|
Post by williammiller on May 7, 2020 9:26:13 GMT -6
Any initial DLC would focus on adding to the current game with new features/systems/tech/doctrine/much more detailed stuff/etc, and would only extend the timeline through roughly the 1960s - so VLS, stealth, and other 1980s+ tech would not be included.
Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by cdodders on May 7, 2020 10:52:52 GMT -6
I think ASW weapons could be expanded, options of Hedgehog, Squid, Limbo, the Russian RBU system, guided ASW torpedoes for helos and ships, towed sonar array, stand-off ASW weaponry such as ASROC and Ikara
|
|
|
Post by brygun on May 7, 2020 12:19:25 GMT -6
nobody is using CLs or any lighter ships because there is no need for them Should I feel insulted? I think you just called me nobody... My CLR based trade warfare continues to reap dividends as nations have ramped up their ASW capabilities.
|
|
geroj
Junior Member
Posts: 76
|
Post by geroj on May 7, 2020 12:53:45 GMT -6
nobody is using CLs or any lighter ships because there is no need for them Should I feel insulted? I think you just called me nobody... US? You can waste resources because your budget is 2-4x higher
|
|
|
Post by aeson on May 7, 2020 13:01:28 GMT -6
US? You can waste resources because your budget is 2-4x higher
I have never found CLs and DDs to be a waste of resources regardless of which power I'm playing.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on May 7, 2020 13:13:00 GMT -6
US? You can waste resources because your budget is 2-4x higher
I have never found CLs and DDs to be a waste of resources regardless of which power I'm playing. I concur, I use my light cruisers and destroyers for just about everything including trade protection.
|
|
|
Post by cogsandspigots on May 7, 2020 13:13:10 GMT -6
Settle down my man. That is a LOT to ask for. I’d say the best requests that are the most likely to get recognition are ones that can reasonably be done by such a small team, and fit within the game’s set structures. A whole new structure is a much greater thing to ask for, and should only be asked for if it can’t be done any other way.
|
|
|
Post by seawolf on May 7, 2020 13:48:48 GMT -6
I wouldn't be opposed to an extension of the time-span, but personally I would prefer certain game mechanics to be better fleshed out even if it meant the time-span of the game doesn't get extended. First of all, the current diplomatic system is really shallow. I would like to see nations fighting each other, forming longer term alliances or rivalries, and going to war over specific objectives, not to mention having more than six other nations to fill the map with. I imagine just those changes alone might be worth a DLC or RTW3 on it's own since it would probably entail a lot of changes to the base game though. The other mechanic I don't really like is that of subs. Right now you just build a bunch of generic subs and they roll a chance to sink merchant or warships based on tech level every turn. I would like to both design subs and use them in the battle simulator. If subs become part of the actual battle side of the game, it would be more important to have ASW on destroyers at all times instead of having pure fleet destroyers and ASW trade protection ships. Of course none of these are mutually exclusive to a cold war DLC, but any of these changes represent a substantial amount of work on their own. I would agree. I would like to see a more detailed ship designer along with a submarine designer. Aircraft design would be very nice. Believe me, you really don't want to try to replicate the Cold War in the game. You really wouldn't. I think there's a difference between simulating Red Storm Rising(Sea Power by Microprose is coming soon for that) and extending the timeline If the Timeline was extended to 1965 I don't think there would be too many problems You would have missiles, but not long range cruise missiles. You would have advanced submarines, but they would be first or second generation Nuclear subs, not terrors of the deep like Los Angeles or Akula You would have jet aircraft and missile centered carrier warfare, but remember that this would still not enter the Vietnam era.
|
|
|
Post by brygun on May 7, 2020 16:18:34 GMT -6
In general Im against expanding the time line. There are other games that handle the missile and air age out there.
An advantage this game has is running the build and tech changes through global wars.
Im iffy on how well this game will handle missile on missiles from airplanes and having airplanes flying out to missile down missiling bombers.
|
|
berte
Full Member
BANNED
Posts: 109
|
Post by berte on May 7, 2020 17:47:07 GMT -6
In general Im against expanding the time line. There are other games that handle the missile and air age out there. An advantage this game has is running the build and tech changes through global wars. Im iffy on how well this game will handle missile on missiles from airplanes and having airplanes flying out to missile down missiling bombers. I’m for expanding the timeline with new tech and toys. The game as it is in patch (1.20) has serious shortcomings after 1945. I’ll just name a few. Torpedo bombers suck. Torpedo tech stops. All nations scrap their BB’s. The game turns into a hvy cruiser carrier fest with tech stagnation and nothing new to do. Unlike some people who don’t mod, I did and played with the missiles all the way thru to December 1969 and then the game made a hard stop. I was content on continuing if the game had let me. I was about to get the war I had really wanted. Quite disappointed it stops at 1970. Can we get a play on feature? Missiles are insanely fun. I’ve played a few campaigns, but this is the first I’ve enjoyed beyond 1950. The game handles fighters and air combat just fine. But pretty soon we are going to need more than just CAP around the carrier. Interceptors that can fly out to meet an enemy that we will be able to detect will be important. So yeah, I’m concerned how they will handle that. And I hope they implement all the changes to ship design thru tech progression that saw the doing away with medium AA guns in favor of Gatling and close in weapon systems with missiles. So we will see, but so far the devs have demonstrated their adept understanding of how Naval warfare constantly changes and how ships that are built are instantly outdated and they seem to be on the right track to continue that thru the sixties. So I can’t wait for the new dlc. I just hope they revamp diplomacy and add in a new submarine configurator and streamline all the clicks for air combat. 😜
|
|
|
Post by rob06waves2018 on May 7, 2020 18:58:46 GMT -6
I'm not adverse to the idea of such a DLC. However, on every possible thread that ends in this topic, I caution against nuclear power. My argument is this: in a world of constant war such as that of RTW, any notion of nuclear technology will be quickly weaponized. This will likely happen before nuclear power is viable. As the game relies on fleets of battleships and carriers, any nuclear weapons would render the main part of this game irrelevant. No nuclear capable power would bother with fleet actions if they could just launch a nuclear strike. I feel that this kind of goes against what the game is about.
|
|
|
Post by seawolf on May 7, 2020 19:20:12 GMT -6
I'm not adverse to the idea of such a DLC. However, on every possible thread that ends in this topic, I caution against nuclear power. My argument is this: in a world of constant war such as that of RTW, any notion of nuclear technology will be quickly weaponized. This will likely happen before nuclear power is viable. As the game relies on fleets of battleships and carriers, any nuclear weapons would render the main part of this game irrelevant. No nuclear capable power would bother with fleet actions if they could just launch a nuclear strike. I feel that this kind of goes against what the game is about. There have been naval conflicts with nuclear armed powers, and nuclear propelled ships, that did not escalate to the use of nuclear weapons Additionally, I see no reason why we couldn’t have nuclear propelled ships while not including nuclear armed ships, from a gameplay perspective
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on May 7, 2020 20:53:57 GMT -6
I am at a loss to understand the fascination with all of you about the Cold War, nuclear armed warships and all that goes with it. The Brush Wars were bad enough; costly, economically degenerative, and socially destructive. Let's just enhance the game from 1900 to 1955. In fact, let's go the other direction, let's move backward from 1900 and develop the game in that direction; the Age of Iron and Steel. It was more interesting technologically and geostrategically.
|
|
|
Post by hawkeye on May 7, 2020 22:05:01 GMT -6
I am at a loss to understand the fascination with all of you about the Cold War, nuclear armed warships and all that goes with it. The Brush Wars were bad enough; costly, economically degenerative, and socially destructive. Let's just enhance the game from 1900 to 1955. In fact, let's go the other direction, let's move backward from 1900 and develop the game in that direction; the Age of Iron and Steel. It was more interesting technologically and geostrategically. Couldn't have said it better myself.
|
|
berte
Full Member
BANNED
Posts: 109
|
Post by berte on May 7, 2020 22:29:32 GMT -6
I am at a loss to understand the fascination with all of you about the Cold War, nuclear armed warships and all that goes with it. The Brush Wars were bad enough; costly, economically degenerative, and socially destructive. Let's just enhance the game from 1900 to 1955. In fact, let's go the other direction, let's move backward from 1900 and develop the game in that direction; the Age of Iron and Steel. It was more interesting technologically and geostrategically. I love sailing games with canons. But they don't sell well. I played one years ago... had a blast, but stayed away from all the subsequent games because I heard they all sucked. Has one come along that's really amazing? I'm ready to give it another go. As far as working back from 1900, I'm game. I'd love to see the Spanish American war where Spain lost their status as a global power. The 1890's would be pretty cool. I think the reason people are on fascination street with this Cold War is all the cool new toys that ushered in a new era of naval warfare unlike anything prior. What's not to like about that?
|
|