Question: Will armored carriers be viable in RTW 3

[lexlaxlove]

I constantly want to make armored carriers for the RP but never am able to justify because of simply how bad they are ingame. The armor is simply far too heavy to realistically be able to fit on something that will actually meaningfully protect the ship. Something like the Illustrious class should not be impossible to replicate, and would also be much less effective then IRL thanks to how much penetration a lot of bombs have in this game. Are there any plans to adjust this in RTW3?

[dorn]

Aug 22, 2022 9:20:31 GMT -6 lexlaxlove said:

I constantly want to make armored carriers for the RP but never am able to justify because of simply how bad they are ingame. The armor is simply far too heavy to realistically be able to fit on something that will actually meaningfully protect the ship. Something like the Illustrious class should not be impossible to replicate, and would also be much less effective then IRL thanks to how much penetration a lot of bombs have in this game. Are there any plans to adjust this in RTW3?

Do you use 1.26 patch? It corrected bomb penetration so armoured deck is more viable.

However effect and prestige of hitorical armoured carriers were not only becuase of their armour but because a lot of additional features in the design (partionallized hangar, splinker system etc.). RTW does not model such detail so armoured carries would probably not be so good in RTW. Another important detail of success of armoured carriers was quite unique situation of Royal Navy, treaty limitation with knowledge that they cannot replace easily lost carriers so carrier which have less strike capability to get higher surviability was quite reasonable.

In RTW you can easily between wars rebuild your carrier fleet so it is not too important that each carrier will survive. Another thing is that this protection of armoured carriers was against bomb only.

[zederfflinger]

I think that it is too easy in RTW2 to rebuild your fleet from the ground up. The next game will improve this somewhat, but it's hard to tell just how much better it will be.

The bigger problem in my mind, however, is that losing your entire navy during a war isn't nearly as bad as it should be. If the RN suddenly vanished in either of the two world wars, it would have been pretty much game over for the UK.

That is the most dramatic example, but it holds true for other countries as well.

In game, you will be merely forced to decline battles and possibly lose a few possessions until you can peace out or rebuild your fleet.

If RTW3 introduces harsher consequences for the destruction of most or all of your navy, I feel that it will be a better game and will also make armored carriers more viable.

[benjamin1992perry]

That is so true, I have had games where I have wiped out the enemy fleet in one battle and the war keeps on chugging on while they only have DDs left having the game end it at a reasonable time would be so nice.

[rob06waves2018]

Aug 22, 2022 12:35:21 GMT -6 zederfflinger said:

I think that it is too easy in RTW2 to rebuild your fleet from the ground up. The next game will improve this somewhat, but it's hard to tell just how much better it will be.

The bigger problem in my mind, however, is that losing your entire navy during a war isn't nearly as bad as it should be. If the RN suddenly vanished in either of the two world wars, it would have been pretty much game over for the UK.

That is the most dramatic example, but it holds true for other countries as well.

In game, you will be merely forced to decline battles and possibly lose a few possessions until you can peace out or rebuild your fleet.

If RTW3 introduces harsher consequences for the destruction of most or all of your navy, I feel that it will be a better game and will also make armored carriers more viable.

Definitely agree. When you play to just sink the enemy fleet as decisively as possible, congrats, you've won the war, but lost the arms race. Their Admiral is 'sacked' and then they use their excess budget free of the encumberance of, you know, ships, to build massively overpowered dreadnoughts which could wipe the floor with your 2-year-old fleet units. This spam, especially from the US and the British opponents (mostly US), means that my current strategy is to sink only the enemy's newest ships and leave the rest, mission killing if possible. If the AI is encumbered with the whole 'you must have x battleships or be shot' idea, this means they have to pay for a legacy fleet which hopefully stymies this effect. I'm not convinced this works though. I think it's just a symtom of the prestige system only really mattering for the player.