanese shells or even if they historically used SAP but it's probably not a bad assumption to make that in-game SAP shells do about twice the damage of an AP shell and HE shells do about twice the damage of an SAP shell (and about 4x the damage of an AP). Others can chime in if they have seen better or more accurate numbers confirmed by the developers. Sorry I can't give you more specifics.
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on May 30, 2019 6:42:01 GMT -6
Something for a bit down the line but the patchwork repair of USS Yorktown prior to the battle of Midway was mentioned in a recent thread and I thought it would be an engaging feature if it could be added to the game.
Have a ship that has been damaged that would normally require several months of repair and designate it for emergency repairs to make it available for the next turn. The ship would be available for use the next turn but would start any scenario missing about 15-20% of its structure and float points to represent that only the most critical repairs and replacements had been made to get it back into the fight.
It provides the opportunity for a great story much like the historical Yorktown.
Obviously there would have to be limitations to prevent abuse or commonplace use that lessens the impact. Possible limits for consideration: -It would be expensive. -It might require a minimum level of base capacity simulating the needed infrastructure. -Perhaps no other ships in that area get credit for repair time that month because the shipyard workers were all sent to concentrate on the designated ship. -Could be performed on only one ship at a time and maybe have a cooldown time. It required rolling blackouts in Honolulu to support the electrical needs of the repair crews. Not something a civilian populace would be happy about occurring repeatedly.
It would be helpful from a player engagement and storytelling perspective if the game forced a battle in that ocean area the next turn and included the ship. After all, why go to those extreme lengths to get the ship ready if there isn't an impending operation for it. That could be problematic to program of course.
There would eventually be the need for a full repair and refit to restore the ship to 100% operating condition so something similar to a blank refit mechanism would be required to clear the damage to the float and structure points.
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on May 30, 2019 6:21:13 GMT -6
Not sure why you brought up Yorktown in the first place but you are right on your main point, it probably doesn't make sense that it would take the same amount of time to restructure unarmored compartments on a destroyer that it would to do on the armored magazine of a battleship. I only say probably because I don't know of any historical examples for reference.
It's most likely the case that the developer had a limited amount of time to work on this feature so he made a one size fits all solution and moved on to more important things. Add the idea to the suggestion sub-folder. Not saying it would be a priority but over the lifetime of RTW1 several changes were made specifically because they were requested by the players. This one will hopefully be doable as well.
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on May 30, 2019 2:33:14 GMT -6
What do you mean by the same "oof"?
It's certainly possible that size and gun caliber are taken into account by the program. I just don't see any objective evidence of it. In a 1920 test game my legacy fleet had BB and BC that were 10,000 tons different in displacement within the same class. The smaller BB with 12 inch main guns was worth the same number of points as the larger BB with 14 inch main guns (14 points). Same with the two BC, 11 inch guns on the smaller and 12 inch on the larger (12).
Interestingly in the 1920 start CA were only worth 5 points each and B worth only 4. Might be due to age, they (CA and B) were all over 10 years old. Speed might be used as a factor as well for the B to have dropped below the CA.
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on May 29, 2019 12:35:07 GMT -6
My favorite feature is that 6 inch stern chaser. Like we have fifteen 18 inch guns on this monstrosity but even so we might find ourselves being pursued by someone so we need that backup.
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on May 29, 2019 9:28:03 GMT -6
That's excellent work bry7x7x7 . Now take those plans, box them up in a crate and store them next to the one labeled ARMY INTEL 9906753.
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on May 29, 2019 9:01:36 GMT -6
Know the odds for firing the invasion or winning it?
I don't believe that 4:1 odds provides a 100% chance of firing. My impression reading the manual is that the odds at 4:1 are very good (guessing somewhere around 80-90%) but it's possible that you could get a bad RNG "roll" and so it may take the next turn or the next, etc. to get under the percentage and fire the actual invasion as the game makes a number check every turn.
Once the invasion is started successfully, you don't have to maintain 4:1 odds for every turn that fighting is taking place although the better your ratio the better your odds of the invasion succeeding and not continuing to the next turn or failing. That chance will also be affected by the results of any battle in support of land combat that occured that turn.
As far as where the 4:1 ratio comes from it's the weighted sum of the number of ships in that particular ocean area. Each ship of a class is worth a certain amount of points. In a 1900 test game the B were worth 9, CA worth 6, CL worth 4 and DD worth 1. BB and BC will be worth more than B. No idea about strength numbers for CV and CVL yet. So 4 B (36 pts) plus 2 CA (12 pts) plus 12 DD (12 pts) would be a fleet strength of 60 for example. As far as I know, the individual tonnage of the ships doesn't matter just the number in each class so a small CL gives the same points as a large CL. I haven't tested that through to the late game with much larger ships in each class yet though.
It's similar to how the blockade mechanic is calculated except there is a national modifier for some nations to account for geographic advantage/disadvantage when it comes to blockade.
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on May 28, 2019 17:27:16 GMT -6
The only possibly related thing I know is that you can get 12 VP of territory in a peace deal now. If the max number is the same for invasions (I somehow think it is), then you can now invade BC. i got a 20 point peace deal against the Russians playing Japan - surprising, but a welcome surprise 20 points opens up almost the entire map outside of home areas. I haven't clicked on every one but so far the only territories I've found worth more than that is India (40) and South Africa (25). That's a big deal. alsadius , I'm sure that was not intended. If 20 is the max points you can take in a peace treaty it is probably the same limit for invasions. Barring developer confirmation, one way to check would be to try to invade either South Africa or India. If it lets you do the preps for those two territories but the invasion doesn't fire then there may be a bug. Or just as likely one of our assumptions is wrong.
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on May 28, 2019 7:00:03 GMT -6
British Columbia's point value is 12. In RTW1 I thought you couldn't invade any territory whose point value exceeded 10. Has that changed in RTW2? I couldn't find anything in the manual.
|
|