|
Post by bcoopactual on Feb 27, 2019 8:12:49 GMT -6
it would lead to japan maybe unlocking the carrier earlier than everyone else and making them highly efficient at researching carrier technology diffrent nations could also have diffrent carriers unlocked earlier for example britan would get their low capacity highly armored carriers they sacrifice aircraft capacity for survivability while for example japan would get the first high capacity armored carrier and the us would follow leaving britan with the large armored carriers last (how it went historically) I don’t think the technology model in RtW and RtW2 supports things like unlocking ship patterns and design templates for some nations before others, nor do I think there’s a good reason to make the game work like that. The fact that that’s how things went historically doesn’t necessarily mean that’s how things should go in the game. If I’m the US and want to go with armored carriers, that should be my choice. Well, I would say it does if it's part of the tech tree. Not representing a tech necessarily but a doctrine that needs to be accepted. Nations can also be given bonus techs or research area advantages. One of the really nice things I think about the RTW tech system is that it's designed to give certain advantages based on history but it's also designed to keep even smaller nations within shouting distance of larger, richer nations and even match them in one or two specific areas. Having said that, I don't necessarily think that one nation needs to be given an advantage in early carrier ops. WW1 drove much of that innovation and WW1 isn't scripted into the game.
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on Feb 26, 2019 17:58:50 GMT -6
Alright, so not a lot of hard numbers on the inner workings. That's a bit of a shame - I didn't really expect a complete breakdown of % hits on each area of the ship, but it'd be really useful to know more about flotation. I'm glad to hear that turret hit chances depend on the number of turrets though! Although I always expected it to work like that, nice to have it confirmed. The opposite would probably make me think about some pretty radical design changes, especially to secondaries. I'd really like to maximize flotation for these pre-dreads, does anyone have suggestions on how to do that? Where to put armor, or maybe how much free weight to leave in the design? Some background: I'm playing as Germany, it's mid-1903 and I'm at war with France. Had a great battle off the Netherlands - my 2 pre-dreads in Europe (another is in Southeast Asia) escorted by a light cruiser and 10-15 DDs ran into a smaller French DD group led by a CA. I manually designed my starting fleet, so the pre-dreads could hit 22 knots, luckily the exact same as the French CA. Sank it and some of its DD escorts with no losses, and then ran when 2 French pre-dreads found us (they had 13" guns to my British-built 12 inchers, but only 18 or 19 knots). I noticed that my pre-dreads had taken a few extended belt hits during the battle from the French CA's 6" guns, very minor damage but worrying that they got through. Believe they had 2-4" BE armor, with 9" or 10" in the full belt. So my next pre-dread that I started construction on last night is the 21k ton one. I increased the BE armor to something like 8" or 9", hoping that early shells won't be able to pen it at medium-long range, and it would be able to take a constant beating. The plan is to use their respectable speed and heavy armor in the future to hang in a battle line and draw fire from my valuable heavier-armed dreadnoughts. I'll need to do a lot more monitoring of battle logs in the future though, since heavy armor might be useless if dreadnoughts can still rip big holes in the hull and sink them without having to penetrate the belt or BE. Some background on the economics of my pre-dreads: I did decide initially to just hoard my money until I could build full dreadnoughts, but did some cost analysis of ships of various sizes and found that dreadnoughts are actually cheaper, in $ per ton, than smaller ships (DDs excluded). Since I generally think of increasing tonnage as providing exponential gains in effectiveness, it was basically a no-brainer to build big pre-dreads instead of some CLs or CAs that'll be completely useless in 5 years when they can't outrun anything. I am still trying to conserve some of my budget for the future, though. "Relating to armor protection, there is AoN scheme if you "invented it" using armor scheme flat deck on top. If you choose this armor scheme and your main belt and deck armor is not penetrated the only way ship could be sink is through torpedoes or flash fire from some of the turret." I'm taking this to mean that AoN is a flat deck, not that the flat deck is another armor scheme that would provide a similar kind of protection to flotation. Please correct me if that's wrong. Ok, then I guess all I can do is research and hope I eventually discover AoN. Appreciate the comments guys - I'll post some screenshots for reference when I get home! Having a lot of fun so far - just managed to develop 12" guns of 0 quality last night to start domestic construction of my 21k pre-dread -- nobody else has the docks for it. Having available tonnage left over does not affect the number of flotation points a ship has. Leaving unused tonnage is really only useful for refitting additional equipment later, such as fire control or mines, without having to remove something else. I usually use the tonnage I would normally leave available for those kinds of upgrades to add additional ammunition since it is easy and free/cheap to remove it later. Being overweight does remove float points though and the effect gets worse per-ton as the ship gets more overloaded. It also increases the likelihood of adverse ship traits like being unable to reach design speed. (And no, leaving unused tonnage available does not increase the chance of positive ship traits.) As far as pre-dreadnought armor there are, I believe, two main schools of thought. Legacy pre-dreads usually have secondaries of either 6 or 7 inch guns. So you can design the belt extended armor to resist those guns. 8 inch (and greater) secondaries get unlocked within the first year but those ships will take another 2 1/2 years to build so you won't see them until about 1904. Also, many AI designs stay with 6-7 inch guns so they can ship more of them. The other main option is to only armor the extended belt to 2 - 2 1/2 inches for splinter protection. The combination of improving AP tech and unlocking larger secondaries means that it becomes increasing difficult and then basically impossible to armor the ends of the ship fully. The same problem that eventually led designers down the road to all-or-nothing schemes. So since early designs are vulnerable to progressive flooding, you need to protect against splinter damage but adding more armor might not be worth the tonnage. Flat deck and AoN are two different things although you need to use flat deck to get the benefits of AoN after AoN is researched. You can choose flat deck from the beginning of the game for battleships if you want but while the flat deck is lighter and leaves more tonnage to use for armor and weapons you don't get the armor bonus of having the sloping deck behind the belt. Personally, for battleships, I don't switch to flat deck until I have researched or stolen the AoN "tech".
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on Feb 25, 2019 18:51:32 GMT -6
Thanks for the flag. Perhaps the three could be combined with a diagonal subdivision. The aim of the three allies was to prevent the XIX French Army Corps from reaching France from Algeria and Tunisia. I would like to know more about the organization of French convoys. This is the best my MS Paint skills will allow. (with significant cutting and pasting around the coats of arms of course) ![](//storage.proboards.com/5448234/thumbnailer/rCoCCoDvLzrmwRLIfmJT.png) That's 20X the size used by the game but I still think you can make out enough details. GerRMKUK.bmp (7.08 KB)
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on Feb 25, 2019 8:30:16 GMT -6
Where could I find a file with the Triple Alliance flag (Germany, Austria-Hungary, Italy)? I would like to make a scenario on a hypothetical beginning of WW1 in the Mediterranean according to the naval war plans of the Triple Alliance. Every suggestion will be appreciated. Did they have a specific flag? I made one that combines the three Ensigns similar to the existing examples for the Entente. GerKUKRM.bmp (3.55 KB)
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on Feb 25, 2019 7:05:35 GMT -6
I was building 4 3 quad 18 in turret BBs and about to go to war with Russia as a revenge for an earlier loss. The ships are literally 1 month away from completion I got the message about possibly doing a naval treaty to reduce tension. I click on the option suggesting a conference. Conference agrees to set displacement limit. All my ships were scrapped to comply with limits, and then Russia declared war on me. I check the message feed, and war was declared BEFORE the conference limits were agreed to. Username checks out. Wow, that sucks. Treaties are draconian in-game about scrapping ships under construction. If I'm close to completing capital ships I always pick the option that is least favorable for treaties to be signed not that that always works. Any kind of acceptance or favorable outlook towards the treaty seems to strongly raise the chance of one being signed. Not sure what to tell you about a war and a treaty happening in the same turn. It probably occurs so rarely that the developers never saw it happen during testing. They will see this post and I'm sure when their schedule allows they will take a look to see if the same thing can happen in RTW2 but I wouldn't expect any fixes for RTW1 in the near future since they are in the home stretch for releasing RTW2. Anyway, welcome to the forum.
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on Feb 23, 2019 18:08:57 GMT -6
What class of ships do you most frequently have that happen? It normally doesn't happen to my fleet but I often get requests for names for MS and AMC from AI nations. The US seems particularly prone to this. I don't build AMCs but I build a lot of MS so I went and added some names to the AMC list for the USA. One file is the names of the 40 largest US rivers not sharing names with states or major cities and the other is the bird-based names historically used for US minesweepers starting with Lapwing. The two lists add a little over 100 names. If you want, copy and paste them into the USAShipNames file somewhere under the [AMC]. Just don't leave an open space between names. The program treats open spaces like the end of the list. AmericanLargeNonStateNamedRivers.txt (395 B) AmericanMinesweepers.txt (566 B) I know that's not the overall fix they are planning for RTW2 but it might help in RTW1 if the US is the nation you see the problem with most often. Neither group of names is inappropriate for an armed merchant cruiser either in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on Feb 23, 2019 16:50:57 GMT -6
I have the opposite problem If I (or sometimes the AI) build too many ships of the same class, I run out of names... I wish the game automatically switched to numbering instead of asking each time for a new name... What class of ships do you most frequently have that happen?
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on Feb 21, 2019 9:32:35 GMT -6
Thanks for sharing that noshurviverse . I had never even heard of the TDR. I'm sure it was probably because it was a video of a film of a television picture but it seemed like it was much easier to make out the ship because it was contrasted against the beach. I wonder if the system was ever tested against a ship at sea with no background to provide a silhouette?
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on Feb 20, 2019 17:36:02 GMT -6
The only thing I can recall it used for in RTW1 was for determining the number of survivors in the water of a sunk ship so it has a small effect on victory points. Fredrik has stated that the calculation for crew sizes was low in RTW1 and they were planning on addressing that in RTW2 so yes, the crew compliments should still be in the game. No idea if it will be used for any other mechanics. I'd expect the numbers to jump significantly, particularly when AA guns start multiplying.
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on Feb 19, 2019 1:01:14 GMT -6
I think he's looking for the actual current in-game status. For example, except for the territories that start the game with it oil finds are completely random so a real world map wouldn't help with that.
Even if the map itself can't be made accessible adding some indicators to that window like including ocean area, base capacity and oil status for each territory might go a long way.
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on Feb 18, 2019 17:07:04 GMT -6
I think in this case the BE is just indicating the location on the ship which is as you mentioned. Since the BE armor on a protected cruiser scheme is the sloping part of the deck on the ends of the ship it would be unusual for a shell to penetrate the sloping portion on one end of the ship and the flat portion of the main armored deck in one go. It's also possible the D* is referring specifically to the splinters but I would guess that's less likely.
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on Feb 17, 2019 18:02:25 GMT -6
Only tangentially related to the subject but I put together the list of USN destroyer escort names, removed any duplicates and put it in a notepad file. I added it to the group of Royal Navy destroyer theme lists that I made and put a link to the google drive RAR file in the custom ship name thread on the RTW1 forum. I'll update it with the lists for the Royal Navy corvettes when I get a chance. nws-online.proboards.com/thread/1205/custom-shipname-lists?page=2&scrollTo=36551
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on Feb 17, 2019 17:56:39 GMT -6
I've added a list of US Navy destroyer escort names to the list of British DD Themes. Here is a google drive link to the RAR file. I'll add the British corvette names as I get a chance to research them and update the link. [Edit - 2/17/19. Added Flower-class corvette lists] [Edit - 2/18/19. Added Castle-class corvette lists, WW1 era Flower-class; Kil-class and 24-class sloop lists; created master list for all Royal Navy Flower-classes with redundant entries removed.] [Edit - 2/19/19. Added RN interwar and WW2 (e.g. Black Swan-class) sloops; added River-class frigate lists for Royal Navy and others including a master River-class list for the Commonwealth navies with duplicate names removed; added Royal Navy Colony-class frigate list.] [Edit - 2/20/19. Added RN and appropriate Commonwealth Captain-class, Loch-class and Bay-class frigates. Frigates and destroyer escorts were placed in a separate folder from sloops and corvettes.] [Edit - 2/21/19. Added American Patrol Frigates of River and Tacoma-classes; added prefix for Soviet Tacoma-class frigates acquired via Lend Lease (EK-); added updated list of named US destroyers ordered through WW2 with duplicate names removed.] [Edit - 2/22/19. Added list of Japanese DD through WW1; added list of Japanese WW2 Kaibokan (escort vessels roughly equivalent to DE or Frigate). Plan is to split post WW1 Japanese DD into 1st and 2nd class lists.] [Edit - 2/24/19. Added Japanese post-WW1 1st Class and 2nd Class/Type D destroyer lists; added master Japanese DD list; Added list of American ocean-going minesweepers.] [Edit - 3/13/19. Split American minesweepers into Bird and Positive trait theme lists since some historical classes mixed the names. Added master USN MS list in historical order with repeated names removed. Added multiple RN and Commonwealth minesweeper lists for WW1 through WW2 including master RN MS list with almost 400 names and master Commonwealth navy list with over 400 names. Added prefixes for Japanese and German minesweepers since they were not historically assigned names. Added alphanumeric lists for German and Japanese minesweepers (e.g. M1 through M200 for larger German MS) since the prefix system doesn't work for MS in RTW1.] drive.google.com/open?id=1x2hvMI-ujpaTmP20SoYnB5MXbZpr2Os_As a reminder, instructions for using these theme lists in RTW1: To use the lists, you need to modify the appropriate nation's ShipNamesList.DAT file in the Data Folder. Download and unpack the RAR file namelist files into a folder. MAKE A COPY OF THE ORIGINAL ShipNamesList.DAT FILE. Set the copy aside in another folder or rename it so you can restore it to the original names for AI use or whatever. Go into the names list file and erase all of the names in the file listed under that ship class (e.g. for destroyers, everything between [DD] and [SS] or [SSPrefix]) Copy the names out of the desired theme(s) file and insert them beneath the [XX] entry for that class. Do not leave spaces between the [XX] and the ship names. THe game see an open line as the end of the list and won't look further. Build the desired number of ships with that theme. Repeat for a new class or different theme or restore the original file if desired.
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on Feb 17, 2019 1:02:30 GMT -6
In RTW1 there is a DD counter similar to the SS one in the save game file but I don't know of any nation off the top of my head that uses DD prefixes instead of names so I don't know if it was implemented. It would be easy to test when I get home though.
To the point though, the mechanisms already exist so with enough interest it's probably easy enough to add eventually if they haven't at game release.
|
|
|
Post by bcoopactual on Feb 16, 2019 16:59:47 GMT -6
Alright then, best of luck.
|
|