|
Post by rodentnavy on May 23, 2019 7:31:24 GMT -6
Very trivial but maybe a bigger issue later: Starting US in 1900 Tonnage on foreign station is -16000. Send to foreign station (from my build screen) a 16000 ton B and it now says -6, 667. The B is neither short range nor cramped quarters (which would explain the strange result). Adding a second 16,000 ton B sends it to OK. Large ships do not contribute as much proportionally to foreign tonnage as small ships. This is intended to encourage the use of cruisers on foreign stations. Not a bug, but it should have been in the manual. This is now very much a problem when playing as GB as now you require 90,000 tons on foreign stations in RTW2 as compared to 74,000 tons on foreign stations in RTW1 on a medium fleet. Given a starting GB fleet in medium weighs in at between 170-180k tons this already represents a major increase in pressure even before you allow for the fact that a disproportionate amount of tonnage is tied up in larger vessels. Mind you I approve of the larger ships being able to do relatively less colonial policing, just think that it needs to born in mind when adjusting national foreign station requirements.
|
|
|
Post by Sven on May 23, 2019 8:15:55 GMT -6
Large ships do not contribute as much proportionally to foreign tonnage as small ships. This is intended to encourage the use of cruisers on foreign stations. Not a bug, but it should have been in the manual. This is now very much a problem when playing as GB as now you require 90,000 tons on foreign stations in RTW2 as compared to 74,000 tons on foreign stations in RTW1 on a medium fleet. Given a starting GB fleet in medium weighs in at between 170-180k tons this already represents a major increase in pressure even before you allow for the fact that a disproportionate amount of tonnage is tied up in larger vessels. Mind you I approve of the larger ships being able to do relatively less colonial policing, just think that it needs to born in mind when adjusting national foreign station requirements. In a "very large fleet" scenario, you needed about 21 Colonial cruisers to fulfill the foreign tonnage requirement as Great Britain in RTW 1 . Now, in RTW 2, it is about 24-25 Cruisers. it is doable.
So, use Cruisers. If you have them ( for example if you design your legacy fleet yourself ) use specialised Colonial cruisers. or KEs with about 1500 tons and a few guns, aka Colonial gunboats. Battleships are not that good, unless you have special Colonial battleships ( the British had a few).
|
|
|
Post by Adseria on May 23, 2019 10:04:52 GMT -6
Ok, once again, this is the demo, not the full version. Also, this may not be a bug, it may just be the UI not being entirely clear.
So, I was playing a game as Japan, and I just finished converting 2 old pre-dreads to light carriers. I decided to do a quick, 1v1 fleet exercise between the 2 ships. I decided to start at short range, to avoid the need for scouts (I still launched some anyway by mistake, so whoops!). As soon as it started, I immediately readied the 9 remaining torpedo bombers.
Once I spotted the "enemy" carrier, I immediately launched all of my TBs (minus fighter escort, because cap) at the enemy; 1 full squadron of 8 planes, plus one lone plane from a second squadron. They immediately head to the target location (which is right on top of the "enemy" ship), and I get the "planes are attacking an enemy ship" message for both groups of planes. I don't receive any "torpedo hit" messages, so they either missed, or didn't report hits.
The thing that's confusing me, and that this post is about, is what they did next. The battle is southeast of Japan, and the "enemy" ship is northwest of me. So can someone please tell me why my torpedo bombers, having just completed their attack on the "enemy" ship, are now here:
Attachment Deleted
...and heading east? I mean, the only thing in that direction is the US, and that's over 4000NM away. That carrier is the only ship I have, the "enemy" is somewhere about 8NM northwest of my ship, and it's a fleet exercise, so there aren't even any airfields (and, even if there were, 1: I haven't built any, and 2: Japan is the other way).
Oh, I should mention; that's just the group of 8 planes. The lone plane is here:
Attachment Deleted
...and headed on pretty much the perfect course for a flight to Fiji (southeast).
EDIT: Just noticed something unrelated; every second recon report won't be sent for another 2 weeks.
EDIT2: Not really related, but pretty funny. You remember I said that all of my fighters were busy on CAP? Yeah, guess what? Just as they landed to refuel...
Luckily, the enemy missed!
By the way, I've also noticed that my attack planes' status still says "attacking, even though it's now been about half an hour since they may or may not have begun the attack, and they're several dozen NM away.
EDIT3: Unsurprisingly, my strike group just ran out of fuel and ditched in the ocean. Even more unsurprisingly, of the 7 planes dedicated to my initial scout flight, 1 is still returning and the other 6 were damaged on landing.
EDIT4: The 7th scout just got back. Yes, it was damaged on landing too. I started with 16 torpedo planes. Of those, 7 are now damaged and the other 9 were destroyed after wandering off and running out of fuel. Honestly, at this point, I'm surprised that I even have 7 of my 9 fighters still operational!
EDIT5: I just ran on to the end of the scenario. Apparently I was wrong earlier; my fighters shot down one of the "enemy" torpedo bombers. Speaking of the "enemy," they apparently lost 2 planes to operational losses (plus the one my fighters shot down). Not really comparable to my 9 operational losses (all to running out of fuel). Not sure how many of my damaged scout planes were repaired before the end (if any), since you can't view your air groups after the battle (maybe this could be added alongside the ability to reopen the post-battle results?).
|
|
|
Post by Fredrik W on May 23, 2019 12:11:13 GMT -6
A-H, 1900 start, 60% tech, VL, historical, now 1934
i'm at war with france, i have 2 BB stationed in northern Europe and nothing else, but every battle generated there gives me ships that i retired a long time ago
i accepted a convoy attack that gave me a single retired DD so i restarted the turn
this time i accepted a coastal raid and it gave me a CA i retired in 1910
here's the save
edit: after the battle it added the CA to my fleet, and it's status was '35' instead of 'AF'
Thanks for the save! I found a bug that will under very rare circumstances add sunk ships to a battle.
|
|
|
Post by nuclearnadal on May 23, 2019 12:39:15 GMT -6
Obligatory sorry for first time posting and possible formatting errors.
When did you start the game - 1900 or 1920?
1900 What nation were you playing? USA, Germany, Japan Were there any start options that were not the default?
Large fleet size, Legacy fleet build Describe the issue in detail. Just won a massive engagement against Tsarist Russia, fleet battle, they collapse into commie Russia. Next war is against commie Russia, (I have Iceland, Norway in my US game, Baltic and Finland in my German game, and all of the above in my Japan game). First battle I try to play, upon selecting the button to give battle, causes an error, not CTD though, just the battle doesn't happen, VP's don't change. This happens with every subsequent battle, it is only present in battles off the Baltic's and Finland, only had this error occur once with Tsarist Russia. What were you doing when the bug occurred?
As stated above, fighting the Russians. What did you expect to happen and how was the result you saw different than you expected.
I expected to go into the battle screen as all the other battles yet this did not happen. Can you describe how to reproduce the bug? Not sure if it is an error with where the battle takes place or with the Revolution that turns Russia to the Soviets. I can still fight in NE Asia which means It probably isn't the nation itself.
I will post a screenshot when I can, if I can replicate the bug again.
I also have another thing(s) to note, not sure if these are bugs but I have noticed that:
1. The USA gets a ridiculous budget after 1955 (Not sure if this is intentional, I know the game "ends" at 1955 with the option to play further) 2. You can't build CL's after around 1950-55. Cruisers with 6in autoloaders become the norm I find, reason I don't think this is a bug is due to missile development that comes in later updates to the game. 3. Airbases can be built before planes are researched in the base overview menu 4. Auto add aircraft to bases with 120 cap only adds up to 113 aircraft if said airbase already has squadrons on it 5. Retrofitting ships with the same name, for example Montana (R1965) as a BB-class, 65000 Tons, can be retrofitted to a broken Montana (R1905) B-class. This can be done in the Refit menu, breaks the ships tonnage, had to scrap 3 BB's of this class name as I misclicked it. 6. CV's can have more than 120 aircraft, (Got to 180 aircraft on a 1in armored flight deck, 86000 tons).
Sorry for formatting errors if any, first time post on this forum.
|
|
|
Post by dorn on May 23, 2019 16:45:01 GMT -6
Error when changed division in "set up strike"
1920 start, UK, standard.
Can be repeated but after saving and reloading error disappeared.
|
|
|
Post by gnoman on May 23, 2019 17:15:22 GMT -6
Not sure if this is a display bug, an intelligence failure, or a symptom of an underlying problem.
1900 British start.
Going through enemy ships to compare my newly-designed carrier class, I noticed this improbably AI design in-service with Japan.
In a possibly-related problem, my save stopped being playable shortly after noticing this. I get a "Warning! Nation=nil when setting torpedo data!" notification for every ship in the battle, followed by a "cannot find file \Rule The Waves 2\\Data\Ides\(ship).sdf" error whenever I try to look at a ship. At a guess, I suspect that the extra "\" is the problem here.
|
|
corgi
New Member
Posts: 43
|
Post by corgi on May 23, 2019 17:27:40 GMT -6
The AI likes to build CVLs as CAs. They're designed like CVLs in all respects except for the ship class, they have CVL names, and the AI seems to use them as carriers, but they're designated CA and all they carry is floatplane scouts (sending squadrons of 20+ floatplanes on naval strike missions).
I've seen this starting in the late 1940s, maybe the problem is when the AI tries to put more than 34 planes on its CVLs?
edit: Opening the design in the editor, it isn't legal as any class. If I try to save it as a CV, the game automatically identifies it as a CA (but it isn't legal as a CA due to 5" main guns and having a flight deck). If I add 100 tons of displacement, it is a legal CV design.
I suppose the problem is that a ship with less than 16000 tons displacement and more than 34 planes isn't legal as either CV or CVL.
|
|
|
Post by garychildress on May 23, 2019 18:35:09 GMT -6
Getting this error message quite a bit in a new game I just started, although as far as I can tell, the game seems to be working OK regardless, at least so far. This is the first game I've received the message. Playing as CSA, I started the game in 1900 without choosing to do my own legacy fleet for a change. I scrapping all my Bs, since they were all junk with cramped accommodations. I'm not sure what the error message means. Attachment Deleted
|
|
|
Post by Tabac Iberez on May 23, 2019 19:34:00 GMT -6
When did you start the game: 1900 What nation were you playing: GERMANY Were there any start options that were not the default: VARRIED TECHS, CUSTOM LEGACY FLEET Describe the issue in detail: NO ALERT OR OTHER SIGNAL THAT AON ARMOR WAS NOW AVALIBLE What were you doing when the bug occurred: ATTEMPTING TO DESIGN AIRCRAFT CARRIER, SET TO "FLAT DECK ON BELT". DID NOT HAVE BE OR DE, DID NOT HAVE ALERT FOR AON, DID NOT EXPECT ALERT FOR AON, GOT AON BONUSES What did you expect to happen and how was the result you saw different than you expected. DID NOT EXPECT AON ARMOR SCHEME WITHOUT HAVING AON ARMOR REASERCHED Can you describe how to reproduce the bug: NOT YET; WILL REPEAT REPORT WHEN CONDUCTING NEXT GAME.
|
|
|
Post by fallenworldful on May 23, 2019 21:33:35 GMT -6
I've got two bugs, one major and one minor. The first is one that was supposedly fixed by 1.01? CheckDarkness doesn't seem to have been fixed by the recent update. I'm still having problems with it appearing during battles. Deleting my airbases, both normal and airship, seems to have removed the bug for now, but I do want to use those things lol.
When did you start the game? - 1900 What nation were you playing? - Japan Were there any start options that were not the default? - Very Large Fleet Size, Manual Legacy Build Describe the issue in detail. - During daylight battles, "Error in CheckDarknessApproachingBase procedure! Invalid argument to time encode" appears after almost every turn, rendering game nearly unplayable. After the 1.01 update, it also shows negative numbers for hours and minutes, as well as a divide by zero error occasionally. What were you doing when the bug occurred? - Fighting a battle What did you expect to happen and how was the result you saw different than you expected. - I didn't expect anything to break in battle like this, and I did nothing special to trigger the bug Can you describe how to reproduce the bug? - Not sure what causes it other than having airship bases and airbases active during daytime battles What version of the game were you playing? - 1.01
The second error is less important, but still a little puzzling. When I was scrapping the airbases, I accidentally tried to scrap an MTB squadron, which gave me the message "Error in ScrapShip procedure! Nation: Japan Ship: MTB MTB squadron 10 List index out of bounds (-1)" and prevented me from scrapping the MTBs.
When did you start the game? - 1900 What nation were you playing? - Japan Were there any start options that were not the default? - Very Large Fleet Size, Manual Legacy Build Describe the issue in detail. - MTB squadrons can't be scrapped. Trying gave me the message "Error in ScrapShip procedure! Nation: Japan Ship: MTB MTB squadron 10 List index out of bounds (-1)" and prevented me from scrapping the MTBs. What were you doing when the bug occurred? - Trying to scrap an MTB squadron What did you expect to happen and how was the result you saw different than you expected. - I was expecting to scrap the squadron as normal, but it didn't work. Can you describe how to reproduce the bug? - Build an MTB squadron and then try to scrap it What version of the game were you playing? - 1.01
|
|
|
Post by swedewolf on May 24, 2019 0:04:03 GMT -6
After every order the list is scrolling and making it har for me to keep up where in list I just give order in.
And when upgrading airbases I cant multi select them to give on convinient order for uppgrade. Just the first in the selection do the uppgrade. And whit the list constantly scrolling away the uppgrading proceediur is a bit tidious.
|
|
|
Post by Gerack on May 24, 2019 1:52:05 GMT -6
When did you start the game? - 1900
What nation were you playing? - Austria Hungary Were there any start options that were not the default? - Medium Fleet Size Describe the issue in detail. - As Austria, I scrapped a bunch of old Bs and one of them, Wien, became a museum. Soon afterwards, I went to war with France and a message pooped up saying "Wien has condenser trouble", and a month later she was repaired and active in my fleet. Is this intended, an old battleship that's been fitter for service? Or did the game forgot the ship was scrapped (since when ships become museums they enter a permanent mothballed status)? I don't know if this is a feature or a bug. What were you doing when the bug occurred? - Playing normally, in the main screen What did you expect to happen and how was the result you saw different than you expected. - I expected the ship to be out of action forever, since it was scrapped Can you describe how to reproduce the bug? - No idea What version of the game were you playing? - Latest patch (vi01)
|
|
|
Post by JagdFlanker on May 24, 2019 2:11:29 GMT -6
When did you start the game: 1900 What nation were you playing: GERMANY Were there any start options that were not the default: VARRIED TECHS, CUSTOM LEGACY FLEET Describe the issue in detail: NO ALERT OR OTHER SIGNAL THAT AON ARMOR WAS NOW AVALIBLE What were you doing when the bug occurred: ATTEMPTING TO DESIGN AIRCRAFT CARRIER, SET TO "FLAT DECK ON BELT". DID NOT HAVE BE OR DE, DID NOT HAVE ALERT FOR AON, DID NOT EXPECT ALERT FOR AON, GOT AON BONUSES What did you expect to happen and how was the result you saw different than you expected. DID NOT EXPECT AON ARMOR SCHEME WITHOUT HAVING AON ARMOR REASERCHED Can you describe how to reproduce the bug: NOT YET; WILL REPEAT REPORT WHEN CONDUCTING NEXT GAME. coincidentally just found the same in my game - A-H 1900 now 1934, 60%, historical, VL (same save as i'v previously posted)
auto-created a BB that had AON, checked it for fun and it was legal
looked through my techs and i don't see AON listed anywhere
|
|
|
Post by alexbrunius on May 24, 2019 6:28:06 GMT -6
Armor for very large ships seem to be significantly heavier than real armor. If you try to make the Yamato with decent armor tech in the late 30s you end up no where near the real historical thickness, since historical armor thickness would require ~35000 tons of armor for the ship + ~17000 tons of armor for the 3 x 18 inch triple turrets = 52000 ton leaving hardly any room for anything else. The total weight of the turrets ingame is ~5300 tons for the guns + ~17000 tons =for the turret armor = 22300 ton, while historically we know that their weight was 3 x 2510 ton = 7530 tons. This means the weight of the turret ingame is almost 3 times that of the historical turrets! Does the game formulas perhaps not take into account length-area-volume scale here? ( Meaning that if you want to armor something with 8 times as much displacement you only need 4 times as much armor/area to cover and it will only be 2 times as long in all directions ). Details: nws-online.proboards.com/post/45880/thread
|
|