Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2019 14:06:49 GMT -6
And what if you were just lucky? Im not sure at this point, but I played RTW 2 for about 60 in-game years, and the battles were like: 1. battle - unbalanced damage for my/enemy ships, 2. battle - no ships which I need and have plenty of, 3. battle - same as 2nd. 3,4,... 10 battle - all same as 2nd. 11th battle - ships are finaly here but also the ship I had for all the previous battles, and this one´s engine breaks before the fleets meet. 12th battle - critical into my flagships CT that is so heavily armoured that none of enemy ships should be able to penetrate it on almost any range. 13th battle - I have 3 ships against enemy´s 1. And I even have better ships. But my ships cant hit theirs from 3 nm in clear weather for 1 and half hour until enemy ship made it back to the port. 14th battle - so called "battleship" battle, but I have no battleships at all, but enemy does have. Maybe there were battles where my ships were at least balanced with enemy´s, but these were super-rare and I cant remember any of these... Maybe I am, I’ve played. Two 55 year games and. Is 20 year in a third. I consider my luck pretty balanced, and I’ve ran into some pretty unlucky scenarios but it was never constant enough to bother me. There are also set backs with clear cause, like BC walking away after 50 hits, but they had good deck armour and I had poor 12in guns etc.... Bottom line, I feel for you being frustrated that the luck(if it is luck) seems unfair. You are also right that it could just totally be I’m lucky, and it could just be you aren’t. Bottom line is I think without either more stats or some insight into actual numbers I’d refrain from blaming it on the game. If you aren’t enjoying the game because of the issues here, I’m sorry about that. I’d still encourage you to give it more tries( maybe after the upcoming 1.02 patch) and see how things are, because it has been working out fine for me. Well, I give it more tries. Im giving it more tries between writing my posts now. But I just dont enjoy it, Im just always trying to mentaly prepare to see another disadvantage I should not really have. I mean, I dont play as United Kingdom to have bad luck as nation perk... I mentioned those made in 1899 DP guns a few minutes ago. Well, that seems to be gone in my second playthrough, but enemy ships still have AA guns in legacy fleet ships from the 19th century... EDIT: They dont use DP guns in legacy fleet now, but they use it in year 1907 on almost all of their ships. I mean, its funny to see a ship from times of IRL battle of Tsushima carry dual purpose guns... |
|
|
|
Post by mycophobia on May 29, 2019 14:10:39 GMT -6
Maybe I am, I’ve played. Two 55 year games and. Is 20 year in a third. I consider my luck pretty balanced, and I’ve ran into some pretty unlucky scenarios but it was never constant enough to bother me. There are also set backs with clear cause, like BC walking away after 50 hits, but they had good deck armour and I had poor 12in guns etc.... Bottom line, I feel for you being frustrated that the luck(if it is luck) seems unfair. You are also right that it could just totally be I’m lucky, and it could just be you aren’t. Bottom line is I think without either more stats or some insight into actual numbers I’d refrain from blaming it on the game. If you aren’t enjoying the game because of the issues here, I’m sorry about that. I’d still encourage you to give it more tries( maybe after the upcoming 1.02 patch) and see how things are, because it has been working out fine for me. Well, I give it more tries. Im giving it more tries between writing my posts now. But I just dont enjoy it, Im just always trying to mentaly prepare to see another disadvantage I should not really have. I mean, I dont play as United Kingdom to have bad luck as nation perk... I mentioned those made in 1899 DP guns a few minutes before. Well, that seems to be gone in my second playthrough, but enemy ships still have AA guns in legacy fleet ships from the 19th century... To be fair, if that’s the mentality you are having it might be best to take a break. If you going in looking for evidence of the game being “against you” you are more likely find evidence to affirm and ignore “good lucks”. In any case tho, best of luck |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2019 14:15:03 GMT -6
Well, I give it more tries. Im giving it more tries between writing my posts now. But I just dont enjoy it, Im just always trying to mentaly prepare to see another disadvantage I should not really have. I mean, I dont play as United Kingdom to have bad luck as nation perk... I mentioned those made in 1899 DP guns a few minutes before. Well, that seems to be gone in my second playthrough, but enemy ships still have AA guns in legacy fleet ships from the 19th century... To be fair, if that’s the mentality you are having it might be best to take a break. If you going in looking for evidence of the game being “against you” you are more likely find evidence to affirm and ignore “good lucks”. In any case tho, best of luck That was the mentality that assured my victory in the beginning of RTW 1, where I could be sure that enemy B´s will use and will hit my ships with their torpedoes, but mine never will (for example). But these were just minor problems that could be turned into advantage somehow, just by for example getting rid of the torpedo launchers on the battleships and use that weight for more ammo instead. But it seems that RTW 2 has more of these permanently unbalanced things... |
|
|
|
Post by mycophobia on May 29, 2019 14:18:20 GMT -6
To be fair, if that’s the mentality you are having it might be best to take a break. If you going in looking for evidence of the game being “against you” you are more likely find evidence to affirm and ignore “good lucks”. In any case tho, best of luck That was the mentality that assured my victory in the beginning of RTW 1, where I could be sure that enemy B´s will use and will hit my ships with their torpedoes, but mine never will (for example). But these were just minor problems that could be turned into advantage somehow, just by for example getting rid of the torpedo launchers on the battleships and use that weight for more ammo instead. But it seems that RTW 2 has more of these permanently unbalanced things... Honestly my Bs getting torped while their B never get hit by my B’s torp did trouble me throughout all my rtw 1/2 playthrough xD But on the otherhand my second rtw2 play through have my early 20 knot BB reliably dumping 2-3 torpedo into the enemy battle line at every major engagement, so I decided to give them maximal underwater tubes out of sheer amusement and roleplay reasons  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2019 14:24:46 GMT -6
That was the mentality that assured my victory in the beginning of RTW 1, where I could be sure that enemy B´s will use and will hit my ships with their torpedoes, but mine never will (for example). But these were just minor problems that could be turned into advantage somehow, just by for example getting rid of the torpedo launchers on the battleships and use that weight for more ammo instead. But it seems that RTW 2 has more of these permanently unbalanced things... Honestly my Bs getting torped while their B never get hit by my B’s torp did trouble me throughout all my rtw 1/2 playthrough xD But on the otherhand my second rtw2 play through have my early 20 knot BB reliably dumping 2-3 torpedo into the enemy battle line at every major engagement, so I decided to give them maximal underwater tubes out of sheer amusement and roleplay reasons That may be an interesting experiment. But what I mean are total immersion-breaking problems like I have now. Its year 1907 and when I look into the almanac, 3 out of 4 ships of any nations other then me are being equipped with dual purpose secondary or tertiary guns. This is just the one problem that is always shown... I mean, is it that difficult to just put a condition check to the AI ship designs before they build it? Just a few lines of code that would check the design, check the technology and check if the design has any DP guns and if yes and the technology is not yet unlucked, then swith the DP guns to just normal guns. |
|
|
|
Post by rodentnavy on May 29, 2019 14:31:35 GMT -6
To be fair, if that’s the mentality you are having it might be best to take a break. If you going in looking for evidence of the game being “against you” you are more likely find evidence to affirm and ignore “good lucks”. In any case tho, best of luck That was the mentality that assured my victory in the beginning of RTW 1, where I could be sure that enemy B´s will use and will hit my ships with their torpedoes, but mine never will (for example). But these were just minor problems that could be turned into advantage somehow, just by for example getting rid of the torpedo launchers on the battleships and use that weight for more ammo instead. But it seems that RTW 2 has more of these permanently unbalanced things... See I started putting torps on everything just so I knew when to start manoeuvring like crazy.* However another issue I feel is not you being unfair on the game so much as unfamiliar with it, after all by 1920 if not sooner we enter a really uncanny valley when it still looks like RTW1 and feels like RTW1 but some of the rules are different and we do not yet know them all or how best to accommodate them. Like you say having an attitude like yours your BCs were on a night raid the enemy destroyers would be waiting in ambush on a uncannily perfect prediction of their course meant you redeployed your squadrons so that your capital ships caught their helpless dds after they had wasted their best chances on your wildly dodging DesDivs and likely also beat the ambush where the entire enemy fleet pincer moves your lone capital ship squadron. So give yourself time to learn and who knows maybe one of the disasters along the way will be amusing to share with the rest of us. *not saying you are wrong just different strokes for different folks |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2019 14:35:38 GMT -6
That was the mentality that assured my victory in the beginning of RTW 1, where I could be sure that enemy B´s will use and will hit my ships with their torpedoes, but mine never will (for example). But these were just minor problems that could be turned into advantage somehow, just by for example getting rid of the torpedo launchers on the battleships and use that weight for more ammo instead. But it seems that RTW 2 has more of these permanently unbalanced things... See I started putting torps on everything just so I knew when to start manoeuvring like crazy.* However another issue I feel is not you being unfair on the game so much as unfamiliar with it, after all by 1920 if not sooner we enter a really uncanny valley when it still looks like RTW1 and feels like RTW1 but some of the rules are different and we do not yet know them all or how best to accommodate them. Like you say having an attitude like yours your BCs were on a night raid the enemy destroyers would be waiting in ambush on a uncannily perfect prediction of their course meant you redeployed your squadrons so that your capital ships caught their helpless dds after they had wasted their best chances on your wildly dodging DesDivs and likely also beat the ambush where the entire enemy fleet pincer moves your lone capital ship squadron. So give yourself time to learn and who knows maybe one of the disasters along the way will be amusing to share with the rest of us. *not saying you are wrong just different strokes for different folks Now Im not really sure if I got the point. Im somehow unfamilliar with the game after 1920, but the gameplay after 1920 was not my point at all. |
|
|
|
Post by rodentnavy on May 29, 2019 14:49:20 GMT -6
See I started putting torps on everything just so I knew when to start manoeuvring like crazy.* However another issue I feel is not you being unfair on the game so much as unfamiliar with it, after all by 1920 if not sooner we enter a really uncanny valley when it still looks like RTW1 and feels like RTW1 but some of the rules are different and we do not yet know them all or how best to accommodate them. Like you say having an attitude like yours your BCs were on a night raid the enemy destroyers would be waiting in ambush on a uncannily perfect prediction of their course meant you redeployed your squadrons so that your capital ships caught their helpless dds after they had wasted their best chances on your wildly dodging DesDivs and likely also beat the ambush where the entire enemy fleet pincer moves your lone capital ship squadron. So give yourself time to learn and who knows maybe one of the disasters along the way will be amusing to share with the rest of us. *not saying you are wrong just different strokes for different folks Now Im not really sure if I got the point. Im somehow unfamilliar with the game after 1920, but the gameplay after 1920 was not my point at all. Well a lot of the pre-1920 differences are really subtle but they are there. I notice a lot of my old stand by design templates do not work in RTW2 without significant modification. I feel I barely understand early light cruisers at all at the moment but that is all part of the learning curve. |
|
|
|
Post by entropyavatar on May 29, 2019 14:53:15 GMT -6
Confirmation bias can be extremely strong, either way. If you have developed a theory in your head that the dice are weighted against you, you will notice events that confirm that model. If you have the model that all is fair, you will notice evidence of that. We would probably need some real log analysis and controlled tests (as much as possible) to confirm one way or the other. A priori though, I find it hard to believe the developers would spend time deliberately introducing a "screw the player" element to the game if it wasn't in RtW1. Breaking something by accident is a possibility but we would need a fair bit of evidence to confirm that. Well, there is even an additional thing called "AI advantage", so your sarcastic theory may not be as much sarcastic as you wanted  I wasn't being sarcastic. Does the AI Advantage adjust RNG rolls? That would be a pretty unusual way of changing implementing a difficulty setting but perhaps? Weirder things have happened. In a later post you mention mentally preparing yourself for the next unfair element - to me that really, really sounds like confirmation bias. Maybe try a naval exercise with exactly equal forces on either side and see how the randoms rolls go? You could try running the same exercise a few times and record hits required to sink, etc. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2019 15:15:45 GMT -6
Well, there is even an additional thing called "AI advantage", so your sarcastic theory may not be as much sarcastic as you wanted I wasn't being sarcastic. Does the AI Advantage adjust RNG rolls? That would be a pretty unusual way of changing implementing a difficulty setting but perhaps? Weirder things have happened. In a later post you mention mentally preparing yourself for the next unfair element - to me that really, really sounds like confirmation bias. Maybe try a naval exercise with exactly equal forces on either side and see how the randoms rolls go? You could try running the same exercise a few times and record hits required to sink, etc. Well, I tried those exercises in different playthroughs. In the French one it seems that I can win easily with a 1925 class BB even against a 1942 class BB which should be much more advanced and better in general. But playing as Japan the ships I control seems to always suck heavily against exactly the same ships that are given to the *enemy* and are controled by AI. That was not what I expected. I expected to be beaten like hell against enemy with Lille class 1942 battleship if I take just Marseille class from 1925, but I won 2 of 2 battles. Well, I also won playing as Lille against Marseille, but that should not be a surprise as it is really a better ship. Playing as Japan I lost all 3 battles with Asama class CA against other Asama class CA. Conclusion = confusion. |
|
|
|
Post by rimbecano on May 29, 2019 15:17:36 GMT -6
And what if you were just lucky? Im not sure at this point, but I played RTW 2 for about 60 in-game years, and the battles were like: 1. battle - unbalanced damage for my/enemy ships, 2. battle - no ships which I need and have plenty of, 3. battle - same as 2nd. 3,4,... 10 battle - all same as 2nd. 11th battle - ships are finaly here but also the ship I had for all the previous battles, and this one´s engine breaks before the fleets meet. 12th battle - critical into my flagships CT that is so heavily armoured that none of enemy ships should be able to penetrate it on almost any range. 13th battle - I have 3 ships against enemy´s 1. And I even have better ships. But my ships cant hit theirs from 3 nm in clear weather for 1 and half hour until enemy ship made it back to the port. 14th battle - so called "battleship" battle, but I have no battleships at all, but enemy does have. I had all of these things except the last happen in RTW1. I haven't seen them to be any more frequent in RTW2. And even with the last, while I've never seen a battleship battle where I didn't have any capital ships, I've certainly seen cruiser battles in RTW1 where my force had nothing larger than a destroyer (though this is probably due to my habit of building nothing but destroyers and battlecruisers / max CAs in the early game). |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2019 15:24:31 GMT -6
And what if you were just lucky? Im not sure at this point, but I played RTW 2 for about 60 in-game years, and the battles were like: 1. battle - unbalanced damage for my/enemy ships, 2. battle - no ships which I need and have plenty of, 3. battle - same as 2nd. 3,4,... 10 battle - all same as 2nd. 11th battle - ships are finaly here but also the ship I had for all the previous battles, and this one´s engine breaks before the fleets meet. 12th battle - critical into my flagships CT that is so heavily armoured that none of enemy ships should be able to penetrate it on almost any range. 13th battle - I have 3 ships against enemy´s 1. And I even have better ships. But my ships cant hit theirs from 3 nm in clear weather for 1 and half hour until enemy ship made it back to the port. 14th battle - so called "battleship" battle, but I have no battleships at all, but enemy does have. I had all of these things except the last happen in RTW1. I haven't seen them to be any more frequent in RTW2. And even with the last, while I've never seen a battleship battle where I didn't have any capital ships, I've certainly seen cruiser battles in RTW1 where my force had nothing larger than a destroyer (though this is probably due to my habit of building nothing but destroyers and battlecruisers / max CAs in the early game). Well, there were a few hits in the cruiser battle. 3 exactly. But 1 was B w/ pen, 1 was engine room B w/pen and the last one was CT w/ pen, so there was no damage at all. I mean, 3 nm is 5,5km. You should be able to hit a 160 meter long ship at that range with iron sights and a regular binoculars without central rangefinder, maybe not with every salvo, but at least enough times to sink that ship before it gets back home... |
|
|
|
Post by frank1311 on May 29, 2019 15:38:12 GMT -6
Agreed. Game completely sucks as-is.
We spend hours designing and building these Capital Ships only to be met with a myriad of destroyer and light cruiser engagements, and have the enemy AI decline every single battleship or carrier engagement it's prompted with. When I DO miraculously get the Battleship or Carrier engagement that I've quite literally played 4-8 hours merely trying to set up, I'm greeted with a nighttime engagement in gale force conditions. Even then, if I DO miraculously get the engagement and manage to win it, surely the AI will get a neutral peace deal when i'm winning in VP's 79,975 to 3,546 and I personally demand unconditional surrender.
This game masquerades around as some sort of Role-Playing Naval Design game where you supposedly play as the lead Admiral of your chosen country, yet you have ZERO control over the implementation and formation of "Your" navy or the battles that are fought.
This game is a frustrating arbitrary exercise in shitty RNG, and I've just about had it.
I didn't pay $34.99 for a Dreadnaught and Carrier strategy/design game where I play 12 straight hours of DD and CL battles. This is nonsensical and ridiculous.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2019 15:42:59 GMT -6
Agreed. Game completely sucks as-is. We spend hours designing and building these Capital Ships only to be met with a myriad of destroyer and light cruiser engagements, and have the enemy AI decline every single battleship or carrier engagement it's prompted with. When I DO miraculously get the Battleship or Carrier engagement that I've quite literally played 4-8 hours merely trying to set up, I'm greeted with a nighttime engagement in gale force conditions. Even then, if I DO miraculously get the engagement and manage to win it, surely the AI will get a neutral peace deal when i'm winning in VP's 79,975 to 3,546 and I personally demand unconditional surrender. This game masquerades around as some sort of Role-Playing Naval Design game where you supposedly play as the lead Admiral of your chosen country, yet you have ZERO control over the implementation and formation of "Your" navy or the battles that are fought. This game is a frustrating arbitrary exercise in shitty RNG, and I've just about had it. I didn't pay $34.99 for a Dreadnaught and Carrier strategy/design game where I play 12 straight hours of DD and CL battles. This is nonsensical and ridiculous. Well, I dont think that it is THAT bad, BUT: I see a very big difference between playing a "computer games" and playing a "computer´s game", if you get what I mean... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2019 15:52:36 GMT -6
I mean, if the game has so much RNG, it can skip all the tactical battles totaly and not bother the player with something that is decided by RNG anyway. I just feel like Im wasting my time when I play another tactical battle that is set up all wrong from T-0. Let the player decide which squadron consists of which ships, what ship can appear together with another ship, what ship is the flagship etc. It is not like a real admiral was just told to sit in a ship he didnt like to lead better ships he would like much more into the battle.
Someone posted an example of the Bismarck´s first battle from British POV. And you know what? I would be perfectly OK with that. I mean, in RTW 2 there would not be just Bismarck and Prinz Eugen, there would be also Scharnhorst, Gneisenau, finished Graf Zeppelin, Hipper, Scheer and Lutzow. But you would not have PoW, Hood and Suffolk, you would have just PoW, Suffolk and 2 W-class destroyers, and maybe, just maybe one Glorious class carrier...
|
|
