|
|
Post by JagdFlanker on Jun 11, 2018 10:56:42 GMT -6
funny i play RtW exclusively at 10% research speed and as a personal rule i only manually build my dock-size to 16-18,000t, after which i'm at the mercy of Private shipbuilding expansions to build my docks for the rest of the game
surprisingly it works out great since at 10% it takes longer before you need to build bigger ships anyways, and even though i usually don't get much past 40,000t docks by the mid-late 1930's i don't find myself at much of disadvantage throughout the game
|
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Jun 11, 2018 12:00:42 GMT -6
funny i play RtW exclusively at 10% research speed and as a personal rule i only manually build my dock-size to 16-18,000t, after which i'm at the mercy of Private shipbuilding expansions to build my docks for the rest of the game
surprisingly it works out great since at 10% it takes longer before you need to build bigger ships anyways, and even though i usually don't get much past 40,000t docks by the mid-late 1930's i don't find myself at much of disadvantage throughout the game
I play almost exactly the same. I raise the research to 10% immediately and then by 1915, if I have 8 or 9 on many of my research areas, then I reduce it to 6%. I only build my docks up to a certain point, then no more. |
|
|
|
Post by JagdFlanker on Jun 11, 2018 13:35:54 GMT -6
I play almost exactly the same. I raise the research to 10% immediately and then by 1915, if I have 8 or 9 on many of my research areas, then I reduce it to 6%. I only build my docks up to a certain point, then no more.
i meant the research rate on the 'new game' screen - you don't hit level 8-9 until endgame if at all on 10% research rate lol
if you havn't tried it, try 10% research rate + varied technologies to randomize the tech more - the ship-building eras are stretched out and more incremental so you end up with some interesting builds like B's with triple turrets
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2018 9:03:46 GMT -6
Please allow us to make a side picture for each ship instead of each class.
|
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Jun 12, 2018 9:15:56 GMT -6
I play almost exactly the same. I raise the research to 10% immediately and then by 1915, if I have 8 or 9 on many of my research areas, then I reduce it to 6%. I only build my docks up to a certain point, then no more.
i meant the research rate on the 'new game' screen - you don't hit level 8-9 until endgame if at all on 10% research rate lol
if you havn't tried it, try 10% research rate + varied technologies to randomize the tech more - the ship-building eras are stretched out and more incremental so you end up with some interesting builds like B's with triple turrets
I think I've done that before, but I did set that rate in my new game as Japan, haven't noticed much difference but a few things are coming in early. |
|
|
|
Post by tbr on Jun 12, 2018 14:23:45 GMT -6
i meant the research rate on the 'new game' screen - you don't hit level 8-9 until endgame if at all on 10% research rate lol
if you havn't tried it, try 10% research rate + varied technologies to randomize the tech more - the ship-building eras are stretched out and more incremental so you end up with some interesting builds like B's with triple turrets
I think I've done that before, but I did set that rate in my new game as Japan, haven't noticed much difference but a few things are coming in early. Yes, that is because research speed is not just influenced by trhe research speed setting but also by the "original invention year" in the researchareas file. There is a malus for "early" research and a bonus for "late" research, so even at 10% research speed setting a tech that is 3 years overdue will unlock pretty quickly. For true sloooow research speed extralong games one needs to reset the year counter manually at the beginning of a new year in the save file, I have done a *10 game at 10% research speed (i.e. playing each year ten times before allowing e.g. December 1900 to be followed by January 1901 instead of another January 1900) and it was marvelous. Really would like that as an automatic option in addition to the research speed seeting (i.e. a "time multiplier" setting which resets each year X times to January before progressing to the next year, this would be the easiest way to extend game length in turns without other massive manipulation of game files).
|
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Jun 12, 2018 15:37:53 GMT -6
I think I've done that before, but I did set that rate in my new game as Japan, haven't noticed much difference but a few things are coming in early. Yes, that is because research speed is not just influenced by trhe research speed setting but also by the "original invention year" in the researchareas file. There is a malus for "early" research and a bonus for "late" research, so even at 10% research speed setting a tech that is 3 years overdue will unlock pretty quickly. For true sloooow research speed extralong games one needs to reset the year counter manually at the beginning of a new year in the save file, I have done a *10 game at 10% research speed (i.e. playing each year ten times before allowing e.g. December 1900 to be followed by January 1901 instead of another January 1900) and it was marvelous. Really would like that as an automatic option in addition to the research speed seeting (i.e. a "time multiplier" setting which resets each year X times to January before progressing to the next year, this would be the easiest way to extend game length in turns without other massive manipulation of game files).
Oh boy, more variables to play with. Hot dog. I believe that I am going to experiment with changing the research rate based on peace or war. During wartime, operations and maintenance will take a hefty part of the naval budget so that might be a way to get more realism. Will see. |
|
|
|
Post by noshurviverse on Jun 12, 2018 23:36:21 GMT -6
Speaking of research, I had a couple ideas I thought I'd toss out there.
-Maximal Research Priority: A step beyond the Low/Medium/High research priorities, Maximal would only be available in wartime, representing emergency resources being diverted to the area in question. Probably only a single area could be designated with this priority.
-Leaders Dictating Research: These could both be like the ones we have presently: "The Prime Minister has recently read a book extolling the virtues of airships. He requests that you give 'Aviation, lighter-than-air' maximum research priority" or perhaps in response to successful or disastrous battles "The President believes that our recent defeat was due to poor damage control. He demands that 'subdivision and damage control' be given maximum research priority".
|
|
|
|
Post by garrisonchisholm on Jun 13, 2018 17:28:08 GMT -6
Speaking of research, I had a couple ideas I thought I'd toss out there.
-Maximal Research Priority: A step beyond the Low/Medium/High research priorities, Maximal would only be available in wartime, representing emergency resources being diverted to the area in question. Probably only a single area could be designated with this priority.
-Leaders Dictating Research: These could both be like the ones we have presently: "The Prime Minister has recently read a book extolling the virtues of airships. He requests that you give 'Aviation, lighter-than-air' maximum research priority" or perhaps in response to successful or disastrous battles "The President believes that our recent defeat was due to poor damage control. He demands that 'subdivision and damage control' be given maximum research priority".
I think that sounds like a pretty good idea Noshurvi. I will raise this point in the team discussions. It seems quite doable. :] |
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Jun 14, 2018 14:58:14 GMT -6
I wanted to bring up an issue for carrier warfare that might be useful in the training area; that issue is fuel management techniques. I am talking about using the management of the throttle, and the fuel mixture control to reduce fuel consumption for long range missions. An aircraft's range is developed by; an efficient engines, clean aerodynamics and fuel management. The designer has control of the first two, but the deck crews have to keep the skin clean with no protruding rivets or anything else. The pilot has control of the last one. An example is Charles Lindberg's trip during the war to the SW Pacific to teach the pilots fuel management to gain extra range and TOT. The Imperial Japanese Naval Air Force did exactly the same thing for the attack on the Philippines from Formosa. Due to the attack on Pearl Harbor, there were not enough carriers to move close and launch the attack missions, so the pilots had to develop and practice fuel management techniques to fly from the Formosa air fields to the Philippines until an airfield could be secured. Much of this knowledge had already been developed in China, so that might be something else to add, experienced pilots will get longer ranges.
There are some variables that affect endurance. Altitude because it takes more power at higher altitude which reduces endurance. Weight means more power and a high angle of attack which increases drag. Lean out the engine fuel requirements during flight to increase endurance. Reduced flight time which also reduces fuel requirements so in carrier aviation, the closer you get, the less time in flight and less fuel. The way you perform a leaning out of the mixture is to reduce the mixture control until the engine is running a little rough, the increase the mixture control until you get a smooth running engine. This I widely known as "best economy". If you need to climb just increase the fuel mixture. Fuel mixture controls generally are near or attached to the throttle, many times on the left hand control shelf. This is where the A6M2 had it but the F4F had it on a multipurpose throttle control on the left hand side.
Just something to consider.
|
|
|
|
Post by Spaghet Shipwright on Jun 14, 2018 21:31:50 GMT -6
I like the idea of political pressure interfering with research, this would add another layer of variation to keep campaigns feeling unique.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2018 8:40:14 GMT -6
I like the idea of political pressure interfering with research, this would add another layer of variation to keep campaigns feeling unique. Well, I would like to turn it off anyway. Im the one playing the game, if the game "plays itself", then it is not good for me. |
|
|
|
Post by aeson on Jun 15, 2018 11:44:20 GMT -6
An option to play under the restrictions of the Washington Treaty has been mentioned, so I was wondering if there will be an option to play under the restrictions of the Treaty of Versailles or a less restrictive version thereof.
Along those lines, any chance of a "quality control" research field? Basically, each nation has a chance of silently developing various nasty problems, such as bad powder formulations that increase flash fire risk (RN in both wars), high due rates for shells (RN in WWI) or torpedoes (USN in WWII), and the focus you put on quality control determines how quickly such things are caught and corrected. It should eat a sufficient fraction of your research budget, and quality issues should be uncommon enough, to tempt players to skimp, but the consequences of cost cutting should be as bad as they were IRL. I kind of feel like quality control effort would be better implemented as something similar to Enhanced Training or perhaps Espionage than as another research field. Just seems like it'd be better modeled as an ongoing effort than something you develop once and don't worry about ever again. |
|
|
|
Post by atlanticghost on Jun 15, 2018 18:28:06 GMT -6
An option to play under the restrictions of the Washington Treaty has been mentioned, so I was wondering if there will be an option to play under the restrictions of the Treaty of Versailles or a less restrictive version thereof.
<abbr>...</abbr>
I really think this is an important question for a 1925 start. In a historically accurate 1925 start, there is so much baggage from the Great War, Versailles, the Washington Treaty, and various policy decisions taken after the war, such as the British decision to proceed as if there would be no major wars for at least ten years (which became a moving target), that it would really skew the starting situation and put some nations at a serious disadvantage. I'm not against a historic start, but I'd like to see it be an option alongside an ahistorical 1925, where nothing major happened in the preceding 25 years. At least nothing on the scale of what did happen. This would be no different than what a player could achieve if they started in 1900 and played cautiously, but would allow anyone who's had enough of pre-dreadnoughts and protected cruisers to skip that era if they wish. That said, like most of you I'm going to buy the game and play the heck out of it regardless. |
|
|
|
Post by williammiller on Jun 15, 2018 21:54:23 GMT -6
An option to play under the restrictions of the Washington Treaty has been mentioned, so I was wondering if there will be an option to play under the restrictions of the Treaty of Versailles or a less restrictive version thereof.
That has already been discussed internally, but we will have to wait a bit before final decisions are made however ;-) |
|
_(edited)_Screenshot_(739).png?width=180&height=180&fit=bounds)
