|
|
Post by thatzenoguy on Sept 15, 2016 9:12:16 GMT -6
That's...Actually kind of clever! Good job!
|
|
|
|
Post by ddg on Sept 15, 2016 16:50:44 GMT -6
Now here is a challenge I haven't seen anyone do yet - how about a battleship or cruiser that gives maximum tonnage per budget spent? The ship itself doesn't have to be big or useful, but can it be built to blockade the enemy cheaply through sheer tonnage? Blockade isn't calculated by tonnage, but by a point value system. Every B has the same value, whether it's a 52,000-ton behemoth or spartan448's 2100-ton armored dinghy. From memory the values are: DD 1, CL 3, CA 5, B 8, BC 10, BB 12. For a minimaxed blockade fleet you'd want to look at lowest cost per point irrespective of ship type. |
|
|
|
Post by ccip on Sept 16, 2016 1:34:06 GMT -6
Ah, I must've confused this with the foreign stations requirements! In that case, the "minimal battleship" seems even more of a clever trick...
|
|
|
|
Post by thatzenoguy on Sept 16, 2016 2:06:35 GMT -6
Holy ****...
I AM SO GOING TO SPAM MINI-BATTLESHIPS TO INVADE EVERYONE!
|
|
|
|
Post by thatzenoguy on Sept 16, 2016 2:38:06 GMT -6
 And this is with an army of 10 inch gunned lightly armoured 18 knot minibattleships! I could have gotten even HIGHER if I removed the armour and such. |
|
|
|
Post by spartan448 on Sept 16, 2016 8:22:10 GMT -6
...What have I unleashed
|
|
|
|
Post by thatzenoguy on Sept 16, 2016 8:22:56 GMT -6
The furry menace has overrun the mediteranian.
Next? EUROPE.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bullethead on Sept 16, 2016 9:33:55 GMT -6
The furry menace has overrun the mediteranian. Next? EUROPE. Hahah. Oh well, enjoy it while you can. Things like this will probably lead to a new blockade/invasion mechanic to close such loopholes. |
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on Sept 16, 2016 9:56:47 GMT -6
It's not a big deal. It's an impractical, non-historic design (and technically illegal based on the class design requirements in the manual) that exploits a programming rule to become a gamebreaker. But, the game is single-player only. If people want to use it or something similar knowing it's an exploit it's their choice. It does reinforce an argument that I believe somebody made in the Suggestions or one of the other recent threads that blockading forces should be forced to fight or quit the blockade. During a blockade, first before going to a random battle, the blockaded nation should have the option to try to break the blockade. If that nations agrees then the blockading force either has to fight or give up the blockade. Also, I would add that since blockades are very public that refusing to fight should cost the player, if he is the blockading nation, prestige similar to losing a major battle. AI nations that refuse to fight can suffer a small increase in unrest to simulate the negative response that the public would have to their navy refusing to fight to help end the war. The first question I would have in response is how do you get the AI to make a decision to break the blockade? How does the AI determine whether all of those B's blockading him are 2,100 ton artificial reefs-in waiting or 49,000 ton N3's that will pulverize the AI if it fights? It could require a significant addition or change of the game's code to make seemingly simple choice possible. |
|
|
|
Post by ccip on Sept 16, 2016 10:37:58 GMT -6
The furry menace has overrun the mediteranian. Next? EUROPE. Hahah. Oh well, enjoy it while you can. Things like this will probably lead to a new blockade/invasion mechanic to close such loopholes. Ha yeah, that's what I was going to say - I'm curious how that one goes for you. If it does actually break the game a bit, I'm sure it's worth reporting to Fredrik! Maybe that's also why I assumed it was tonnage-based, since tonnage is usually a closer approximation of cost and combat power (but not always). |
|
|
|
Post by thatzenoguy on Sept 16, 2016 11:02:04 GMT -6
It breaks the game because it allows for a fleet of pathetic ships able to takeover entire continents within years.
|
|
|
|
Post by director on Sept 16, 2016 14:57:26 GMT -6
What happens when it comes to a fleet battle? Do you engage or run?
|
|
|
|
Post by axe99 on Sept 16, 2016 17:36:28 GMT -6
I'd be curious if it changes AI behaviour as well (ie, if the AI responds based on numbers of Bs, BBs, etc;)). As BCoop says, it's not really a worry as it's a SP game, so any exploit is the player choosing how they want to play the game.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bullethead on Sept 16, 2016 18:42:53 GMT -6
I'd be curious if it changes AI behaviour as well (ie, if the AI responds based on numbers of Bs, BBs, etc;)). As BCoop says, it's not really a worry as it's a SP game, so any exploit is the player choosing how they want to play the game. This is my usual line in the forum for Kerbal Space Program. Space has always been cannonfodder for speculative fiction since at least Mark Twain (plus better-known later folks like Jules Verne and HG Wells). Thus, in the KSP forums, whenever the Space Realism Taliban get on the warpath, I tell them to get a life and quit worrying about whatever other people do in their own private single-player games. If folks want to play in sci-fi, let them. To some extent, this attitude applies to RTW, but RTW is closer to Crusader Kings 2 than KSP. In CK2, the outcome in present times is more dependent on who married whom back when more than anything else. Thus in RTW, even with varied tech, things should not depart too far from what we know. And we know that so-called Bs with no armor and 1 knot of speed do not make anything except sinkable shore batteries. To the extent that such ships count as battleships, so much is the game as a whole broken. |
|
|
|
Post by galagagalaxian on Sept 16, 2016 19:59:22 GMT -6
Well, monitors could always be included as an actual ship type in RtW2, but I'm not really sure if they'd serve any genuinely useful purpose in the scope of the game. Dedicated shore bombardment is a little too niche for the game.
|
|
