|
|
Post by williammiller on Jul 11, 2018 9:43:56 GMT -6
Amazing! Every time there's a new update, I look forward to the game a little bit more. Just one little question, will planes eventually be represented with little sprites (like subs maybe) or is that not feasible due to how strikes are calculated?
My idea is to have something that shows the strike graphically (and makes it easy to get strike details via a single mouse click), but what final form that will take I cannot yet say.
EDIT: The screenshot missed showing the (small red) aircraft 'pips' that appear on the map, so they are visible on screen- the real point of this post is that I would like something to make them easier to notice/get info from.
|
|
|
|
Post by Airy W on Jul 11, 2018 11:07:14 GMT -6
Really love the Dev Diary! They ships are operating in a way that seems to make sense for 1925 instead of acting like it's always 1942. But will carriers succeed at increasing the distance as time progresses? An Anglo-American arms race would have been quite dangerous by virtue of geography. The Royal Navy was extremely well positioned to cut off American shipping off from Britain, a key trading partner for the Americans. Similarly the American Navy had bases extremely close to the chief ports of the United States, whose trade was just as significant for the British. I'm rather confused by this statement; the British Navy is well positioned to cut off US shipping from...Britain? |
|
|
|
Post by williammiller on Jul 11, 2018 12:14:59 GMT -6
Really love the Dev Diary! They ships are operating in a way that seems to make sense for 1925 instead of acting like it's always 1942. But will carriers succeed at increasing the distance as time progresses?
Funny you should ask - Fredrik mentioned this recently: "...simulate this by having nations develop "Independent carrier force"...much like the development of the independent scout force."
This may not be the exact final form it takes but you get the idea...
|
|
|
|
Post by cheetar on Jul 11, 2018 12:47:39 GMT -6
How many planes did he have.
|
|
|
|
Post by axe99 on Jul 11, 2018 13:43:22 GMT -6
DEVELOPERS UPDATE NOTICE:
I just added a new Developers Journal post showing something never before seen in the SAI or RTW series.  Super exciting  . Am a big fan of everything that's mentioned in the DD - felt like I would imagine a mid-1920s carrier operation to play out. Would be great to have a graphical representation as well of course, but appreciate due to the relatively fast-moving nature of aircraft that it'll be a bit tricky to implement. |
|
|
|
Post by mmmfriedrice on Jul 11, 2018 14:57:15 GMT -6
Well something else to keep in mind is that a destroyer today like the USS Zumwalt displace 16000 ton and a Strategic missile submarine like the USS Ohio displace 17000 ton.
Both of them similar in size to most dreadnought battleships built around 1900, and have very little in common to a 500 ton DD...
If someone from 1905 would have looked at our warships today they would not have said that is a destroyer, they would have said that is a future battleship, and you can afford to build alot more of them then we could.
Every once in a while, there's some talk about how we might as well call multirole surface combatants with a few guns and a big 'ol stack of cruise, anti-ship and anti-air missiles a 'battleship.'
Then again, steaming forth in a line of battle isn't really something ships of a task force do these days, so who am I to say anything about what we should call them?
My favourite term has still got to be 'aviation destroyer' for the modern Japanese Kaga-class ships. Friend, that right there is a helicopter carrier that'll go full ski-jump CVL with a few months in drydock.
|
|
bakara
Junior Member
Posts: 55
|
Post by bakara on Jul 11, 2018 16:50:14 GMT -6
Cant wait to see more info regarding naval aviation, really liked the mini AAR. However I have another request, would it be possible to make 4" secondaries visible on dreadnoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by Airy W on Jul 11, 2018 17:02:07 GMT -6
Funny you should ask - Fredrik mentioned this recently: "...simulate this by having nations develop "Independent carrier force"...much like the development of the independent scout force."
This may not be the exact final form it takes but you get the idea...
Nice. Will carrier formations be unlocked with techs too? Like going from keeping them together for shared protection or spreading them out to minimize losses? |
|
|
|
Post by williammiller on Jul 11, 2018 17:20:37 GMT -6
Funny you should ask - Fredrik mentioned this recently: "...simulate this by having nations develop "Independent carrier force"...much like the development of the independent scout force."
This may not be the exact final form it takes but you get the idea...
Nice. Will carrier formations be unlocked with techs too? Like going from keeping them together for shared protection or spreading them out to minimize losses?
Well, we are in the middle of implementing the carrier/aerial portion in the code. so until we get more solid on certain aspects actually implemented in code I cant really give a definitive answer to many questions, but having said that: The intent is to allow for something along those lines, yes.  |
|
|
|
Post by williammiller on Jul 11, 2018 17:37:07 GMT -6
How many planes did he have.
I just added an update to that Developers Journal post that adds some basic info for the carriers involved in the engagement. Enjoy!
|
|
|
|
Post by jeb94 on Jul 11, 2018 21:34:45 GMT -6
What will be the size limit on the small end for aircraft carriers? The two converted CAs seem barely functional yet its probably not unlike what HMS Vindictive would've been if she'd been converted into a thru-deck carrier like HMS Furious was. Will it be possible for us to remove armored belts during conversions at increased cost and length of refit?
|
|
|
|
Post by rimbecano on Jul 12, 2018 4:43:21 GMT -6
A pie-in-the-sky feature I'd like to see later on in RTW2 is the ability to generate SAI operational campaigns for one or more sea zones from a war in RTW2. Of course, this couldn’t be a release feature of RTW2 because SAI would likely need to be brought up to speed as far as carriers, etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by akosjaccik on Jul 12, 2018 6:34:01 GMT -6
Greeting, gentlemen! Someone asked me, "Don't you feel like playing RtW2?", to which I reacted with a "...playing WHAT?!", as the last time I checked upon the title I couldn't be certain it will be done. And now I managed to read the forums, get hyped like a teenager, and join the community. To not clutter too much the post, some of my barebone questions I managed to ask (mainly from myself): 1. - Squadron management. Can we safely assume that support vessels WILL be there for the task force to support them in battle events? 2. - Is land-based aviation possible / viable? (I know, I know, question about air aspects...!) To elaborate it a bit more. 1. - I did read some questions regarding fleet organization, but did not quite found an answer to this. In RtW, this wasn't much of an issue, as raiders went raiding, patrol ships went to do their duty, and the active fleet got randomly selected for battles, basically. However, if I understand the DevBlog correctly, specializing ships for different roles is not only a possibility, but - due to the diminishing returns on multipurpose / all-purpose ships - it's kind of a favourable possibility. So let's say, I lead Japan, and realize that the Fubukis are all well and good, but I'm in dire need of Akizukis - so I build them! However, if we are going by the rules for RtW, it is still possible to my understanding that the 5 of my fleet destroyers will get obliterated by air-to-surface assets in open waters without any help from my 15 anti-air destroyers playing beer pong in the port. Do we get a bigger control over squadrons? Obviously I'm not thinking about "utilize the entire fleet in every possible situation"-silliness, but something along the lines of "every DesRon must contain at least a single AA destroyer"-kind of thing, or I don't know, a "task force should use at least two seaplanes for reconnaissance". (I was secretly hoping for sort-of-full control, but with heavy costs in terms of fuel usage from a limited pool and service needs. Such the question is not only "can I build this thing and pay for the monthly fee?", but "Can I afford to send out two capital ships this month?")2. - As an A-H main (...don't laugh!), it would be hilarious for me to see the state not only survive, but thrive to the point of commissioning the first Maria Theresia-class Flugzeugträger. However, let's get back to the cold, hard ground: while I am fairly certain that in a what-if scenario with big enough sacrifices A-H would be able to field at least some kind of - although marginal - shipborne aviation, the real question is why would it do so. Playing the mediterranean game, and especially looking at the Adriatic, a more sound decision would be investing into land-based naval aviation. Esentially, I am curious about the possibility of having those in the first place (practically doing the carrier-thing without carriers), let alone the viability. Come on, admit it. It would be some sight to win a game called Rule the Waves with air-thingies launched from the ground. Plus a small suggestion: On the airplanes or even the ships tab, could we maybe sort them by multiple parameters, for example list by type, and "inside" that, by year of commission/building? It could help to quickly see for example which is my fastest or newest dive bomber. |
|
|
|
Post by noshurviverse on Jul 12, 2018 8:36:35 GMT -6
To not clutter too much the post, some of my barebone questions I managed to ask (mainly from myself): Land based aviation has been confirmed, as has constructing air bases. Based on that, it sounds entirely viable for AH to focus on those, although I'm sure a small strike force might be useful for fast-reaction missions.
|
|
|
|
Post by jwsmith26 on Jul 12, 2018 11:02:33 GMT -6
Plus a small suggestion: On the airplanes or even the ships tab, could we maybe sort them by multiple parameters, for example list by type, and "inside" that, by year of commission/building? It could help to quickly see for example which is my fastest or newest dive bomber. This feature is already working in RTW1. For instance, if you sort by "Speed" and then sort by "Type" your dreadnoughts will be at the top of the list but within the dreadnought category they will be sorted by speed (rather than by year, which is the default). |
|
. Am a big fan of everything that's mentioned in the DD - felt like I would imagine a mid-1920s carrier operation to play out. Would be great to have a graphical representation as well of course, but appreciate due to the relatively fast-moving nature of aircraft that it'll be a bit tricky to implement.
